User talk:PKM/2 2006

I think you'll enjoy this!

Play a Victorian dress-up game. [1] Zora 22:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where angels fear to tread (kilts, etc)

In the spirit of being bold, I have just created and posted an article with the somewhat convoluted title of Kilt, kilt-skirt, and skirt: what's the difference. Meant originally as an article on kiltmaking, with illustrations showing in detail the construction of the kilt and the process of making such a garment, I decided to address the more general question of just what is, and what is not, a kilt. This comparison method allows certain common misconceptions to be discussed, but also runs the risk of POV problems.

I am not entirely satisfied with the photos. One major project of mine this year when the Highland Games season gets under way is to build the Highland dress and Highland games photo libraries on Wikimedia Commons with quality high resolution images.

Please take a look at the article. Leave any comments thereon on the talk page of that article. JFPerry 14:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Men's 1795-1820

There are some relevant pics at commons:Category:1810s_fashion - Churchh 02:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent editing in European fashion! --Wetman 14:23, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better Scan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1833_fashion_plate.jpg

Can you scan this in high dissolution? The line is smal in the original.Håbet 22:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I didn't do the original scan. Let me see if I can locate the original. - PKM 16:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More excellent stuff!

You continue to turn out ells of excellent yardage! Wikipedia at its best. --Wetman 20:18, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - PKM 20:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons category

Unfortunately, the category commons:Category:1600s clothing you established on Commons is redundant with the existing category commons:Category:17th century fashion - Churchh 03:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I corrected the commons category on commons:Image:Metsu virginal.jpg witrhout even noticing that it was uploaded by you! Churchh 08:35, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All moved to commons:Category:17th century fashion. Thanks. - PKM 02:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editrix categorization foofaraw

Maybe you can weigh in on User talk:TheEditrix -- user "Editrix" created a European clothing (historic) category, and moved about half the items from History of fashion to her new category (completely randomly and arbitrarily, from anything that I can figure out), and is going around to a lot of clothing articles and replacing general categories with often inappropriately narrow ones (as I explained in the linked talk page discussion). Churchh 04:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

My e-mail isn't working too well nowadays -- I have about three accounts, and they're all basically immobilized by spam... Churchh 23:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interested in another project?

I have just started a new wiki at Craftacular.com. It runs on the same software as wikipedia, but the goal is a little different.

I am working to make it a central resource for all things related to crafts. A central, on-line repositiory of patterns, techniques, tutorials, tip & tricks, etc that people can use as a resource. It will be a place that encourages opinions. I'm (obviously) just getting started, but I'm reaching out to crafters to ask them if they'd be willing to contribute some of their expertise or help me get the word out.

I appreciate any help that you can lend. From the article you've written here, it's clear that you know a lot about fashion and costume design. It's going to take a lot more people than just myself to get this baby up to its full potential.

Also, please let me know if this comment is unwelcome. It's my understanding from reading wikipedia's rule/terms of use that this would be an appropriate place for a post like this. Thanks!

Thanks for the heads-up. At the moment, I am facing cutting back on Wikipedia for a short time to work on another project, but I will certainly take a look at what you are up to, and quite possibly contribute where I can. - PKM 18:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Identity query

Are you by chance a rasseffer of my acquaintance? If not, just delete this cryptic note and pardon the intrusion.--Orange Mike 03:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A rasseffer is an habitue or inhabitant of the Usenet newsgroup rec.arts.sf.fandom. Your fields of interest match a couple of such folks I know, and I wondered (though PKM are not the initials of either of them).--Orange Mike 00:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC) (In the Knowne Worlde since A.S. VI.)

Chaperon

Hi, Time to update that User page, as you are clearly no longer "new to Wikipedia"!

Do you know if there is an article on the medieval chaperon? - French/Burgundian name for the male head-gear - round hat (bourrelet) with two long wide tails (cornettes). I can't see one, but there are probably more names for it than I am aware of. Thanks Johnbod 14:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's at Chaperon (headgear), though it could use some expanding. Do you know things about Burgundian etc. costume? We could use some of that! - PKM 18:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks - I can add to that. Do hats not count as clothing then? Wimple & snood are so categorised, so I imagine I should change this. I come at clothing from the art history angle - the description of the Arnolfini Portrait is my main effort on the subject so far; clothing as such is not really an interest of mine. Johnbod 19:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Things that go on the head seem to be subcategorized as headgear rather than clothing - it was that way when I got here. I come at art history from the clothing angle. Just read your Talk pages - nice work you've been doing. Let me know if you need any images, especially 16th-19th century. - PKM 19:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I will! Johnbod 19:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually, these two would be very handy:

Van der Weyden in Brussels Bibliotheque Royale:[2] - just the miniature ideally; here's a poorer version (I think - maybe just bigger?) of the same work: [3]

Pisanello in the NGA,DC (although there would be other copies, but Google finds none online): [4] or, sharper: [5]

The V d W would be the most useful by far. Many thanks if you can do anything. Both artists have Commons categories. I have got on quite well with the article off-line Johnbod 03:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me do some digging. - PKM 17:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your help - it's now up. Do have a look & change anything Johnbod 16:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]