Jump to content

Talk:Four-in-hand knot

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fink/Mao notation

[edit]

I removed the following text from the article: "Using the notation of The 85 Ways to Tie a Tie by Thomas Fink and Yong Mao, the four-in-hand (knot 2) is tied *Li Ro Li Co T." Until that book's article explains the notation this information is not generally useful to Wikipedia users. --Dfred 19:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but all the other Tie Knot articles show the notation, and it's not that hard to figure out IF YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE LIKE THIS. I had to switch back and forth between this article and "the 85 ways to tie a tie" article to work out the notation so I could work out the "Pratt".
To be consistant and helpful, this article would include the notation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.18.240 (talk) 10:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Historical/Fashion note:

[edit]

George Bush (senior) always had a Four-in-hand knot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.18.240 (talk) 10:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another necktie knot called four-in-hand at some point in the past?

[edit]

I had inadvertently added the wrong ABOK number in an earlier edit due to two distinct necktie knots having "four-in-hand" as part of their name. The entry for the "wrong" knot, #2407, which based on an overhand knot with the end threaded through, reads as follows:

"#2407 The Four-In-Hand. This tie also has a horsy background, which it has long since lived down. So much so that I found one person who thought that the name was in some way descriptive of the manner of tying, and that two people with four hands were required for the job."

Regarding the name for #2408 Ashley says, "This is the common Four-In-Hand Knot, called by M. Le Blanc 'The Cravat Knot.'" It's interesting, given Ashley's "horsy" comment about #2407, that the suggested etymologies in the lead may in fact be referring to a different knot than the one now commonly known by the name... I'm leaving everything alone for now, but this is an area that additional information may help clarify. Much of Ashley's information on necktie knots appears to come from H. Le Blanc's book The Art of Tying the Cravat, Philadelphia, 1828; that might be a reasonable place to start. (Added moments later: Google Books to the rescue) --Dfred (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tying

[edit]

The image sequence is slightly incorrect in step two. The line drawing appears to indicate a wrap around the short end that would not be present in this step. At this step, there should not be a line across the upper right of the knot or a horizontal line at the top center of the knot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.15.88.48 (talk) 23:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just came here to write exactly that! 87.154.220.64 (talk) 00:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I don't think this caveat

This section contains instructions, advice, or how-to content. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to train.

is appropriate, and that instructions how to tie four-in-hand knot are not part of wikipedia. Method how to make thing is essential part of information about thing - if we have article about HCl, we have, I hope, also information about its production in same article. Why not then the same about knot: how to make it is actually its definition, or part of it. I think in paper encyclopaedia was similar information about ties. So, I vote for removing this box from article; if it's possible to improve wording, very well, but nothing wrong with it as it is. BirgittaMTh (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with this. I thought it was a bit of an out of place little notice, which is in fact what drew me to come to the talk page. I'm unfamiliar with the policies regarding removal of such a template, but I do agree it doesn't have a place on this page. 2601:7:6780:30A0:851B:A30:6B96:48E5 (talk) 03:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree. Since it's a "drive-by" tagging with no explanation, anybody disagreeing can remove it, so I will. JulianBradfield (talk) 08:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eytmology

[edit]

What is the etymology? This needs to be included.Curb Chain (talk) 14:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Four-in-hand knot. 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:

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) 22:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The US Navy citation link is dead, but it is archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20180123204605/http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/support/uniforms/uniformregulations/uniformcomponents/Pages/3501_37.aspx I don't know how to add archived links in the proper format, but here it is. 75.142.43.172 (talk) 01:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Four-in-hand_knot&oldid=1232109832"