Talk:Socks and sandals

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep.

Page title

Every source and the lede seem to call this either socks and sandals or socks with sandals. Yet the article is called socks in sandals. I wonder if this is a legacy/mistranslation of the Danish article? Brianhe (talk) 05:59, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a preference for and or with, but I do think either of these is better than in. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:13, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Google hits (ghits) shouldn't be counted blindly, but:

"Socks and sandals" = 525,000 ghits
"Socks with sandals" = 275,000 ghits
"Sandals and socks" = 102,000 ghits
"Sandals with socks" = 82,600 ghits
"Socks in sandals" = 19,600 ghits

This, with the sources indicating it's meaningful, I think indicates that the title should be "Socks and sandals". Brianhe (talk) 03:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 05:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Hi. Just curious if we would get an example picture of a senior man with socks and sandals that has shorter shorts? Thanks.73.220.34.167 (talk) 18:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I propose we blur the face to protect the dude's identify. --Frozenport (talk) 02:07, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary. Per the Wikimedia page for the image, "The uploader asserts the following regarding consent of identifiable persons: I personally created this media. All identifiable persons shown specifically consented to publication of this photograph or video under a free license."

If the subject wished his identity protected, he would not have consented to publication. (If the uploader's statement was falsified, the individual is free to dispute it himself.) 76.179.130.131 (talk) 20:23, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting proposal. User:Blue Rasberry presented a talk on exactly this sort of issue at WP:WikiConference North America a few days ago. Maybe he has an opinion. - Brianhe (talk) 23:32, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When you check contributions of the uploader (Oddman47) at WP:COMMONS you can find many images of that man. I've selected rather a decent one, I'd say. Strange contributions we host on this educational project. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 05:51, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History of Socks and Sandals

Hello all,

You have advertised the history wrong, and this has led to it being advertised on the Wikipedia FaceBook page wrong. Please correct. This link^[1] shows socks found in Tutankhamun's tomb. These socks would have been worn with sandals. This took place in the 1800BC era, and thus is much older than your claim of 300AD.

Cheers JoshMuirWikipedia (talk) 08:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Veldmeijer, André (2011). Tutankhamun's Footwear. Lieden: Sidestone Press. p. 165. ISBN 978-90-8890-076-1. Retrieved 28 July 2016.

Who thought this article was a good idea?

This article is a little on the absurd side. This is an encyclopedia. Yes, Wikipedia has many, many articles on culture, and I think that's a good thing. What purpose does this article serve? Two celebrities are mocked for wearing socks and sandals, a computer scientist is noted for wearing them, people wear them in the Pacific Northwest, blah blah. What do you people think? Is this article useful or needed? 63.248.183.82 (talk) 20:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The person who originally created this article thought it was a good idea. So what if it's absurd? And why shouldn't an encyclopedia have encyclopedic articles on absurd subjects? Cow tipping is another favorite. This article is a lot more appropriate, in my opinion, than the numerous worthless pop-culture articles we have about teen heartthrobs, or obscure video games that 99.9999% of the world's population will never play but the game got enough news coverage to meet inclusion criteria. In my view, we'd be far better off without those than without this one. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:09, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So long as the subject matter is notable and backed up by reliable sources, then regardless of how absurd or stupid some might find the topic, it's suitable for a wikipedia article. Since Wikipedia is not a finite encyclopedia the way printed and CD-ROM encyclopedias where, where space was at a premium and thus what articles were included had to carefully selected, we can include all sorts of articles that deal with less encyclopedic topics (at least by printed encyclopedia standards). --Notcharliechaplin (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Who tells NOT to wear socks with sandals?

Most of the article says that it is considered OK to wear socks with sandals. For the article to make sense, it would be good if the viewpoint that socks should NOT be worn was presented far more thoroughly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.233.97.85 (talk) 08:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Hiking in Knee Socks, Sandals, and Cut-offs.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

White socks

I personaly dont have a problem with the combination of socks and sandals and I always wear socks with sandals. However I always use dark or brown socks. This is much less noticable than contrasting white socks, wich I find problematic. As a practical matter, white socks get dirty very quickly with street dirt. I am surprised that this distiction is not made. I wonder what the sources say about white socks.Smiley.toerist (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Veldmeijer, André (2011). Tutankhamun's Footwear. Lieden: Sidestone Press. p. 165. ISBN 978-90-8890-076-1. Retrieved 28 July 2016.

[1]