Talk:Bow tie - Knowledge

31: 1774:

you don't wear a bow tie. a suit, on the other hand, is more properly and completely referred to as a business suit. moreover, there is certainly a body of thought to the effect that a suit is the least appropriate occasion for a bow tie.formal wear? of course. sport coat? certainly. suit? maybe. also, is 'dickie bow' a british term? i have worn bow ties in the u.s and canada for nigh on 40 years, and have never heard the term used. not saying that invalidates it, mind, just curious.

85: 1295:

that there is no data to back up the perception. Keep in mind that it's possible that a trend may have been started or spurred on by prominent architects like Le Corbusier and Gropius that led to the perception. Citations from the Web or elsewhere should be able to prove that there is such a perception, any other statements we make should be backed up by sourcing or very small, very sure steps in logic.

64: 904:

easier to read one list or the other? Is it better to have a long list with one name per line (as it is on the other page) or in a paragraph as it is here (I like one name per line). If you had one name per line, would that make this article annoyingly long at the bottom for someone who wants to get down to external links, for instance? I dunno, but the list needs to be in one place or the other.

22: 197:.... Careful manipulation of such a tie can produce effects like a black neck band, white bows, and a black center to the knot. Or the other way about. There are a total of 64 possible ways to twist the bits about with such a tie (some of the effects are more difficult and subtle than others, and I am not sure that all of them would be stable, as there would be many twistings inside the knot.) 1837: 95: 958:, I feel having such a list is quite pertinent, even useful. Showing how many prominent people became closely identified to the garnment certainly conveys its importance and mark upon human culture. It is also amusing. That is not a criteria for deletion on Knowledge. About the merge, I feel having a seperate list is probably the best option. With the material we have from both 2089: 829:(Please note that, contrary to some people's thinking, it isn't customary to create a page just because a redlink exists to it. There are a few editors who try to make red into blue wherever they can, and that's great, but we shouldn't let a redlink sway us in the slightest when deciding if a redlinked article would be encyclopaedic). 1194:, I hope i am not late to post my vote. Well here it is anyways, I dont see any problem with having a little bit of redundancy on both articles. In my opinion i am in favor to replace the current list for a short paragraph which mention some notable people known for their use of Bowtie and let the article ( 2119:

Even though this page displays Colonel Sanders wearing a "string tie," it seems this page doesn't cover that type at all. It's apparently also referred to as a "string bowtie", a "colonel bowtie", and a "Western bowtie." No, I don't know enough about the subject to add in information about it, I just

1663:

Yes, I just finished reading the article and my impression was that it was poorly referenced and suffered from worldview problems throughout. For example, the bit about pediatricians did not ring true to me. I have lived in three Asian countries, and I have never seen a pediatrician wearing a bowtie.

706:

So, I shall boldly edit the article - i had removed the architect reference entirely, but I'll put it back in as a popular idea/meme. Hope that satisfies. And while i'm at it, i'll purge the reference to it giving rise to the four in hand; if that's debated, and people think they may have both come

401:

I'd say that the bowtie does warrant its own page, as there is/could be a lot of information on this page (for instance, about the differing shapes available) which someone would not be interested in if they were attempting to learn about neckties. There are overlaps, but the bow tie is sufficiently

182:

Many bow ties have a different pattern or color scheme on each side. The top method features the outer side (away from the neck) and the bottom features the inner (touching the neck). My grandfather distinguished between the two styles as "left handed" and "right handed" based on which hand is used

1773:

i have removed the statement that suggests that bowties are primarily an item of formal wear. it simply isn't so. moreover, a suit is not formal attire, a term which has a fairly specific meaning, including evening wear and such things as morning coats, strollers, etc., although with the latter two,

1644:

Oh and by the way the "citation needed" tags do not necessarily mean that the statements are wrong, it simply means that they are not (yet) backed up by reliable sources; it's a request to find and insert these sources. Remember that statements that are not substantiated by reliable sources will be

818:

Doesn't the list of people "known for" their bow ties just read like a big list of everyone who's ever worn one, rather than people for whom it is a recognizable sartorial marker? Tucker Carlson: known for bow ties (and, if I may be a bit NPOV, for being a dick). Alfred Kinsey: just a guy who wore

728:

Your use of the term "meme" is misleading. You contrast it with verifiable fact, suggesting that you think a meme cannot be a "fact". Epistemological problems with the acquisition of "truth" aside, a meme is merely a discrete unit of cultural information, the seed of a behavior. It can be true or

559:

It's not an official rule, so it depends on many things. For example, the regiment in question (cavalry regiments tend to be far more extravagant and flambouyant than, for example, REME), the seniority of the perpetrator (a young subbie with a clip-on at his first dinner night has fucked up far less

354:

I think this should be merged into necktee. Also I think "Towards the end of the 19th century the free ends of the bowtie grew longer, and the necktie was born, and the bowtie slowly went out of fashion." is incorrect. The bowtie wasn't the precursor to the modern tie as this sentence suggests. Both

1511:

as i've pointed out previously in reverting calls for citation, pretty much every other sentence in this article could be seen as needing citation. this last guy was particularly annoying, since he's one of those who edits without actually READING what he's editing.why pediatricians? if you'd read

903:

is duplicative of sections on the same subject at the bottom of this article. Please take a look at each and suggest here which you prefer: A list on that separate page or a list here. I think it's ridiculous to have both lists, but I'm neutral as to whether they should be on a separate page. Is it

881:

The references are kinda strange. The page that's supposed to be an example of the cravat slowly becoming the bow tie doesnt really give any of that information, it's just a shop with cravats and bow ties etc. The other references about architects are a bit strange too, I dont see them to be of any

196:

There's a magician's routine (Carl Ballentine?) wherein a bow tie is repeatedly re-tied by the magician, trying to get the tie to appear to be all black or all white (the tie is black on the inside and white on the outside.) He ties it, the assistant points out it's wrong. Again and again and again

1908:

I am a Prof and a bow-wearer of long standing, and came here to have a look at what this fine lot of stylish editors had pulled together. I have made only one edit, and ask it checked—clarification of the intended contrast between a return to style of real bt's, versus negative perceptions of the

1056:

I like the photo gallery as well. I am not sure how many images will be uploaded with "famous" people sporting a bow tie, but for now, it seems at least the photo gallery can stay. The rest of the names can be merged perhaps into the list article. I doubt a category system will be of any use here,

192:

Some bow ties have different fabrics on each end, and the wearer chooses which is in front. (Some bow ties have the left and right hand ends buttoned together; if the wearer has several such ties, he can mix them up intentionally.) Some have different sized ends, where (usually) the smaller end is

1294:

On the larger subject of stereotypes, someone can state that there is a perception that bow ties are used by a lot of architects, and if that perception exists, it can be right or wrong, but as long as someone is saying "all architects wear them" it's not a stereotype. It's even fair to point out

278:

of a bowtie with a normal dress shirt. The photo of a tie on a naked neck that was previously up seems to have been replaced by another picture of a famous bowtie wearer. Perhaps the tie itself should be featured again at the top (since there's a gallery of other people further down on the page

1310:

As far as the name of that article, I'm going to move (copy, really) your paragraph over there and continue the discussion on that page, since we're talking about the name of that article and I think it will be more natural for interested editors to come upon it over there. I'm grateful for your

983:

it here, to a manageable number of persons and fictional characters. (I.e., fewer than are on this page now.) A bare-page list of people noted for wearing bow-ties is better-suited to being a category. My reservation is that if there's any sort of meaningful heirarchy beyond people and fictional

700:

In the award-winning architects, most pictured have open shirts or neckties - the only bow tie I saw was at a black tie event. To quote the article about the collector: "Dr Derham Groves, 47, of West Brunswick, is an architect. This should come as no surprise. Everyone knows architects love bow

1284:

I don't think casting "List of bow tie wearers" as a "main article" for the subject of stereotypes is fair. It's reasonable, given the contents of that section and the current contents of the List article that there be a link, and a link at this spot isn't a bad idea, as long as there is a link

823:

I'd agree - And I think it needs to be smaller, so the first policy should be - no redlinked names. People sometimes find it amusing to put their name in amongst the valid members of lists, and it can be a difficult type of vandalism to deal with. This is pretty widely accepted as a name list

1159:

I've sent this message to the four editors who suggested merging the list onto the Bow tie article. I want a resolution to avoid the repetition between these two pages. I think there's limited interest in the subject anyway, so perhaps what I say in my message will clear it

1435:<| ; the band is straight, of the same fabric, and about 3/4" wide. I presume it's tied by folding the tie part on itself twice, tying the band around it, adjusting the knot, and then fastening the band around your neck like it was a pre-tied bow tie. Weird. 428:

How about this for an argument - if necktie was entitled simply "tie (clothing)", then it'd be appropriate to merge. But since it's not, the title "necktie" wouldn't fit info on bowties very well, since many people think of those as the four in hand kind.

218:

I must differ here. The bow tie is NOT a type of uniform for "male strippers" but is the exclusive trade dress for CHIPPENDALES. In fact, the cuffs and bow tie is a registered trademark of CHIPPENDALES. See U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2694613.

743:

I've moved these red non-linked names to the talk page to make it easy once there are at least stub articles to put them back on the page. I don't have the time to determine if they are notable persons, but if someone is so interested they are here:

1109:. Note that there are no votes or comments for keeping the full list on the main article. I would recommend that the migration begin. Leave a couple photo gallery pics but I would say that the photo gallery should not be expanded on the main page. 368:

Disagree about merging. I think the topics are separate enough to be different articles. BTW, does anybody know more about the different ways how to tie a bowtie? I checked the web and found two different methods, which i created graphs for. --

1909:

pre-tied, etc. Also, please note that the bt vs b_t matter is still alive and well (because of Knowledge spell correction?!)—see, in that same paragraph, "opinions of bow tie wearers are mixed. He observed that bowties…" With regard, LeProf

1356:

they are not correctly called 'batwing', but simply 'bat'. this comes from the shape resembling a cricket bat, or actually a pair of cricket bats,handle end to handle end. if you can't imagine a cricket bat, think of a fraternity paddle. same

701:

ties"; this suggests to me that this is some sort of meme, or folk-lore, but I'm unable to back it up. And on the ArcSoc page, they provide suggestions, links to other info, but no hard evidence. It does seem to be a quite widely held idea!

1169:

My idea of polling people on what they want with the bow-tie articles hasn't exactly worked perfectly. I don't see much of a consensus for moving the list to one page or the other, so I'm going to try this: I'll cut down the list on the

295:

available. But I must point out that, in the interests of NPOV, we do cover the ready-tied bow tie. Yes, I think it's a fake too, but as far as i can see, quite a few people would think of one of those if asked to picture a bow tie.

1121::MPS, I count four people in my tally who say remove the list page and keep the list on the main article, although Johndodd says move it to the main article and prune it there. Does anyone have any strong objections to MPS' suggestion? 1405:

there are also 'batwing' brasses, drawer pulls for queen anne and chippendale furniture. when my son was 8, i happened to mention these in conversation with his mother. typical 8 year old boy, he was very anxious to see the bat

1681:

Knowledge has other-language editions. It is natural that the English language encyclopedia primarily deal with English and American fashion conventions and stereotypes if not explicitly labelled 'world' or 'Continental'.

1013:

As per MPS's suggestion, if we do it the way he suggests, the list here could be considered a summary of the other list. I've done that with some municipality pages and people pages that have been calved off from them

264:

Either way, it should probably be replaced. The article talks about how it's usually worn with formal attire, and then the illustration has a bowtie on a bare neck, which doesn't match the article's description.

1342:

Done. I've always wondered why they were called "batwing", as it's not obvious. Perhaps there was an earlier version, now lost, that was of constant width, but that still doesn't make these look like batwings.

599:

I suspect that purchasing a proper bow tie and learning how to tie it would be a lot cheaper. Plus, single or not, the ladies will want to adjust it. The faux ties they ignore, except to quietly disapprove.

1256:

article could then be renamed and reworked as a article to convey (with an exhaustive list of cited examples) evidence that pundits have used to bolster theories of stereotypes of bow tie weareres. I will

1863:; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. 1178:

page sometime late this week unless I hear a strong objection from those, like you, who have suggested otherwise. I think (hope) that's an acceptable resolution. Feel free to speak up if I'm all wet.

786:

I think we need a policy on external links, as many of them on Knowledge seem to be duplicating the same info, in order to increase their Google PageRank if nothing else. So, I've begun by deleting

545:

How much champagne would someone who wears a clip-on bow tie in the mess halls have to buy if found out? $ 100 worth? $ 500 worth? Or maybe $ 2000 worth? (I want the answer to this question to be in

1244:

article... they are thinking of renaming it. Based on this AFD and a review of the original article here, I had the idea that perhaps that the bow tie article could have a separate section about

324:

I've added a picture of a pretied bow tie. It's a particularly vintage, velvety one, which doesn't do the pretied type as a whole any favours, but maybe some people like that sort of thing. --

2163: 243:

Obcene? I am no stripper ;-). Hey, what do I care? I often do wikiwork without shirt, and I did this in less than 5 mins. :-). But what can I say if you take a better picture? Go ahead.

1789:

I wear bow ties with suits, but not bolo ties (which I will wear with a sport coat.) 'Dickie Bow' I have not heard, either, or not frequently enough that it's made an impression on me.

675:

I would agree. I'm a medical student, but that hasn't stopped me abandoning the necktie. So I've looked around for one, and through various searches, i only found these to be of use:

512:

Of course, Google isn't the best indicator, but i'm in favour of "bow tie" - it's a type of tie, so it should be two separate words, or possibly hyphenated, but not one word. --

2168: 2097: 2153: 819:

a bow tie. Bill Nye: known for it. Stan Laurel: just a guy with a bow tie (even if Hardy did wear a necktie, I'd say there are other things Laurel is known for). Etc.

1285:

elsewhere in the article (there is, at "See also"; although I think I would prefer that eventually the link be put in a summary list of the most famous bow tie wearers).

384:

There is not enough information on this page to warrant an entire article yet, it is mostly illustrations and most of the other information is a summary of what is on

1040:

The article can probably carry the list for now, but if it were to get much longer, then perhaps it should split off. I like the photo gallery on the article page.

2026: 2022: 2008: 35: 1813:, A Return to Tying the Knot: Bow Ties Are Finding Favor as Day-Wear Accoutrements With a Younger Generation by William Lyons, 2011-07-22, may be of interest. 457:

I've tidied the page a lot, moving the images around so that the sections and contents box aren't so badly placed. It now looks more respectable, i think. --

564:

of champagne varies in the British Army depending on whether one is in Britain or Germany, as the tax situation means alcohol is far cheaper in the latter.

2158: 1745: 790:, which was not very helpful, and aimed to promote a commercial DVD that would teach you to tie. The others are all helpful, i think, but be vigilant! -- 1974: 834:

Other than that, perhaps a marked shortening of the list without images, and removal of faces from the table if "wears a bow tie" wouldn't appear on a

2178: 2148: 1206:(now added to the list), as far as i can remember from my childhood i used to watch him wearing a bowtie in the 80s computer magazines, cheers :) ! -- 141: 1606:

Yes, this is just silly. All of these assertions are not cited from reliable sources. They must be cited, or they will be removed. In particular:

151: 638:

Is James Bond famous for bow ties apart from tuxedos? Also, I question the smurfs being bow tie wearers, though I never really watched the show.

215:

seems to ask for this. The bow shown on bare skin seems somewhat obscene as this is often portrayed as a part of the "uniform" of male strippers.

1449:

Can anyone tell me why a bow tie is known as a dicky bow? I'm sure there's a perfectly obvious reason, but have no idea what it is!!! Thanks

2173: 1689: 1810: 1646: 1627: 402:

distinct - in society as well as in its knot. And the main thing is, people may wish to search directly for information on the bowtie. --

235:

shirts at hand, but I could use folded collar and maybe some picture of an untied one. Perhaps even provide an original tying diagram. --

2143: 1615:

Who says that bow ties are associated with politicians? (How many politicians nowadays wear bow ties?) Please provide reliable sources.

2081: 1450: 1379:

Ah. Makes much more sense. Now I wonder where the ...wing was added? There are batwing sails, but those don't look like the bow ties.

117: 1748:. See the eighth, ninth and tenth paragraphs in particular. It's not enough to call it plagiarism, but it's enough to be amusing. — 1758: 1609:

Who says that bow ties are associated with architects? Who says this? I have never heard of this. Please provide reliable sources.

1328:

Would someone mind assigning the classifications within the photo caption to a specific tie (with left/right associations)? Thanx.

487:

Which is more correct? My vote is for "bow tie". To my eye, the word "bowtie" would be pronounced 'boaty'. Just looks wrong to me.

1139:

as per MPS's idea. I like the gallery a lot, and that could be coupled with a short list on the bow tie page, and then a link to

1890: 1019: 1432:

Saw one at Sak's 5th Ave the other day. Comes in two separate parts, a "tie" and a "band". The tie part is like this: |: -->

1595: 1226: 108: 69: 624:

Shouldn't Tucker Carleson be under the famous bow tie people? I would add him myself but I don't know how to do pics....

2069: 1567: 1023: 212: 44: 868:

These are both important as separate sections, IMO. The links to pages with directions on way to tie a bow are useful.

2105: 1886: 1975:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150204164003/http://mensfinestpocketsquare.co.uk/new-pocket-squares/being-fashionable/

1069:

There's no point in having the list repeated in both locations, and it has the potential for becoming too bulky for

1818: 671:

A citation for this is needed. I'm a bow tie wearer-and an architectural historian and never heard of this before.

2125: 1940: 1843: 496: 2025:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

684: 1928:

I should be grateful if some contributor with more authority than my poor self could add some reference to the

1693: 1650: 1631: 1045: 873: 798: 715: 520: 465: 437: 410: 304: 252:

There I was with this imagined image of you completely naked except for the tie. You've shattered my daydream.

1222: 1022:

for instance. I think it's definitely better to have a longish list somewhere, for reasons I went into on the

966:, we have enough for a list article of its own. Putting it in the main article will weigh it down too much. -- 21: 2060: 1978: 1966: 1454: 1253: 1241: 1175: 997: 963: 955: 900: 893: 850: 332: 279:

now). At any rate, I request that someone else put the picture on the page itself if it seems appropriate.

1664:

I suspect this is some kind of U.S. or British stereotype. And yes, this stereotype needs to be referenced.

2121: 2101: 1482:

don't we need to at least mention that only a total philistine would wear either of the above. really! ;-)

1015: 791: 708: 560:

than the adjutant doing same) and the mood and personality of those present at the time. In addition, the

513: 495:

in the absence of contradiction (obviously, this isn't a particularly popular page), and in the spirit of

458: 430: 403: 297: 984:

characters that could be applied, it should go to a separate page and be allowed to expand ad infinitum.

2044:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2032: 1914: 1814: 1754: 927: 355:(along with the Ascot) were around from about the 1860s and were all decended directly from the cravat. 220: 174: 50: 1965:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 996:- IMHO, redundancy is not a problem. Have short list (three to five) on main article with full list at 532:

Oh really? A necktie is also a type of tie, but that is "necktie" rather than "neck tie" or "neck-tie".

184: 2100:

until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

1999: 1936: 1794: 1724: 1685: 1468: 1384: 769: 761: 757: 753: 605: 1057:

since if an image is available, it will show the corresponding person with his bow tie already :-).

729:

false, its success turns on its adaptability. I think "stereotype" is the word you're looking for.

691:

The clincher for me, a page with photos of past winners of an architects' award, going back to 1979

388:. Necktie covers cravats (and cravat is a redirect to necktie) and the history of ties in general. 1779: 1581: 1517: 1487: 1411: 1362: 1074: 1041: 869: 773: 765: 653: 582: 116:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1144: 843: 546: 500: 488: 374: 325: 253: 2029:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2045: 1463:

A wild guess is that a starched shirtfront, or dickey, is worn with a bow tie in formal dress.

1847: 1669: 1592: 392: 359: 280: 1560:

template should not be removed simply because a plausible explanation has been added. I have

1910: 1749: 883: 749: 272:

Besides, the picture is of a fake pre-tied effort. Get rid of it (the picture and the tie).

2052: 1198:) to be more specific on that information. By the way, in my previous contribution i added 1790: 1740: 1720: 1714: 1708: 1464: 1436: 1380: 1344: 1330: 1207: 1058: 967: 835: 601: 577:

unfortunately, in the u.s. clip-ons and bandeds are probably in the majority. aarrrggghhh!

565: 550: 198: 173:

Is it just me or do the two tying diagrams actually shew the same way of tying a bow tie?

1073:. Having the list in the "List" article will keep it from having to be pruned too much. 2011:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1868: 1775: 1612:

Who says that bow ties are associated with attorneys? Please provide reliable sources.

1513: 1483: 1407: 1358: 1258: 649: 578: 100: 2051:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

1626:. Please provide reliable sources. If there are no sources, I'll delete all of this. 2137: 1875: 985: 629: 370: 266: 244: 628:

Done. He's now resting comfortably between Earl Blumenauer and Winston Churchill. --

527: 1665: 1588: 1532: 1312: 1296: 1218: 1179: 1122: 1091: 1027: 911: 842:(US) board of notable facts about that person. That would seem sensible to me. -- 745: 389: 356: 685:

An article about a bow tie collector, of clip-ons, who happens to be an architect

2018: 1618:

Who says that bow ties are associated with pediatricians? The question is not "

1554: 1528: 1501: 939: 839: 730: 639: 236: 292: 84: 63: 2017:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 1836: 1199: 90: 1871:

then you may need to upload it to Knowledge (Commons does not allow fair use)

291:

Eric's penguin, that looks a great photo. Mine is the one illustrating the

1090:(4) Liberlogos, Intangible (weak), MPS (weak), Carl.bunderson -- (updated) 787: 193:

meant to be the bow in front; some of these are different colors as well.

678: 1979:

http://mensfinestpocketsquare.co.uk/new-pocket-squares/being-fashionable/

1276: 1266: 1110: 1000: 2088: 1550:

Without sources, this entire section can be challenged and removed. The

690: 1958: 1262: 1249: 1171: 1106: 1070: 959: 923: 385: 113: 1624:

whether there are sources that say that pediatricians actually do that

1221:? I was thinking of it luckily someone thought of it six years prior. 232: 2093: 882:

importance to the article. But the last point is just my opinion --

275: 1697: 1521: 648:

agreed. only time bond ever wore a bow tie was with formalwear.

2129: 2109: 2074: 1944: 1918: 1894: 1822: 1798: 1783: 1763: 1728: 1673: 1654: 1635: 1599: 1491: 1472: 1458: 1439: 1415: 1388: 1366: 1347: 1336: 1315: 1299: 1279: 1269: 1230: 1210: 1182: 1147: 1125: 1113: 1094: 1077: 1061: 1048: 1030: 1003: 988: 970: 942: 930: 914: 886: 876: 857: 805: 776: 733: 722: 657: 642: 632: 609: 586: 568: 553: 472: 444: 417: 377: 362: 339: 311: 283: 256: 247: 223: 201: 187: 177: 15: 1086:(4) Andrew Levine, Alcuin, Johndodd (tentative), Doc (weak); 1984:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

1933: 1932:- some inspiration may be found with our French colleagues: 1969:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

1545:

that the given explanation is in fact the reason for this.

1174:

main page to a summary and make sure everything is on the

707:

directly from the cravat, Wiki shouldn't display it. --

1962: 1904:

Please examine last edit here by the undersigned editor

1715:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123924074857303763.html

1709:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123924141044503821.html

1561: 1016:

Greenwich, Connecticut#Notable people, past and present

951: 2098:

Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 24#⧓

2092:

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect

1734:

This article appears to have been used as a source...

1219:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:List_of_bow_tie_wearers

112:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2021:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 1874:If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no 2164:Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Everyday life 1088:Merge to list (with short list on article page): 679:Some thoughts on an architectural sociology page 506:To go by number of Google hits, the results are: 1240:I was thinking about ongoing Afd regarding the 2007:This message was posted before February 2018. 1828:File:Fiveo On Steps.jpg Nominated for Deletion 1248:. This could be easily assembled from current 8: 1852:Media without a source as of 2 November 2011 1805:Current popularity of bow-ties (WSJ article) 2169:Start-Class vital articles in Everyday life 1539:pediatricians wear them needs sources for: 19: 1957:I have just modified one external link on 1252:content on James Bond and architects. The 509:3,010,000 "bow tie" vs 2,030,000 "bowtie". 58: 2154:Knowledge vital articles in Everyday life 1717:-- How the Hip knot and style a bow tie. 1542:that pediatricians really do wear bowties 1141:full list of famous bow tie wearing folks 1934:https://fr.wikipedia.org/Lavalli%C3%A8re 1204:why did he got cutted off from the list? 1084:Tally so far: Merge to bow tie article:' 1809:To improve the "current" section, this 499:I'm moving the article to "bow tie". -- 60: 1883:This notification is provided by a Bot 1996:to let others know (documentation at 1846:, has been nominated for deletion at 7: 948:Merge into "List of bow tie wearers" 106:This article is within the scope of 1878:then it cannot be uploaded or used. 482: 49:It is of interest to the following 2159:Start-Class level-5 vital articles 1531:, each sentence in appears to be 14: 1961:. Please take a moment to review 1711:-- Bow Ties are coming back ! ? 1261:and aggregate the content on the 2179:High-importance fashion articles 2149:Knowledge level-5 vital articles 2087: 1835: 1020:People of Greenwich, Connecticut 979:the lists into this article and 93: 83: 62: 29: 20: 2120:noticed it wasn't mentioned. -- 2096:. The discussion will occur at 1842:An image used in this article, 1704:WSJ articles/opinions 16 Apr 09 1246:stereotypes of bow tie weareres 864:References & external links 541:Bow ties for mess dress/undress 146:This article has been rated as 1655:18:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC) 1645:considered original research. 1636:18:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC) 1600:03:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC) 1522:03:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC) 1275:ok new section creation done. 1236:Stereotypes of bow tie wearers 1105:I think it's time to move for 926:article can support the list. 554:06:12, 14 September 2005 (UTC) 224:19:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC) 211:I could take some photos that 1: 1919:04:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC) 1575:Stereotypes of bowtie wearers 633:09:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC) 126:Knowledge:WikiProject Fashion 120:and see a list of open tasks. 2174:Start-Class fashion articles 2075:18:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC) 1895:17:08, 2 November 2011 (UTC) 1316:18:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC) 1300:18:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC) 1280:20:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC) 1270:20:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC) 1231:09:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC) 1217:Can we get this merged with 1211:19:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 1183:20:35, 15 October 2006 (UTC) 1148:23:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1126:21:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1114:21:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1095:21:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1078:05:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1062:03:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1049:02:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1031:01:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 1024:Talk:List of bow tie wearers 1004:01:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 989:01:19, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 971:01:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 943:01:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 931:01:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 915:00:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 739:Removed red non-linked names 643:06:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC) 284:15:13, 29 October 2005 (UTC) 213:Knowledge:Requested pictures 178:12:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC) 129:Template:WikiProject Fashion 2130:02:28, 28 August 2021 (UTC) 1850:in the following category: 1698:03:20, 14 August 2011 (UTC) 1622:they would wear them", but 1577:. It might be worth adding 1440:22:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC) 1348:04:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC) 1337:22:55, 12 August 2007 (UTC) 877:14:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC) 734:23:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC) 188:15:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC) 2195: 2144:Start-Class vital articles 2038:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1954:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1729:22:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC) 1674:04:23, 7 August 2011 (UTC) 1535:. The sentence explaining 1265:article as y'all discuss. 887:17:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 658:13:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC) 239:01:30, May 11, 2004 (UTC) 152:project's importance scale 2110:18:43, 24 June 2020 (UTC) 1945:20:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC) 1823:08:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1492:21:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC) 1416:23:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC) 1389:21:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC) 1367:21:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC) 858:17:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 806:18:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 610:23:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC) 587:16:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC) 569:14:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC) 503:29 June 2005 00:12 (UTC) 491:02:11, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) 473:18:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 340:00:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 269:04:23, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC) 202:04:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC) 145: 78: 57: 2082:Redirects for discussion 1799:03:47, 9 July 2010 (UTC) 1784:05:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC) 1512:the next sentence - duh. 1473:13:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC) 1459:12:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC) 975:I would tentatively say 777:20:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 723:19:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 528:18:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 445:19:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 418:18:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 378:10:16, 15 May 2004 (UTC) 363:09:04, 15 May 2004 (UTC) 312:18:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 257:16:06, 11 May 2004 (UTC) 248:15:57, 11 May 2004 (UTC) 1950:External links modified 1844:File:Fiveo On Steps.jpg 1764:06:36, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 1254:list of bow tie wearers 1242:list of bow tie wearers 1176:List of bow tie wearers 1143:just above the gallery 998:List of bow tie wearers 964:List of bow tie wearers 956:List of bow tie wearers 901:List of bow tie wearers 894:List of bow tie wearers 183:most in the knotting. 1887:CommonsNotificationBot 1587:to the article top. / 483:'Bowtie' or 'bow tie'? 667:Architects Uniform(?) 36:level-5 vital article 2019:regular verification 1744:reporter who penned 1738:...by the anonymous 2009:After February 2018 1988:parameter below to 1568:unreferencedsection 1478:Banded and clip-ons 1428:New kind of bow tie 1311:input, by the way. 1223:PortlandOregon97217 954:made to delete the 922:, I think the main 547:New Zealand dollars 109:WikiProject Fashion 2063:InternetArchiveBot 2014:InternetArchiveBot 1876:fair use rationale 892:Merge suggestion: 207:Example photograph 45:content assessment 2102:1234qwer1234qwer4 2039: 1901: 1900: 1856:What should I do? 1848:Wikimedia Commons 1762: 1688:comment added by 1598: 1533:original research 1529:without citations 711:(triptogenetica) 516:(triptogenetica) 433:(triptogenetica) 406:(triptogenetica) 300:(triptogenetica) 166: 165: 162: 161: 158: 157: 2186: 2091: 2073: 2064: 2037: 2036: 2015: 2003: 1867:If the image is 1839: 1832: 1831: 1815:Jodi.a.schneider 1752: 1700: 1591: 1586: 1580: 1572: 1566: 1559: 1553: 1506: 1500: 1333: 1324:thistle/bat wing 855: 848: 846:(James McNally) 803: 796: 794:(James McNally) 750:Siegfried Bracke 720: 713: 525: 518: 470: 463: 461:(James McNally) 442: 435: 415: 408: 337: 330: 328:(James McNally) 309: 302: 276:Here's a picture 134: 133: 132:fashion articles 130: 127: 124: 103: 98: 97: 96: 87: 80: 79: 74: 66: 59: 42: 33: 32: 25: 24: 16: 2194: 2193: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2134: 2133: 2122:UltimateKuriboh 2117: 2085: 2067: 2062: 2030: 2023:have permission 2013: 1997: 1967:this simple FaQ 1952: 1937:Jan olieslagers 1926: 1906: 1830: 1807: 1771: 1741:Daily Telegraph 1736: 1706: 1690:198.144.201.135 1683: 1584: 1578: 1570: 1564: 1557: 1551: 1509: 1504: 1498: 1496: 1480: 1447: 1430: 1331: 1326: 1238: 897: 866: 851: 844: 836:Family Fortunes 816: 799: 792: 784: 770:Matti Sillanpää 762:Risto Penttinen 758:Jason Nicholson 754:Jason Nicholson 741: 716: 709: 669: 622: 543: 521: 514: 485: 466: 459: 438: 431: 411: 404: 352: 333: 326: 305: 298: 209: 171: 148:High-importance 131: 128: 125: 122: 121: 99: 94: 92: 73:High‑importance 72: 43:on Knowledge's 40: 30: 12: 11: 5: 2192: 2190: 2182: 2181: 2176: 2171: 2166: 2161: 2156: 2151: 2146: 2136: 2135: 2116: 2113: 2084: 2080:"⧓" listed at 2078: 2057: 2056: 2049: 1982: 1981: 1973:Added archive 1951: 1948: 1925: 1922: 1905: 1902: 1899: 1898: 1880: 1879: 1872: 1858: 1857: 1840: 1829: 1826: 1806: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1770: 1767: 1735: 1732: 1705: 1702: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1658: 1657: 1647:131.111.223.43 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1628:131.111.223.43 1616: 1613: 1610: 1603: 1602: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1543: 1508: 1495: 1479: 1476: 1446: 1443: 1429: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1351: 1350: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1237: 1234: 1216: 1214: 1213: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1151: 1150: 1145:Cornell Rockey 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1081: 1080: 1075:Carl.bunderson 1064: 1051: 1034: 1033: 1007: 1006: 994:weak Keep Both 991: 973: 945: 938:, per above -- 933: 917: 896: 890: 865: 862: 861: 860: 831: 830: 826: 825: 815: 812: 810: 783: 782:External Links 780: 740: 737: 726: 725: 703: 702: 697: 696: 695: 694: 688: 682: 668: 665: 663: 661: 660: 636: 635: 630:דוד ♣ D Monack 621: 618: 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 612: 592: 591: 590: 589: 572: 571: 542: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 510: 507: 484: 481: 480: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 450: 449: 448: 447: 423: 422: 421: 420: 396: 395: 381: 380: 351: 348: 347: 346: 345: 344: 343: 342: 317: 316: 315: 314: 281:Eric's penguin 262: 261: 260: 259: 228: 208: 205: 170: 167: 164: 163: 160: 159: 156: 155: 144: 138: 137: 135: 118:the discussion 105: 104: 101:Fashion portal 88: 76: 75: 67: 55: 54: 48: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2191: 2180: 2177: 2175: 2172: 2170: 2167: 2165: 2162: 2160: 2157: 2155: 2152: 2150: 2147: 2145: 2142: 2141: 2139: 2132: 2131: 2127: 2123: 2114: 2112: 2111: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2090: 2083: 2079: 2077: 2076: 2071: 2066: 2065: 2054: 2050: 2047: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2034: 2028: 2024: 2020: 2016: 2010: 2005: 2001: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1980: 1976: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1955: 1949: 1947: 1946: 1942: 1938: 1935: 1931: 1923: 1921: 1920: 1916: 1912: 1903: 1897: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1877: 1873: 1870: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1862: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1849: 1845: 1841: 1838: 1834: 1833: 1827: 1825: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1781: 1777: 1769:Formal attire 1768: 1766: 1765: 1760: 1756: 1751: 1747: 1743: 1742: 1733: 1731: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1718: 1716: 1712: 1710: 1703: 1701: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1687: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1643: 1642: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1617: 1614: 1611: 1608: 1607: 1605: 1604: 1601: 1597: 1594: 1590: 1583: 1576: 1569: 1563: 1556: 1549: 1544: 1541: 1540: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1519: 1515: 1503: 1494: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1477: 1475: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1461: 1460: 1456: 1452: 1444: 1442: 1441: 1438: 1427: 1417: 1413: 1409: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1368: 1364: 1360: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1349: 1346: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1335: 1334: 1323: 1317: 1314: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1301: 1298: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1278: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1268: 1264: 1260: 1255: 1251: 1247: 1243: 1235: 1233: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1220: 1212: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1190: 1189: 1184: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1158: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1149: 1146: 1142: 1138: 1135: 1134: 1127: 1124: 1120: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1079: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1067:Merge to list 1065: 1063: 1060: 1055: 1052: 1050: 1047: 1043: 1039: 1036: 1035: 1032: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1012: 1009: 1008: 1005: 1002: 999: 995: 992: 990: 987: 982: 978: 974: 972: 969: 965: 961: 957: 953: 949: 946: 944: 941: 937: 934: 932: 929: 928:Andrew Levine 925: 921: 918: 916: 913: 910: 907: 906: 905: 902: 895: 891: 889: 888: 885: 879: 878: 875: 871: 863: 859: 856: 854: 849: 847: 841: 837: 833: 832: 828: 827: 822: 821: 820: 813: 811: 808: 807: 804: 802: 797: 795: 789: 781: 779: 778: 775: 771: 767: 766:Lauri Rauramo 763: 759: 755: 751: 747: 738: 736: 735: 732: 724: 721: 719: 714: 712: 705: 704: 699: 698: 692: 689: 686: 683: 680: 677: 676: 674: 673: 672: 666: 664: 659: 655: 651: 647: 646: 645: 644: 641: 634: 631: 627: 626: 625: 619: 611: 607: 603: 598: 597: 596: 595: 594: 593: 588: 584: 580: 576: 575: 574: 573: 570: 567: 563: 558: 557: 556: 555: 552: 548: 540: 531: 530: 529: 526: 524: 519: 517: 511: 508: 505: 504: 502: 501:Urbane legend 498: 494: 493: 492: 490: 489:Urbane legend 474: 471: 469: 464: 462: 456: 455: 454: 453: 452: 451: 446: 443: 441: 436: 434: 427: 426: 425: 424: 419: 416: 414: 409: 407: 400: 399: 398: 397: 394: 391: 387: 383: 382: 379: 376: 372: 367: 366: 365: 364: 361: 358: 349: 341: 338: 336: 331: 329: 323: 322: 321: 320: 319: 318: 313: 310: 308: 303: 301: 294: 293:types of ends 290: 289: 288: 287: 286: 285: 282: 277: 273: 270: 268: 258: 255: 254:theresa knott 251: 250: 249: 246: 242: 241: 240: 238: 234: 229: 226: 225: 222: 221:12.154.250.67 216: 214: 206: 204: 203: 200: 194: 190: 189: 186: 180: 179: 176: 175:129.12.234.51 168: 153: 149: 143: 140: 139: 136: 119: 115: 111: 110: 102: 91: 89: 86: 82: 81: 77: 71: 68: 65: 61: 56: 52: 46: 38: 37: 27: 23: 18: 17: 2118: 2086: 2061: 2058: 2033:source check 2012: 2006: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1983: 1956: 1953: 1929: 1927: 1907: 1882: 1881: 1860: 1859: 1851: 1808: 1772: 1746:this article 1739: 1737: 1719: 1713: 1707: 1684:— Preceding 1680: 1623: 1619: 1574: 1536: 1510: 1481: 1462: 1451:84.71.108.16 1448: 1431: 1329: 1327: 1245: 1239: 1215: 1203: 1195: 1191: 1156: 1140: 1136: 1118: 1102: 1087: 1083: 1082: 1066: 1053: 1037: 1010: 993: 980: 976: 950:: About the 947: 935: 919: 908: 899:The article 898: 880: 867: 852: 845: 817: 809: 800: 793: 785: 746:Martin Ebner 742: 727: 717: 710: 670: 662: 637: 623: 561: 544: 522: 515: 486: 467: 460: 439: 432: 412: 405: 353: 334: 327: 306: 299: 274: 271: 263: 230: 227: 217: 210: 195: 191: 185:192.249.47.8 181: 172: 147: 107: 51:WikiProjects 34: 2000:Sourcecheck 1911:Leprof 7272 1861:Don't panic 1811:WSJ article 1750:Josiah Rowe 884:Janzomaster 853:(talkpage) 840:Family Feud 814:"Known for" 801:(talkpage) 718:(talkpage) 620:Famous Ties 549:, please.) 523:(talkpage) 468:(talkpage) 440:(talkpage) 413:(talkpage) 335:(talkpage) 307:(talkpage) 41:Start-class 2138:Categories 2115:String tie 2070:Report bug 1930:Lavallière 1924:Lavallière 1582:Refimprove 1434:<|: --> 1433:<|: --> 1332:DRosenbach 1208:HappyApple 1200:Steve Jobs 1192:weak Merge 1059:Intangible 1054:Weak Merge 1038:weak Merge 968:Liberlogos 566:PeteVerdon 551:Scott Gall 497:being bold 245:✏ Sverdrup 231:I have no 2053:this tool 2046:this tool 1776:Toyokuni3 1514:Toyokuni3 1497:Too many 1484:Toyokuni3 1445:Dicky bow 1408:Toyokuni3 1359:Toyokuni3 1137:weak keep 650:Toyokuni3 579:Toyokuni3 39:is rated 2059:Cheers.— 1869:non-free 1759:contribs 1686:unsigned 1196:the-list 1157:Comment: 1011:Comment: 986:Johndodd 838:(UK) or 788:this one 562:quantity 371:Chris 73 267:Delirium 169:Diagrams 1986:checked 1963:my edit 1959:Bow tie 1666:Newzild 1527:Still, 1313:Noroton 1297:Noroton 1263:bow tie 1259:be bold 1250:bow tie 1180:Noroton 1172:Bow tie 1123:Noroton 1119:Comment 1107:cloture 1103:Comment 1092:Noroton 1071:Bow tie 1028:Noroton 960:Bow tie 952:attempt 924:bow tie 912:Noroton 909:Neutral 824:policy. 390:Mintguy 386:necktie 357:Mintguy 350:merging 150:on the 123:Fashion 114:Fashion 70:Fashion 1994:failed 1406:wings. 1357:shape. 940:Alcuin 731:Jag149 640:Alcuin 237:blades 233:tuxedo 47:scale. 1562:added 1026:page. 981:prune 977:Merge 936:Merge 920:Merge 28:This 2126:talk 2106:talk 1990:true 1941:talk 1915:talk 1891:talk 1819:talk 1795:talk 1791:htom 1780:talk 1755:talk 1725:talk 1721:htom 1694:talk 1670:talk 1651:talk 1632:talk 1518:talk 1488:talk 1469:talk 1465:htom 1455:talk 1437:htom 1412:talk 1385:talk 1381:htom 1363:talk 1345:htom 1227:talk 1046:talk 1018:and 962:and 874:talk 654:talk 606:talk 602:htom 583:talk 375:Talk 199:htom 142:High 2027:RfC 2004:). 1992:or 1977:to 1620:why 1589:edg 1573:to 1537:why 1277:MPS 1267:MPS 1160:up: 1111:MPS 1042:Doc 1001:MPS 870:Doc 774:Doc 393:(T) 360:(T) 2140:: 2128:) 2108:) 2040:. 2035:}} 2031:{{ 2002:}} 1998:{{ 1943:) 1917:) 1893:) 1885:-- 1821:) 1797:) 1782:) 1757:• 1727:) 1696:) 1672:) 1653:) 1634:) 1585:}} 1579:{{ 1571:}} 1565:{{ 1558:}} 1555:cn 1552:{{ 1520:) 1507:'s 1505:}} 1502:cn 1499:{{ 1490:) 1471:) 1457:) 1414:) 1387:) 1365:) 1229:) 1202:, 1044:♬ 872:♬ 772:. 768:, 764:, 760:, 756:, 752:, 748:, 656:) 608:) 585:) 429:-- 373:| 296:-- 265:-- 2124:( 2104:( 2094:⧓ 2072:) 2068:( 2055:. 2048:. 1939:( 1913:( 1889:( 1817:( 1793:( 1778:( 1761:) 1753:( 1723:( 1692:( 1668:( 1649:( 1630:( 1596:☭ 1593:☺ 1516:( 1486:( 1467:( 1453:( 1410:( 1383:( 1361:( 1225:( 1014:( 693:. 687:. 681:. 652:( 604:( 581:( 154:. 53::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index