Talk:Tagelmust

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Berbers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Berbers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BerbersWikipedia:WikiProject BerbersTemplate:WikiProject BerbersBerbers articles

Fashion

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles

Interesting Point

This page was mentioned in the Acknowledgements section of the 2007 Queensland Core Skills Test Short Response Paper. That is a statewide, very important test, so I thought it was worthy of some sort of thing on this talk page.

Interestingly, there was a typo. The note was:

"Wikipedia, for an adapted photograph from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabelmust, accessed March 2007"

That page doesn't exist, and the picture is on this page.

I wonder if improper citation is a breach of the license it's under :D

Joeldipops 04:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting rid of picture

Hi, I've just got rid of this picture from the article for two reasons:

There is already one perfectly good picture showing the item in question, as it is meant to be used, and this is quite a short article so the second pic overloads it a bit while adding no extra info.
It is a cross-dressing pic, as it shows a woman wearing a man's article, which makes it a bit distracting for anyone who is already familiar with North African clothing and customs. From this angle, it can be said to distort the information presented (contradict it, in fact, as the article already mentions this is gentleman's wear)

If anybody can see a reason why that pic should be there, feel free to stick it back in--as it stands at the moment, I just think it looks amateurish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.27.130.200 (talk) 01:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone restored the photo of a woman in January 2014, and someone replaced the photo of the man in May 2018. I have restored the close-up photo of the man, which gives the best view of how the tagelmust is traditionally worn. I will leave it to others to decide whether the woman's photo or the group photo should be removed. Goustien (talk) 18:21, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not in the category box

The artice has its {{Hats}} http, but does not appear in the boxed listing.Wetman (talk) 01:50, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]