Talk:Underwear

Engvar

So the WP:RETAIN guideline says "When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, maintain it in the absence of consensus to the contrary" so changing spelling top to bottom without discussion or a compelling reason is already suspect. It's WP:LAME to stir up a non-issue.

"Was started in EngvarB" is not quite to the point. The IP address that began this as a stub in 2002 appears to be in the UK now but there's no evidence of that editor's spelling preference, and anyway, that's not what the guideline says to look for. It says "When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety." The first revision that might meet that is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Undergarment&oldid=712081 which has "popularized" not "popularised". If you consider that a stub then the next major expansion is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Undergarment&oldid=780010 which still uses "color" not "colour". By that point American spelling is pretty well established. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Boxer briefs are AKA...

A *lot* of people colloquially refer to boxer briefs currently as just “briefs” - which isn’t grammatically untrue, as sometimes people call bikini briefs simply “briefs”, as well. They are both types of briefs of course. Also, some refer to boxer briefs as “boxers” although that seems less common, and once again may still he linguistically correct. Should this be reflected in the alternate names section for Boxer Briefs? BlackAdvisor (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Citation? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:02, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I know of no documentation of it, otherwise I would have posted about it. BlackAdvisor (talk) 01:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

In that case, the answer to your question is that it should be in the alternate names for boxer briefs, provided we have a citation for it. Since we don't, then no, not at this time.--Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Bra table

The image

There wasn't an image for a bra in the table, so I added File:Buestenhalter-2.jpg to the table. Was this a good choice? It does represent a fairly common example of a bra shape, and it adequately shows the breast coverage, I would like to say. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 22:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 13 January 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 06:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

---

Undergarment → Underwear – Per WP:COMMONNAME, as "underwear" is much more common based on the Google Ngrams in English generally[1], as well as in American English[2] and British English[3] respectively. Rreagan007 (talk) 05:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom. A clear COMMONNAME exists.>>> Extorc.talk 18:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support, sure. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:16, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support Blu Moon (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
• Support per above. --Srapa (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Union suits…

is everyone ok with me to make a separate entry in the Types section? ChecksMix (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC)