Talk:Shoe polish/Archive 1

Archive 1

Older Entries

I removed the clean up tag. Surely it doesn't need one now. Proto 13:02, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

just some feedback:

• The chemistry section includes "The burning of shoe polish..." seems rather odd in there. The products you describe are the result of the burning of any hydrocarbon. Unless there's some particular significance to the burning of shoe polish I'd drop that. But I would like to know more about the ingredients that are included. What is the purpose of including lanolin, or gum arabic for instance? you say that 65-77 percent is volatiles, is that so it hardens after it's applied? What's the significance of its specific gravity? If you knew the answers to this questions, the chemistry section would be more interesting. Otherwise, it's a bit small and maybe the relevant portions could be merged into another section.

Done, except why the s.g. is significant. I don't know why it is. Or even if it is.

• "Wartime surge in popularity" section the part that reads "Williams, a native-born 'Kiwi' who lived in Japan" should be changed (probably to "Williams, a New Zealander who lived in Japan" Although you properly mention above that 'Kiwi' is slang for newzealander, it's a term that is considered offensive to some (though not all) and is not very encyclopedic.

Done

• "Alternative uses" section I think the expression is 'in a pinch' not 'at a pinch'.

Depends on whether you're American or British, respectively. Either is ok.

• "that would take the person's mind off the stark realities of life in the twilight hours of Communism." I think this should go. It sounds really corny, Seems POV, and doesn't seem to reflect a scholarly view of substance abuse.

Done ... hmm, that was a bit fruity. I did write that when I'd just started.

• "Dangers of shoe polish" maybe use this section to expand the chemistry section. They really go together.

Done, they now follow one another.

• "Home-made shoe polish" section is not really encyclopedic, should be removed I think.

Hmm ... I kinda like that section. Will see if anyone else agrees with you.

You've got a good start on the article here, great job on the work you've put in so far. Matt 03:22, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

(all indented italic comments by me) Proto t c 23:18, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

More PR comments

A nice article, but the sections are woefully small.

• remove the bold text in the article. Just Boot/shoe polish should be bolded.
  • Done.
• Expand the lead by another para
  • done
• Start with the chemistry section first, rename [Chem] to =Manufacture= and include the manufacturing process here. The dangers can also be added here.
  • done
• follow with history section, try and increase the length by 50%-75%. Remove sub headings
  • Working on it
• Trivia section can be merged somewhere else.
• Remove the home made section ingredients. This should be added in wikibooks:. (recipies do not come under an encyclopedia)
  • done
• Now the section on how shoe polish is applied can be added. Expand. Suggestion: There are a lot of home remidies such as the use of alcohol, potatoes etc. to get that perfect shine. Include this. The tone should read like an encyclopedia, not a help magazine BTW.
• Brands should be expanded to cover all continents. Brazil, Agentina, Russia, Spain, Egypt, Japan. Try and get info on all these countries. It is currently too commonwealth centered.
  • I can't find this
• The image has a dubious copyright status.
  • Fixed.
• Please add your references.
  • The pages I used for help are at the bottom in 'external links.
• If you reach this stage, I'll try and reward you by uploading a pic of the shoeshine boys in the railway station. :). Just ping me for that.
  • I'm still waiting, Nichalp :@

=Nichalp «Talk»= 09:19, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

• • Comments in 'italics by me Proto t c 11:58, 15 August 2005 (UTC) Updated Proto t c 09:46, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Ramsey or Ramsay

In the intro the inventors name is given as William Ramsey but later on it is Ramsay, which is correct?AllanHainey 12:24, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

It's Ramsay. I've fixed it, thanks for noticing it! Proto t c 11:51, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Link to shoeshine boy

The "Pre-1906" section of the History mentions shoeshine boys. I added a link to shoeshine boy, which currently hasn't been written. The boot polish boy article does exist, but seems to only cover India. I took the assumption that these were somehow separate, but I wanted people to know in case they weren't. -- Creidieki 14:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

because this section is called "shoeshine boy", I thought I'd add my related but somewhat independent comments here: traditionally, shoe polishers are called "shoeshine boys", even if they are men older than that (look even at the picture in this article) This traditionally has been a derogatory usage, though it may have lost some of that in modern times. Note the famous Kenny Price lyric to the Glenn Miller song, "pardon me boy, is that the Chattanooga Choo Choo", is a reference to a shoeshine boy, who would have been assumed to be African-American (or "colored") in the time that song was written; the title of that song is "Chatanooga Shoe Shine Boy".

Other terms for shoeshine boy include "bootblack" and "shoeblack" which also strike me as potentially seen to be derogatory, even though they refer to the color of the shoe polish. The shoeshine trade is a skill and has a deserved amount of respect and pride in workmanship, but it is definitely a low status working class trade the world over. In Japan, IIRC it is practiced by an distinct "outcaste" subculture, the "buraku", and I think (a strong dose of "I think") it is because leather handling is considered dirty because it is dead flesh (and not to mention it's somebody else's feet).

Another interesting tidbit which it seems should be mentioned, a somewhat archaic but still common slangy idiom "he doesn't know shit from Shinola" comes from a hypothetical comparison with the shoe polish brand. Oh, and shouldn't there be mention of [Horatio Alger] whose rise to fame started with his story about Ragged Dick, the once immensely popular rags-to-riches success story of an enterprising young man who got his start as a shoeshine boy. [[[User:66.92.78.29|66.92.78.29]] 18:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)]

Scottish expatriate(s)

In the "Invention" section (2.2), I'm a little worried about the phrase "Scottish expatriate William Ramsay and Hamilton McKellan". Were they both Scottish expatriates, and there's an "s" missing? Or did we mention Ramsay's nationality but not McKellan? I think the sentence should mention both of their nationalities. -- Creidieki 14:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Should be an s. I'll fix it. Proto t c 14:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Structure of "Invention" section

I had some trouble following the "Invention" section. It mentions a lot of good information, but it doesn't provide any structure or narrative. Essentially, every paragraph in that section needs an introductory sentence.

I don't know enough about the topic to write those myself, so I'll provide a few options/examples.

First paragraph: We need to establish why the first paragraph is

• The beginning of large-scale commercial production of shoe polish was with "Kiwi" brand shoe polish in 1904.
• The first shoe polish to be marketed on a large scale, and the first to be called "shoe polish", was Kiwi shoe polish.
• The first modern formulation of shoe polish was produced by Kiwi in 1904.

Sentence about Ramsay's wife: Is this actually relevant? Please either connect her with shoe polish or remove her from the article.

Yes. It's the reason it was named Kiwi. In the frenzy of copyediting, someone had seperated it from where it originally was (and made sense). Proto t c 14:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Second paragraph: "A rival brand of the time": Was this their main competitor? The only other commercial brand? Try to start this paragraph with a stronger statement, that tells us why we're learning about Cobra.

• Kiwi faced at least one major competitor when it was founded, in Cobra Boot Polish.

We are learning about it because it is an article about shoe polish. Proto t c 14:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Third paragraph: Again, this gives good information, but it's not connected very well. "However" indicates that the paragraph is contradicting something. Presumably, with the second paragraph we're saying "Kiwi had at least one major competitor", and with the third paragraph we're saying "But they were better, and that's why they won in the marketplace". This flow needs to be explicit.

Easily fixed. In fact, all of this has been fixed. Proto t c 14:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Shoes and boots before 1900

The "Surge in Popularity" section's first sentence says that no one could afford shoes or boots before the 19th century? What were they wearing? I assume you mean that no one could afford leather shoes or well-made shoes or modern shoes or commercial shoes or something? I'm afraid that Wikipedia's history of footware is *pathetic*, so I can't tell what changes happened in shoes around then. -- Creidieki 15:03, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Read the sentence. It states "At the end of the 19th century, shoes and boots became affordable to the masses". Proto t c 14:10, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

• Yes, I understand that. But were the masses seriously going around barefoot before then? -- Creidieki 15:58, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Oh, I see. I'll try and fix it up. Proto t c 16:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Featured article!

That's right, Shoe polish is now a featured article! Thank you very much to everyone for your help. Proto t c 10:03, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

British or American English?

Right now we have a sentence with colo(u)r both ways: "The polish is generally the same color as the shoes it will be used upon, or it may be neutral, lacking any intrinsic colour." I see a "colourant" in there somewhere else. I'm not sure which way this one started out. Proto? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I would have spelled it 'colour', being a dirty Brit, but as long as it's consistent, it really shouldn't matter. I think Nichalp has amended it now, anyway. Proto t c 14:15, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

No, it was still a mix. I've changed them all to "colour". —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Junk?

Why is there that big section on the top of the article? It ruins the article's reputation as a featured article. Bibliomaniac15 01:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're referring to? --Oldak Quill 02:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

References jumbled

Multiple references to the competition commission that need to be untangled into two references.

This is a pretty big problem—the first citation points to the 18th note, and the second one doesn't even seem to work. Could someone fix this? --Spangineer^es (háblame) 04:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Dead Link

The link to the 'shoe polish fraud' article is dead.--Anchoress 06:11, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Invention in Germany 1887

According to the company history of the market leader for shoe polish in Germany [1] (german) Adam Schneider, head of Werner & Mertz (brand name Erdal), in the german town of Mainz, invented a shoe polish that not only was water resistant, but was the first to include ingrediences to conserve leather in 1887. --82.135.79.162 10:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC) (H-stt in the de-Wikipedia)

Erdal was more of a dubbin than a shoe polish. It provided water resistance and preserved the leather, but didn't induce shine (which is what a shoe polish would do). Proto t c 10:21, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Erdal isn't and never was a "dubbin". I don't know where you're getting this idea from. It provided water resistance, preserved the leather, restored color (has been and is available in black, brown, clear, white, for instance) and induced shine. Great, now I'm involved in a wikipedia flamewar on freaking shoe polish. I hate you, Proto. ;) Kar98 15:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

The difference (as someone mentions below) is that Erdal was one of the first to not dissolve in the rain/water as dubbin does. Punch (first manufactured in Ireland in 1851) did the same thing, yet again the difference is it wasn't what 'modern' shoe polish is today (no high concentration of fast-evapourating volatiles). Proto t c 14:44, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Footnotes

Links to/from footnotes appear to be screwed up. Joestynes 10:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

• I think I fixed them- I did a revert from link spam in the footnotes earlier. --Adam ^(talk) 15:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Jackassery on the main page

Just deleted a bold paragraph at the top going on about Wikipedia saying "this proves that Wikipedia isn't reliable, blah blah blah." Kids these days, I swear...