Talk:Evening glove

Untitled

Makes sense to merge this page with the opera glove page. But more to the point, an opera glove just refers to the legnth of any glove, really. So maybe the whole mess should just have a section in the glove page. Stachman 01:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evening and opera gloves both refer to the styles and length of a particular type of glove. They are far separate from driving gloves or boxing gloves, so I support the merge together (now, under which name?), but not into the main glove article. They are noteworthy enough and already have two separate good starts on articles. Chris 01:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latex

K, seriously, you should try to finish the article about the *gloves* before you start writing the article about the kink. I came here from the page on cigarette holders to find the lengths of opera, theater, dinner, and cocktail length gloves (that's what they mention on the other page that sent me here!) and instead of finding any kind of detailed information on gloves here (seriously, I learned most of this from the page on cigarette holders -.-) I find that some idiot has made about half of this article about his weird fetishes.

Grow. Up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.172.36.81 (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fix please

The text "Queen Mary" is hotlinked to the article on Queen Mary I of England, who died in 1558and yet wore evening-gloves in the 1690s? I think MAYBE you can get away with referring to Mary II (the female half of WilliamAndMary) as "Queen Mary", as you're just leaving off the Roman numeral and people will today say such things as "Queen Elizabeth just announced" without thinking the "II" is mandatory. But just to play it safe I think you should put the "II" in there. Whether you do that or not, since this IS, beyond a doubt, Mary II, the linking of that text to an article on (allegedly "bloody") Mary THE FIRST who died long before the 1690s should be repaired. It is without a doubt wrong at this time (20 Sept 2013 8:30pm New York City time).69.86.65.12 (talk) 00:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Evening glove. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060823192752/http://www.operagloves.com/history.html to http://www.operagloves.com/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:25, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glove ettiquette section

This reads like it was copied from some ettiquette manual, so there's kind of a sense of WP:NPOV issue here. YellowAries2010 (talk) 04:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Edit: Incorrect Source

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The section:

The mousquetaire is originally derived from the gauntlets worn by French musketeers of the 16th and 17th centuries, although, tongue-in-cheek, according to Ambrose Bierce in The Devil's Dictionary, 1911:

Mousquetaire, n. A long glove covering a part of the arm. Worn in New Jersey. But "mousquetaire" is a mighty poor way to spell muskeeter.

Should be removed. The source implies the name is tongue-in-cheek because it's a "poor way to spell musketeer". Yet 'mousquetaire' is quite literally the French form of musketeer, so it's very blatantly a case of the word deriving from the French and not being Anglicised. Essentially, it seems obvious that the source is just wrong. 2001:8003:1C20:8C00:1549:E44:6C4C:4768 (talk) 07:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Besides being possibly wrong, the source is The Devil's Dictionary which is a satirical work from 1906. Not a good source. --Mvqr (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]