Talk:Stafford knot

Staffordshire hoard

A 6th? century knot was found on an article in the Staffordshire hoard. Here is a link to an article if anyone is interestred in adding it. [1]. Heironymous Rowe (talk) 22:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Have added this in. It's also now being reported in the archaeological press, Current Archaeology. If anyone can shift the Refs para to below the pennant img, that would neaten the page up.Rhodian (talk) 13:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Done.Heironymous Rowe (talk) 18:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Stafford knot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091021032936/http://www.expressandstar.com/2009/10/16/knot-found-in-hoard-jewels/ to http://www.expressandstar.com/2009/10/16/knot-found-in-hoard-jewels/
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130215122601/http://www.the-smiler.com/thesmiler/ to http://www.the-smiler.com/thesmiler/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

It's knot

I'm not suggesting a title change or saying that the usage "Stafford Knot" is wrong as refers to this image. However, it's not an overhand knot because it's not a knot, as knot-theorists use the term "knot", unless the ends are joined together or are joined to something like the wall of a building that make the ends inaccessible as far as manipulating the knot to see if it can be straightened or untangled into a simpler knot. That Stafford Knot can be unknotted into a straight cord, without cutting, by moving the ends around, since they're already cut. Something like "an overhand knot with free ends" instead of "an overhand knot" is required.2603:7000:9906:A91C:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 07:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

It's odd that this article is titled 'Stafford knot' when the first sentence of the lede states that the common name is 'Staffordshire knot'. This appears to be directly contrary to Wikipedia article naming practices. I had never heard of a 'Stafford knot' before being redirected here. --Ef80 (talk) 12:48, 29 December 2021 (UTC)