Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:57, 3 March 2014

Fashion Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bangs and shaved heads

Growing out a shaved head will always result in bangs...should we add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.219.144 (talk) 20:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC) isn't that just common sense?

Eyes

Why can a fringe not be over the eyes?! This is one of the most common styles of fringe/bangs... 82.29.77.158 19:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Bangs?!?

Why is the article called "bangs" when only Americans call them "bangs"... call it a fringe >_< 222.153.147.13 09:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You mean Americans and Canadians. And the simple fact of the matter is that Americans and Canadians are more Common than people from the UK, so it makes more sense to call it bangs.--71.36.43.16 18:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC) We (I am American) are Not more common than the UK, but as a group are a MUCH larger group by numbers. Common with a capital C implies a UK or royalist (like Royalty) snub against Americans. Wfoj2 (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Likewise, why is it called "fringe" when a majority of the native English speakers are found in North America? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.232.144.109 (talk) 22:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, because the majority of English countries (eg. UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, etc.) are outside of North America (hint, the language is called 'English', not 'North American') Also, the majority of English speakers are non-native English speakers who, despite English not being their first language, use the English Misplaced Pages. The majority of them use Commonwealth English.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

It's wikipedia.com, not wikipedia.co.uk. Go to your own site!

Actually its wikipedia.org--2.97.89.48 (talk) 19:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

This talk page is read by me with a high humor content. I am Ok with current page name, URL and the redirect from bangs to here. Some of my point to add- I consider bangs as a term to apply to both men and women- yet seems to lack any comment reference to fact most men have bangs. . Vast majority of men do have bangs. Among women what percentage have bangs? (I am not looking for an answer, throw question out to make reader think). IF a woman hang bangs and want to change away, then cannot be cut out, but must take the time and bangs allowed to grow out to become no longer bangs. Without bangs, it is am easy haircut to create bangs. I have known one women who did not have bangs but "looked down" on women with bangs. For a woman having bangs can be user to hide a large forehead, Or a receding hairline(men), and also alter the appearance or shape of the face. Wfoj2 (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Francesca Dani image - not fair use

I've removed the image of the model Francesca Dani from the Bangs (hair) page, as it is certainly not fair use of a copyright image. It'd be fine on a page about the model herself, but not about the hairstyle she happens to be sporting. Also, I note from the edit history that this removal had been done before, by User:MattKingston, so I'm not entirely sure why I have to do it again. Unless people are feeling anarchistic about licensing law - I know I do sometimes. -- (James McNally)  (talkpage)  02:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm

I'll have to see if I have any pictures I can use. Someone should also put this in a section about style or something, since it seems to be a "growing" fashion trend.

SwedishConqueror 23:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)SwedishConqueror

A boy in my chorus class a few years ago had fifteen inch bangs, long enough to make that kid's hair look short. Our class made up a song for him that I have always found exceptionally funny, though it may be that you "had to be there." In any case, here are the lyrics:

To be sung to the tune of "Do Your Ears Hang Low"

Do your bangs hang low, can you touch them to your nose?

If I tied them in a knot, would you cry and clutch them close?

Have they grown and grown and grown and grown and grown and grown and grown?

Do your bangs hang low?

Do your bangs hang low, do you comb them down for show?

And if someone cut them off, would you ever be consoled?

Can you touch them to your shoulder, if you bend your head real low?

Do your bangs hang low?

I'm almost certain that this song applies here.

Be Bold

As per the first entry, why is this listed as bands and not fringe? Thus, I moved it to what the entire world (minus one country) knows it as. No disrespect intended by this, I just figured that the majority of viewers would be stumped trying to work out what's going on when looking for this article. Jachin 09:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Jesus effing christ what an argument to have! I am from the UK, hence would prefer fringe, but how can you presume to speak for the Chinese, Brazilians, Indians and Polynesians of this world? You are sure they use "fringe"

I'm South African, and over here we also call it a fringe... (Personally I'm sure most Aussies, New Zealanders and other members of the Commonwealth call them fringes... And I presume that the rest of the world, when speaking English, say fringes.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I would have thought there were better things to worry about. Such as this sentence "In the late 1980s and early 1990s, poofy, curly, teased fringes were in fashion." What's with the word "poofy"? 164.143.244.34 14:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Disagree, Bangs are not Fringe

I disagree, fringe and bangs are clearly not the same thing, as far as popular culture in the United States is concerned. The article here clearly states "except that it does not cover the eyes." In the US, when referring to bangs, it absolutely can cover the eyes (and is quite acceptable and I hung out with a girl who had this style last night). In fact, in the broadest sense I'd say bangs in the United States are loosely defined as curled or straight hair which covers some part of the forehead using hair across the full width of the forehead. It can include the eyes. The most typical definition being "hair with the ends pointed generally downward and when viewing a profile of a person curls outward over the forehead."

It seems to be a case where loosely translated fringe and bangs are the same but within their own culture usage there is a subtle but important difference and I think they should be separate articles. 216.253.200.145 18:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

IMO fringe can cover the eyes. It's called a long fringe. :P --pfctdayelise (talk) 12:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

${\displaystyle Insertformulahere}$

Whoever wrote that fringes can't cover the eyes doesn't know what they're talking about... Fringes and 'bangs' are exactly the same thing.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

How come this page is called "Fringe"? Why shouldn't it be called "Bang"?

67.87.184.150 20:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought fringe was the correct term and bang was more of a slang term. *shrug* I don't really mind where it is. Liam Markham 12:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The thing is that most of the world says Fringe instead of 'bangs'. It's only Americans and Canadians who call it that.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be no evidence that "most of the world" uses fringe instead of bangs, beyond the word of this "Zimbabwe for the British" user's word. The links cited in the article do not specify what most of the world uses, only that UK and Americans use different terms, and are inappropriately sourced as evidence that "most of the world" calls it fringe. Indeed, one of the links is simply to some forum of people arguing over the term. Someone needs to provide definitive evidence of what the majority term is, or else give both terms equal credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.61.224 (talk) 05:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Can someone explain to me why an entry on bangs has been changed to fringe? Great, they call bangs in the UK "fringe." Guess who else calls fringe "bangs?" All of North America, including Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.200.117 (talk) 04:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Should be bangs

For Americans seeking information, this article should be changed to "bangs" rather than "fringe." Fringe can be referenced, but should be excluded beyond that. This is wikipedia.com. It is not wikipedia.co.uk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.200.117 (talk) 04:58, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Just going to point out that it's not wikipedia.us either 124.148.216.40 (talk) 12:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Both terms are needed

The problem

Some considerations:

• Bangs is obscure to a UK reader. I arrived here to find out what it meant. Because it's used here, I found out.
• Bangs is standard in North America. We don't know who else does or doesn't use it. Other countries tend to use some mixture of US and UK vocabulary, so it seems likely that some countries will use bangs and some will use fringe.
• Given that the population of the US is only something like 250 or 300 million, fewer than half of whom have English as their first language, US speakers are unlikely to be a majority of English speakers. Just a larger minority than British speakers are.
• Readers will search for either term, depending where they're from and why they're searching. Some, like me, will have intentionally searched for the "foreign" one.
• If the two are not synonyms, the differences need clarifying. If that's not possible because of disagreement about whether they're the same, then the disagreeement's existence is a piece of information belonging in the article.
• As the article stands, the grammar is a mess in many places where it tries to use bangs (plural) and fringe (singular) in the same sentence.
• If only one term is used, the article will have geographical bias towards the countries which use that term. So for neutrality, both are needed.

Suggested solution

Assuming the distinction between the two can be clarified but is not huge:

• Rename the article Bangs, fringe, and redirect both bangs and fringe to it.
• Include a general section containing information that's indisputably applicable to both. Use bangs or fringes early on, then refer to them and they as much as possible. Avoid repeatedly using one term without the other.
• Include a section Fringe versus bangs or similar, mentioning (i) the different UK and US usage, and (ii) the differences of meaning if any.
• In the list of hairstyles, include both the US terms which refer to bangs, and the UK ones which refer to fringe. Where they're equivalent, say so. Where they're not, explain both.

It doesn't make sense to have two sides each protesting "But why doesn't the article use the term that's common in my country?". Both terms are relevant, and the difference of usage is surely one of the pieces of information that belongs in the article. Musiconeologist (talk) 00:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

As this article was written in US english first, and then changed to UK english, the original terminology was restored. The page should be moved back to bangs (as it was originally written, as per the URL..and history). 2.222.152.109 (talk) 07:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)21/10/13

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Speedily closed and relisted (non-admin closure) Red Slash 16:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Fringe (hair) → Bangs (hair) – Was originally Bangs, and then moved without debate on this talk page (at least as I can see). 2.219.46.24 (talk) 09:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose, per WP:COMMONALITY. I'm from the United States, where "bangs" is the usual term. But "fringe" is fairly familiar as a secondary term here (while my understanding is that the reverse isn't true in most of the English-speaking world), making it more recognizable to the site's international readership. This is why I corrected the 2006 copy-and-paste move instead of undoing it. —David Levy 10:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• I stumbled on this today. I have never before heard bangs called a "fringe". I'm from Canada. I have no opinion on the move or on the cause of my ignorance. Srnec (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - Both 'Bangs' and 'Fringe' are used in North America, but 'Bangs' isn't used outside of North America. WP:NC states Recognisability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject will recognise. "Fringe" is the most recognisable name throughout the English speaking world. Also "bangs" is more of a colloquial word, whereas "fringe" is more formal; this is an encyclopaedia, we should use formal wording as it is more professional. IJA (talk) 14:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  I agree with most of what you wrote, but I'm curious as to what makes 'bangs' "more of a colloquial word" and 'fringe' "more formal". —David Levy 14:37, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Support per WP:ENGVAR. If the article did start with one variation of english, why not keep it that way. It appears that someone was WP:BOLD and changed it from the original version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.46.24 (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  WP:ENGVAR doesn't advise us to always retain an article's original English variety, regardless of good reasons not to. Did you read the above discussion (wherein justification for the change is provided)?
  Also, please note that supporting your own move request (by essentially reiterating your original rationale) won't help, irrespective of whether you sign your post. —David Levy 15:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  --Sorry, I thought it was a given I support my own idea! Is there a wiki-split-personality policy? Didn't mean to not sign, I often forget to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.46.24 (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  Yes, it's obvious that you support your own idea. It's okay to say so explicitly, but please be careful to acknowledge that you're the same person. (Misplaced Pages:Sock puppetry is a relevant policy. It focuses mainly on the use of multiple account names / IP addresses, as simply omitting a signature is unlikely to have the effect in question.) —David Levy 21:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Strong support per WP:RETAIN and WP:ENGVAR. Red Slash 16:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • On second thought, I'm just gonna revert and relist. Red Slash 16:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

RM

It has been proposed in this section that Bangs (hair) be renamed and moved to Fringe (hair). A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

Bangs (hair) → Fringe (hair) – Someone boldly moved this page from Bangs (hair) to Fringe (hair), apparently in violation of WP:RETAIN. An RM was filed to move it back to the original title, Bangs (hair). I carried out the move speedily in order to re-file this request. I'm not sure what justification if any there is to override WP:RETAIN, but if anyone wants to present such evidence, they are welcome to. I am not supporting this move request. Red Slash 16:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

• David Levy, Srnec, IJA...

• Start-Class fashion articles
• Mid-importance fashion articles
• Requested moves