Talk:Cardigan (sweater)

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

Gender[edit]

Why is it said that cardigans are usually worn by women?? They are very often worn by men. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.95.50.181 (talkcontribs) 10:06, 3 March 2007

Possibly because they are even more often worn by women these days. I'd be inclined to agree that this is the situation at least here in England. -- Smjg 10:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I find it odd that the article says that cardigans are usually worn by women, but the list of "Notable wearers of cardigans" are almost all men. Benanna 20:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The list seems to have gone now. But could that be why they're notable - because they're men? -- Smjg 16:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think cardigans are more often worn by women than men generally, but there are times that men wore them more than they do now. They seemed worn more by men in the 1980s than now. Though come to think of it, I don't often see men wearing any types of sweaters that often now. I suspect that men's sweater sales have gone down in general in the US compared to 20-25 years ago as some kind of fashion trend. It seems like it would be easier to support the statements with sweater sales data than simply casual observation, though I don't really care, but it seems like original research. I also find the picture of the girl in the knee-length cardigan to be unrepresentative and weird since most cardigans I see worn aren't nearly that long. Sbfisher 04:58, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added the pic, but would welcome a replacement, if you find another image, which should be easy to do. But I do think some picture is needed. Also, if we go by what "...I see worn...", I'm sure we'll always see different things. Anyhow, as said, I welcome a replacement. If you do, I won't put back the old image. In addition to this article, we should offer a variety of images at Commons:Cardigan (sweater) (which is linked from here, of course), so people can see a good range, not just one. --Rob 12:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Surely, because cardigans are most common among the elderly, the higher survival rate of women is all it takes for more women to wear them? There used to be a Dunn & co standard cardigan with leather buttons worn as a uniform by old men. But no longer Brunnian (talk) 21:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I always thought that cardigans were primarily a man's garment, but there you are... (talk) 16:32, 18 Dec. 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.29.1 (talk)

Raglan[edit]

I thought that the defining thing about a cardigan was that it does not have a Raglan sleeve? rather than just the difference between open-fronted & pullover? Brunnian (talk) 21:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shrinkage[edit]

When they shrined in the washing, they beconme bolleroised.86.24.20.143 (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AKA-a shrug.82.11.109.46 (talk) 15:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Osman[edit]

Why does osman redirect to a disambiguation page with nothing being relevant to cardigans? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.159.254.209 (talk) 04:15, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Present Decade"[edit]

The introduction includes "present decade". Terms for time, date, or interval should never be relative to the present time or date in a work such as Wikipedia, since the present time and date continually change, and there is no guarantee that the term will have been amended sufficiently soon.

Also, "decade" is ambiguous. Common usage is that the set of years with the first three digits the same (post-999) constitutes a decade : so 2010 to 2019. But educated usage, astronomers apart, recognising that the Gregorian system has no year zero, starts decades, centuries, and millennia with years ending with a 1. Sometimes the context indicates that the meaning is an interval of the stated length ending at the present time.

94.30.84.71 (talk) 10:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why haven't you changed it? BMK (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]