Talk:Technical textile

Proposed merge with Gore-Tex

The following discussion 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.

---

Seems to be kind of technical textile Shrikanthv (talk) 12:20, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose Gore-Tex has enough notability to merit an individual article. The fabric is widely used in apparels used in Motosports and large number of other applications. --DBigXrayᗙ 17:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose Comprehensive coverage about Gore-Tex in this general article would likely make it far too long, and may run into issues re. WP:UNDUE.— Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:23, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose What a silly idea, to move a whole class of textiles to an article about a single brand name of a lamnated fabric. Gore-Tex is a technical textile, and if any merging is to be done it should go the other way, i.e. merge Gore-Tex to this article. Good grief. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 12:50, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Comment hang on, there is a tag on the article that says exactly the opposite of what this proposal says. Hmmm. ??? -Roxy, the dog. wooF 20:37, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose The technical textile / performance fabric is a broad concept while Gore-Tex is quite a specific example. It's best to keep these levels of coverage separate to avoid generalising, contrary to WP:SYNTH (pun intentional) Andrew D. (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose refute premise of nom - "technical textile" meaning? Widefox; talk 16:15, 16 September 2018 (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.

It is about section Geotextile

I am not sure about doing this. Asking for advice, does it make sense to replace section intro of Geotextile in Technical textile from the main article Geotextile. Both say slightly differently. Should they not inform exactly similarly? In the edit summary, I will make sure that I took the text from article A and put it into article B to preserve the attribution history. Thanks RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 05:52, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

@John B123: Sir, I am sorry to bother you here for the advice, I am looking for. Thanks and regardsRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 14:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

@RAJIVVASUDEV: I'm not sure it's needed as there are differences between the two subjects. For future information, if you copy from one article to another the usual format of the edit summary is Content in this edit from [[article name]]; see page history for attribution. --John B123 (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I am thankful for your advice RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 17:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Attribution

Text and references copied from Technical textiles to Performance (textiles), See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:40, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Revert images back

I'd prefer to revert the images from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Technical_textile&oldid=1128975254 back, someone actually thanked me for putting them there recently (images from other articles) @Some1 Adenosine Triphosphate (talk) 00:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I disagree. Technical textile (the topic of this article) states that it is a textile product manufactured for non-aesthetic purposes, where function is the primary criterion. The three images you added (consisting of you wearing clothing "with embedded squibs") aren't exactly useful to the article/readers and also lack variety. Per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE, Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. They are often an important illustrative aid to understanding. When possible, find better images and improve captions instead of simply removing poor or inappropriate ones, especially on pages with few visuals. However, not every article needs images, and too many can be distracting... Strive for variety. For example, ... If an article on a military officer already shows its subject in uniform, then two more formal in-uniform portraits would add little interest or information.... Resist the temptation to overwhelm an article with images of marginal value simply because many images are available. Anyway, I've found better images to replace the previous ones on this article with. Some1 (talk) 04:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

What is PES?

Please define. 85.193.199.19 (talk) 11:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)