Talk:Shoe

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

Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2022[edit]

The plural of "Man" and "Woman" is "Men" and "Women", not "Mens" and "Womens", so the plural possessive of these words is "Men's" and "Women's". Please correct the "Mens'" and "Womens'" section headers to "Men's" and "Women's". 49.198.51.54 (talk) 23:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Also corrected some instances in the text. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 10:58, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2023[edit]

In the "Shoe" article it's listed that "foot straps" were used to bind the feet into the "lotus foot" shape, and is simply stated that it was used to "lure men". In fact foot binding, as it was specifically called (there is a wiki article here, which should be linked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_binding ) they used silk bandages, started by breaking and binding the feet at a young age (around 3-7 years of age) and it was considered a mark of beauty, and a way to "ensure a husband", which is stated in the article. At one point almost 100% of Han upperclass women had lotus feet. The foot binding and lotus feet are not shoes specifically, but it may be important in reference to the shoes that accompany them (and are really not referenced aside from the photo). Recommend that "foot straps" be replaced with "silk bandages", and a brief, concise description of foot binding and a link to the page should be included in that section (as it is vaguely alluded to and needs to be more clear). Also recommend the later remark of "Chinese feminists called for the ban of the foot strap" be possibly linked directly to the section "decline" from the foot binding article, and clarified to be that many called for the ban of foot binding, which started with Chinese writers calling the practice into question and an Anti Foot-Binding Society being formed. The editor can use discretion of what to add within this section, as there is a lot of information and a fair amount is not necessary to the shoe article.

Also in the article a phase states "the upper is lasted to the sole" which is not possible, as a "shoe last" is for shaping shoes and is more modern than the reference. I'm not sure how it would be rephrased, as the "shoe" article states that uppers being sewn to soles is more modern, as well as gluing, but I figure I might as well point it out. Damien-Silverfang (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Damien-Silverfang: your requests are more likely to receive attention if you
  1. Put each request in a separate section with its own request template, instead of shoe-horning two requests into one section
  2. Specify exactly what change you want made.   Maproom (talk) 20:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: Please heed Maproom's advice. This request is too difficult to follow, with regard to what parts should be changed, versus what is an addition.
When creating a request, please be specific about what X should be changed to Y, or where specifically Y should be inserted into X (or, possibly what X should be deleted entirely). It is best to separate each instance into their own requests. Be sure to provide reliable sources for each individual edit request (even if the sourcing repeats).
-- Pinchme123 (talk) 04:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2023[edit]

Change "bone points bone awals" to "bone awls" under History. 134.88.137.102 (talk) 08:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Tollens (talk) 09:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prehistoric footwear[edit]

I hope to add some content on on prehistoric adoption of footwear to Shoe § History. Here are some sources I put together in a fairly thorough Google Scholar search:

Prehistoric footwear sources

Trinkaus (2005) is a good place to start, and would alone significantly improve this article. Feel free to add content from these sources now. If not, I'll get around to it eventually. Daask (talk) 01:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The current version of the Wikipedia article on shoes exhibits an advertisement-like tone in certain sections, such as Athletic Shoes, Boot, and Dress and Casual Shoes. These sections contain detailed brand histories, specific product names, and descriptions that resemble promotional material rather than neutral, encyclopedic content. For instance, the Athletic Shoes section includes detailed accounts of brand histories and specific product names, which can be seen as promotional rather than informative. Similarly, the Boot section contains detailed descriptions of specific types of boots and their features, including mentions of specific brands, which might be interpreted as promoting those brands rather than providing neutral information. Additionally, the Dress and Casual Shoes section includes detailed brand information and specific product types, which could be perceived as more suited to a marketing brochure than an encyclopedia article. To align with Wikipedia's standards of neutrality and reliability, the article should be revised to present information in a neutral and educational manner, focusing on the historical, cultural, and functional aspects of different types of shoes, while ensuring that claims about specific brands or products are supported by reliable sources. Cleter (talk) 01:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shoe&oldid=1198223436"