Template talk:Historical clothing

Criteria?

This needs to be made clear. By what criteria is the term "historical" being used here? My first reaction upon seeing it is that it is to list items that are no longer current, that is ones that someone would only wear if they were dressing in period garb or costume as part of a historical recreation for theatre, educational purposes or the like. As such, then greater care must be taken to ensure that the items here truly fit that criteria, as some items that were listed here, though less common, are not historical at all.oknazevad (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I am open to a more clear criteria, but I am not sure what wording would be. To me the criteria is clothing that is worn much less then it was worn in the past. tahc ^chat 01:06, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Globalization of fashion

The section on modern fashion has now been divided to reflect the beginnings of globalization in the late 90s. As mentioned in 1990s in fashion, this may be due to the increased availability of the internet and satellite TV outside of America, plus Bill Clinton's reduction of import tariffs under Nafta.

Peace and love -Ossie

These articles are not named "Globalized fashion" and do not seem to relate to all of Globalized fashion (whatever that is)-- they are merely wider than "Western fashion". tahc ^chat 17:34, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Disposition?

Could the disposition of this template be harmonised more in line with that of Template:Clothing? PPEMES (talk) 09:15, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean... and why would it be any better than what we have now? tahc ^chat 18:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Every piece of armor gets included?

If not, sabatons have no business being included in the footwear. — LlywelynII 12:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Vestments

On the other hand, ecclesiastical vestments absolutely are clothing and should be included unless we're pretending 'albs' and the like are 'modern outerwear' instead of historical anachronisms. — LlywelynII 12:58, 28 June 2023 (UTC)