Talk:Black tie

/Archive 1

Black Tie versus Dinner Jacket/Tuxedo (separate articles)
The definition of black tie is inheritently contradictory. It is defined as a synonym for "dinner jacket" or "tuxedo" and, at the same time, as a dress code. Only the latter is correct. Unlike "dinner jacket" or "tuxedo", "black tie" is not an article of clothing. While black tie certainly requires a dinner jacket/tuxedo, putting on such a jacket does not necessarily mean being dressed for black tie. If this were the case then all formal proms and weddings would be considered black tie events. The difference lies in the details of the outfit, such as colour and style. It is more correct to consider "black tie" not as a noun but as an adjective similar to "formal" or "semiformal". Peter Marshall 19:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree. This needs to be a short article on what to wear to a black tie affair versus a white tie or semiformal affair. Tuxedo should have its own article; not disambiguate to here. That's like having business suit disambiguate to work. --Tysto 00:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Tysto, Black tie and Tuxedo are quite different, I would recommend creating two separate articles to distinguish the two. Schnarr 01:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The two articles (tuxedo and black tie) seem to be rather mixed up. If we are going to have two articles, I think we should enforce the distinction properly, or else just merge them.  Does anyone object if I shift some paragraphs around to sort this out? I was thinking of taking the history from the tuxedo article and putting it here, and having the tuxedo article just describe the jacket. --Kan8eDie (talk) 20:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Right. I have taken action and merged these articles because:
 * A tuxedo is another name for a dinner jacket, and dinner jacket redirects here, so this is inconsistent.
 * The objections above are two years old. Since then, the page has changed such that there is not a single fact on the tuxedo page not duplicated here.
 * The analogies above are flawed: work is not a dress code, and white tie does as a matter of fact have a lengthy discussion of what to wear
 * Yes, black tie (a dress code) and tuxedo/dinner jacket (a garment) are different, but they are by necessity discussed together; we use and distinguish the terms on this page successfully already.
 * Kan8eDie (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Regarding the recent revert by Deltageignet on (17:27, 2008-09-21), all the material removed was on the tuxedo page except the last sentence, added to make it less geo. specific. I am looking up a good reference, but a quick google gives three UK retails using the term in this way: Brook Taverner, Highland Store, ClermontDirect.  These are not reliable sources, but I will find one. Edit: I added the Black Tie Guide, which is pretty neutral and reliable, with an extensive bibliography; i.e. not as good as, say, Flusser, but I will document the whole article later properly when I get round to it.


 * I have no problem with the sourced note on British terminology. My problem is with this:


 * "In North America, the tuxedo is commonly taken to mean a modern variation on the black tie described above, usually where the jacket has a notch lapel and three or more buttons. These have become more common as they are easier for manufacturers to produce, since they use the same pattern as a business suit and are more accepted in mainstream America. Because in such settings many choose to remove their jackets, full-back waistcoats have become more commonplace as well; often high, single breasted, and with the full five or six buttons of a daytime waistcoat. Many recent popular 'tuxedo' styles are merely three piece suits with notched collars, flap pockets, high cut vests, and long ties. Only the fabric of the suit, not the cut or style, differentiates the modern tuxedo from a business suit."


 * We have several problems here. First, "three or more buttons" is simply untrue—the two-button and one-button notch still prevail, three-buttons being sometimes seen and four-buttons quite rare. Second, while full of basically factual information, the paragraph has a subtle but distinct slant against modern variations. (I'm a firm supporter of formal-wear tradition, but this is a neutral encyclopedia.) Finally, the idea that "tuxedo" means something else in the U.S. and Canada is unverified original research. Again, I would argue that some modern variations—especially those with long ties—are not tuxedos, but arguing that point is not the place of this encyclopedia. Besides, information on modern variations is incorporated throughout the article.Deltabeignet (talk) 04:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks; I immediately leapt to the conclusion you didn't like the sentence I had written. Since the section was now so short, I have removed it and redistributed the facts around the article; I think it is now less biased than whoever originally wrote it.—Kan8eDie (talk) 18:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I think this issue needs to be re-opened. A tuxedo is a specific thing, a noun.  Black tie is an adjective describing a category of formal wear.  The tuxedo page should be a short definition of a tuxedo, styles, and its history.  It can specify that it is appropriate for black tie events, and link here.  Similarly, this page should simply specify that tuxedos are one of the forms of dress that satisfies the dresscode of "black tie" and link to tuxedo. 69.118.126.213 (talk) 14:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I have gone ahead and created a separate article for tuxedo for all the reasons listed above.Peter Marshall (talk) 01:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Leaning towards that the 2011 split was a mistake, for arguments given. Introducing renewed merge proposal further down this talk page. Chicbyaccident (talk) 18:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

What shall Women Wear?
I am a bit puzzled that it's not mentioned what women shall wear at a Black Tie event.
 * It's covered briefly in the introduction. See this site for an exhaustive explanation. Deltabeignet (talk) 05:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Black Tie for waitstaff
Many continental Europeans and Latin Americans have commented to me (an American) that they would never wear "black tie." To them, this is considered to be the uniform of the waitstaff for a formal event. They typically wear a dark suit for evening wear. In the case of the most formal event, they wear a morning suit in the day, and white tie at night.
 * Interesting comment to me. I grew up on Father Brown mysteries and The Queer Feet, found in The Innocence of Father Brown covers just that subject with a thief alternately being a waiter and a gentleman as he steals the silverware. -Fuzzy 14:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It's correct that black ties are generlly only worn by waitstaff, everyone else wears white ties. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, such as, some academic events, and some funerals. (I know these exceptions are valid in Sweden, not sure about the rest of Europe, but rules are probably similar)./probell (Talk)
 * In recent decades restaurateurs and caterers have moved away from traditional uniforms (usually with short “mess” jackets) and begun to dress staff in black tie in order to impress customers. At the same time, the increasing informality of society has led to a greater number of events being "business attire" (meaning dark suits) rather than black tie (which is perceived by some to be stuffy and/or elitist).  The clash of these two (depressing, in my view) trends is what creates the burlesque occasions of semi-formal dressed waiters filling the drinks of lounge suited guests.  It is good to hear that white-tie events are still common in Sweden.  They are perishingly rare in the United States.  TheCormac (talk) 04:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I would also note that in the Anglo-American tradition (circa 1800 through 1960), domestic servant uniforms were typically a stylized version of out-of-date formal dress. Hence, seventeenth century livery worn by the servants of the British aristocracy during the Regency and Victorian era and the persistence of frock coats among butlers in the Edwardian period and between the wars.  The phenomenon of servants in black-tie and guests in leisure suits could be seen as an extension of this pattern and a (distressing to me) indicator of the decline of black-tie in currency.  Indeed, many affairs I have attended feature event or venue staff who have moved beyond black-tie to wear simple long ties with  white soft-collar dress shirts and (or sometimes without) sports jackets; while the attendees eschew ties, sometimes jackets, and sometimes even dress shirts (wearing polo shirts instead).  Less well healed events even seem to feature staff in matching polo shirts and guests in T-Shirts with unbuttoned sports shirts worn as jackets.  I fear this may be an indicator of the direction Men's clothing is headed in the current century. TheCormac (talk) 14:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Here in Britain, black tie is clearly far more common than white tie. Plenty of dinners and evening events will require black tie, but not many once you start to leave the last bastions of culture in the ancient cities. Black tie in my experience is common among guests, but rare among staff, who will often play the old trick of mixing in day cloths (cashmere stripes and so on).— Kan8eDie (talk) 16:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Many years ago I heard that the Tuxedo originated as a waiters uniform in the city of Tuxedo 198.144.208.148 (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Top hat with dinner jacket
According to Chapter XXXIV ("The Clothes of a Gentleman") of Emily Post's Etiquette in Society, in Business, in Politics and at Home (1922, New York, Funk and Wagnalls) (full text available at http://www.bartleby.com/95/ ), regarding tuxedo clothes, "The smartest hat for town wear is an opera, but a straw or felt which is proper in the country, is not out of place in town. Otherwise, in the street the accessories are the same as those already given under the previous heading." I believe "opera" is another term for a collapsible silk top hat. Michael Gerard Tom 04:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * From the Black Tie Guide: "Until the dinner jacket found a hat of its own in the 1930s (pictured), it was usually accompanied by the more formal  top hat or collapsible opera hat." The picture in question shows a black homburg. In the earlier days of black tie, there was more borrowing from white tie, with some men wearing white piqué vests and bow ties. That the full-dress hat would also be appropriated is not surprising. Deltabeignet (talk) 03:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

External Links/Sources
I'm not a Wikipedia editor and am just passing through, but I saw that this article needs sources and wanted to recommend a web site. It may make a suitable external link; may be a good source for some of the material in this article; or may be a good place to find other useful sources for the material: there is a comprehensive bibliography on the site. It ought to come in particularly useful in relation to the "Black Tie versus Dinner Jacket/Tuxedo" discussion above, and to the "history of the tuxedo" section of the article. The URL is http://www.blacktieguide.com. Best regards from MelissaKD.199.8.210.54 21:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that this is a decent site for references. It discusses both traditional black tie and new "American" (I am loathe to call these American, as the American upper-classes tend to stick to the first traditional code and not the "American" style) incarnations and it notes that these two dress codes are, despite what a casual observer might think, completely different.
 * However, I am a bit conflicted as to the legitimacy of having references at all. As with any dress code, there will always be an element of subjectivity, and this makes it hard to make any legitimate claim of any source being correct.--Zoso Jade 19:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That said, the Guide tends to cite the conclusions of multiple established etiquette sources—at times, a model of NPOV. While I see your point, no one could argue with simply quoting Emily Post and letting the reader decide. Deltabeignet (talk) 03:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Coat & number of buttons
There appears to have recenly been some discussion on the number of buttons on a traditional dinner jacket. As the most recent version of the article - as written by another contributor -states the most traditional form is to have just one button on the jacket. This is certainly the truth, despite some recent contributor's efforts to remove this from the site. Two buttons are very rampant and are generally considered correct, though anything with more than two buttons is essentially not a dinner suit.--Zoso Jade 13:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:HughLaurie-BertieWooster.jpg
The image Image:HughLaurie-BertieWooster.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --16:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Waiters
At Harvard in the 1960s, young men in dinner jackets seen during the late afternoon hastening towards an event would be hailed by ironic cries of "Check please!" -- I assume (after some thought) that this is because people thought they looked like waiters. The article doesn't mention waiters anywhere else, though, so it's not terribly clear: can someone clarify this within the article? Marnanel 22:43, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * That is the impression I got. Many comedies seem to explore the subject. To me it has always seemed rather inappropriate to dress "servants" in a fashion that can be confused with guests'. --blades 18:39, May 8, 2004 (UTC)


 * G. K. Chesterton exploits this in his short story "The Queer Feet". The confusion should be eliminated by the supposition that anyone who is a guest will look unmistakably like a gentleman, whereas anyone who is a servant will not. Opera hat 13.36, 13 Sept. 2004 (BST)


 * This was not a problem in the era when all men dressed perfectly correctly, since servants would always make sure to get some detail wrong, like colour of waistcoat or tie, for instance servants when wearing white tie would have a black tie to specifically avoid being confused as a guest.--Kan8eDie (talk) 20:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure when it was that all men dress perfectly correctly, but I think the key is that guests at dinner parties before the mid-twentieth century were waited on by full-time staff. In large homes the staff often had distinctive livery and even in more modest homes they were uniformed.  At restaurants, theaters, and other public spaces, most staff were also uniformed up until the 1960s.  So distinguishing guest from staff was probably not really a problem.TheCormac (talk) 04:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * 'Perfectly correctly' was in terms of actual garments, not necessarily style. Even in the doziest country house it would be unthinkable for the guest coming down from dinner to have somehow contrived to put on the wrong coloured tie, or by mistake slipped into the wrong jacket. It takes an act of will to dress incorrectly, and if a servant wore the most immaculate white tie with a black bow tie, he could be utterly confident of being distinguishable: no-one could possibly be stupid enough to do the same by accident, or eccentric enough to do so by choice. The butler would, except in the most aristocratic households, wear 'proper' clothes, not livery, but combining them so as to never mingle.— Kan8eDie (talk) 16:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Surely the implication is that they are wearing it at the wrong time of day. Only a waiter would wear evening wear in the "late afternoon". 8.8.38.2 (talk) 20:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Stroller
Is stroller specifically American dress? If so I think this should be noted.8.8.38.2 (talk) 20:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * No. London and Cambridge are the only places where I have ever seen it recently (not that I have been to the States for a while). The name 'stroller' is American though. I believe I added this to the stroller article. The article does in fact need quite a bit of work (organising and adding facts and references, as well as some illustrations).  I will do this whenever I have a bit of time. —Kan8eDie (talk) 21:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Beer out of a bottle?
I know black tie is only "semi" formal, but are those guys in the photo really drinking beer straight out of the bottle?! Rees11 (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So it would seem. I am notorious for never having pictures of myself to hand, but if you have something better and want to replace it, feel free. Black tie is after all originally just an informal loose jacket for slobbing around in when the ladies were away. Beer from the bottle fits in well with the after-dinner brandy and cigars mentality, if not in execution of the ideal. —Kan8eDie (talk) 20:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

A Change?
I think we may have just seen a permanent change in Men's dress codes tonight. At the Inaugural Balls, President Obama upstaged his wife by daringly wearing a white-tie with his dinner jacket. Inaugural Balls are typically white-tie and Obama's decision to wear a tuxedo (a bad one, sadly) instead was reported as a signal of frugality in the economic crisis. But then he wore a white-tie with it! This may be a situation like the creation of the dinner jacket by the Edward VII (while Prince of Wales) or the adoption of the soft collar and authorization of midnight blue by his son the Duke of Windsor (when he, in turn, was Prince of Wales). In each case - as in most changes to the male dress code through the years - they used their status at the very apex of the social pyramid as license to change the rules. I wonder if we have not just seem the same thing from the new phenomenon/President - the final banishing of the tailcoat and the adoption of the dinner jacket for white-tie. TheCormac (talk) 03:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It will never catch on outside academia (where we use it as subfusc). I might even suggest that the fact that an American President wore it makes it highly unlikely to be copied by anyone else outside America (for fear of being associated with the US). I myself wear American styles, but most people would hate making that link. White tie will continue to be worn for at least the rest of our lives, as unchanged as it has been since the 1920s.— Kan8eDie (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I hardly think the US President can cause such a fashion revolution, unless it were a woman. Anyway, I also thought the white tie with an otherwise black tie outfit was bizarre, but at least his clothes were well tailored. His and McCain's actual white tie outfits at that roast a few months ago were rather embarrassing... both looked very poorly fitting, which defeats the point of uniform male formalwear.Njsustain (talk) 17:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Blue tie image concerns
I'm concerned about the use of the image because it's currently the primary illustration but includes a blue tie and (until just recently) had an erroneous lapel description in the caption. I intend to move the image to a less prominent position, but didn't want to completely remove it precipitously. Should it go, or be thoughtfully located and noted as a variant? ENeville (talk) 20:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for that: it is not perfectly accurate, but I try to keep the article from deteriorating. That bad description was only added a day and half ago, and it 'slipped through the net'. (Actually, just under two days for a mistake to be fixed is very good by wiki standards.) The state of pictures on all the clothing articles is dire, and we make do with what we can get. Almost certainly, the main contributors to the article do not approve of blue bow ties. On the other hand, I suspect people do wear coloured ties widely in America, so it could perhaps be said to describe well. The replacement was nonetheless better; thanks.— Kan8eDie (talk) 22:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the blue should go and we should in general stop using pictures which seem to be from high school proms, as while they may more accurately reflect how black tie is interpreted amongst American schoolchildren, they still deviate from black tie proper. JacobJHWard (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. The Wikipedia article on Black Tie should probably display pictures of outfits which adhere to the generally accepted rules of the dress code. The problem comes about because most pictures of people wearing an appropriate get-up are copyrighted.  Failing this one of the contributors could put a self-portrait but I for one do not really want a picture of me used for the Black Tie article.--Zoso Jade (talk) 18:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree the image is inappropriate, and mislabeled (only the third person is wearing a fold down collar). It looks silly and is a poor depiction of black-tie attire. It should be removed even if a better picture is not currently available.Njsustain (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've removed it. I too would be rather apprehensive about a self-portrait. If I come across anything appropriate I'll add it. JacobJHWard (talk) 19:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I would like to address the issues brought up with this picture one at a time: 1)The article was merged with tuxedo and as such is representative of tuxedos as well. According to Merriam & Webster amongst other sources, blue-tie, or the set in any other color is still a tuxedo.  As long as a tuxedo page does not exist, and further, as long as the tuxedo page redirects to black tie, a picture in which one member is wearing blue-tie is not only acceptable but representative. 2)The picture discussed was not improperly captioned. The caption reads that the two men in the middle are wearing shawl collars, which they are; this is a type of lapel not a type of shirt-collar. 3)The picture is from a formal event at a university and is, as such, representative of a large segment of black-tie events. The fact that the wearers are students does not make their attire any less black-tie. 4) I'm not sure what is "silly" about the picture. CDutcher (talk) 2:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * (Belated note: the caption error was describing the notched collars as peaked. ENeville (talk) 19:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC))


 * Even if it was representative (which I think it is not), it is not suited for this article because: a. the image quality is poor: it is out of focus and it uses a hard flash, furthermore, a computer monitor is visible in the foreground when it should not have been; b. a blue tie is generally not considerd black tie or tuxedo (the article must represent a worldwide view on the subject and I've never, ever, seen anyone in Europe wear a colored tie to a black tie event); and c. the people on the photo are not suited to illustrate the subject: though they are technically wearing black ties, due to the way they are positioned this image does not give a good impression of black tie attire (and I also suspect these are rental suits). Cocytus Antenora (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Tuxedo is the American term for the jacket worn in Black Tie, not a separate entity. You will find on the internet many hundreds of incorrect definitions of what comprises Black Tie. This article is not one of them. Yes university students probably do account for a lot of Black Tie events - I for one go to several a term, but then that's Oxford for you - and there would be nothing wrong with a picture from one of those events as long as the subjects were wearing the correct form of Black Tie and were in an appropriate setting. JacobJHWard (talk) 12:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

a.The image is slightly out of focus but not nearly as much as the image of the gentleman in a kilt. The image uses a hard flash, which might have helped out Reagan's photographer to keep Reagan and Mulroney from blending into the background. b. The gentleman wearing blue-tie is Serbian, but I'm sure you've been to every black tie event in Europe and would discount his experience. c. I'm not sure what kind of impression you want the wearers to make, but they are smiling and seem to be in good spirits. Perhaps black-tie is supposed to instill in the wearer a sense of melancholy and dourness at celebrations. The attire worn was not rented, but that is a moot point. Further, I believe the image was the only image on the page in which the common elements of black tie attire are all visible.

Perhaps "Tuxedo" should not have been merged with "Black tie", but all of the subjects in the picture are wearing tuxedos according to the most reputable Oxford English Dictionary (which interestingly features an example of a white tuxedo). An appropriate setting, to me, is any setting in which the attire specified is worn. I, for one, try to determine what something is and to present it as such, being cognizant of the biases I might hold with regard to the subject and its context, but then that's Harvard for you.

I'm done ranting, but I believe those in favor of the removing the image are taking a myopic view of the subject that presents one idea of black tie and/or tuxedo well, while ignoring the much wider application of this attire to mainstream society. CDutcher (talk) 2:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

You must have a larger edition of the OED than mine, which simply states it is a dinner jacket. My 'appropriate setting' comment was not aimed at this particular image. Rather a lot of university events specify black tie for what is in fact a glorified club night, and my comment was merely protecting against things like that. I don't think a picture of a crowd of people in a disgusting nightclub vomiting everywhere but happening to wear black tie would be appropriate. Do you? I think, as it would seem a lot of the contributors to this page do, that this article should refer to black tie proper. If you're set on including modern interpretations of black tie then perhaps a section on contemporary manifestations of it would be a good compromise? I endeavour to make contributions based on unbiased knowledge. From what I have read on the subject (quite a lot), I was presenting an accurate picture without personal bias. And the inclusion of my university was purely because we have a lot more black tie events than many others, not to start a dick contest. JacobJHWard (talk) 19:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

No worries, I'm sure we could settle this in a duel or a three-quarter mile race down the Charles/Thames. CDutcher

Maroon
Maroon is the traditional colour for accessories. We wear it still now on the handkerchief, and in the past it was all over (stripes on socks etc., and even cummerbund). This was not the same as 'Red Sea rig', which was rare, strange, and a much brighter red. See illustration. I have a similar image somewhere in the archives for mess dress and red sea rig showing the brighter colour.— Kan8eDie (talk) 13:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Potter vs Lorillard
The History section now seems to contradict itself as to whether Potter or Lorillard was the first to wear a tuxedo in the US. My copy of Flusser is at the cleaner's so I can't check. Rees11 (talk) 21:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Smoking
It would probably be futile to list all the countries in which the term "smoking" is used. But it's a fairly common term on the Continent, and should be mentioned. Unfortunately I have no source, as usual. Rees11 (talk) 05:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Is a Black BOW Tie always worn?
Is a Black bow ties always worn to a "Black Tie Event"? Have a Tuxedo look great kin same! But also haved a White silk tie!Thanks!HOYMOI (talk) 21:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No. But they should be. White silk bow ties are not worn with a dinner jacket. Neither are they worn with a tail coat. Opera hat (talk) 21:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Canada and Ireland
I see that Canada and Ireland have been moved from the "Tuxedo" column to the "dinner jacket" column. Do we have a source for that? Rees11 (talk) 12:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Dinner Jacket Neckwear
Cited material regarding what neck wear is appropriate is repeatedly being removed. The material regarding neck ties was added, not because of its correctness or acceptability, but because the practise exists. It, consequently, warrants discussion regardless of whether anyone approves of the practise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irvnik (talk • contribs) 01:20, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Merge proposal with tuxedo
Per redundancy. "Black tie" is strictly speaking the dress code. This article was split from tuxedo in 2011 per WP:BOLD by. The arguments opposing this split above on this talk page, however, merits a reconsideration. Mainly, black tie is the etiquette designating dinner suit as seen in Tuxedo. As such there is no essential difference in scope. This policy would be in consistency with how morning dress deals with both clothes and dress code, as is the case with white tie (although the latter article curiously opted its article name after the very WP:COMMONNAME dress code, which however merits reconsideration per se). Any thing "black tie" that for whatever uknown reasons must not be dealt with in the tuxedo article may as well be mentioned on semi-formal wear, Western dress codes or bow tie. It hardly seems motivated to confusingly retain such a redundant duplication of content as in the preexisting state. Either that, or tuxedo ought better merge into black tie, as dress coat is trancluded in white tie, and morning coat in morning dress. Chicbyaccident (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2018 (UTC)


 * You have made a reasonable case for merging the two articles. As for which one should be subsumed into the other, the main issue I foresee is the disagreement as to whether the garment should be referred to as a 'dinner jacket', 'dinner suit', or 'tuxedo'. To avoid any such disagreement, I propose that they should be consolidated under the dress code article in a similar fashion to the one on 'Morning dress'. --Irvnik (talk) 05:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)


 * If none else opposes it, we might have a case to carry it out, then? Chicbyaccident (talk) 00:57, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that it would be best to merge the article on the garment into this article on the dress code. Opera hat (talk) 01:42, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have altered top the top page templates to reflect the current consensus of merging tuxedo into black tie. Chicbyaccident (talk) 17:06, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I could support merging the garment (tuxedo) into the dress code article (black tie) but not the other way around. Greenshed (talk) 21:20, 1 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge completed. Interwikilinks congregated accordingly. No information was lost, but the final merged article may use some improvement. PPEMES (talk) 01:58, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Black tie
Hello. Page 201 of Ford's and DeMontravel's book (which is the source given for it, not Emily Post...) says "too formal for weddings", not "too informal", and it's also obvious that black tie/tuxedo, a dress that is considered to be too formal to use before 6 PM, can't possibly be seen as too informal (i.e. the direct opposite to formal) to use for daytime weddings... - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 23:17, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The above moved from User talk:Chicbyaccident for convenience. Chicbyaccident (talk) 23:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Your edit away from a longstanding stable version seems to contradict the assertion of Emily Post. What makes the sources you invoke more authoritative on the subject, please? Chicbyaccident (talk) 23:28, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The source given for it is Ford and DeMontravel, who say "formal", not Emily Post. And "seems to contradict" isn't good enough, you need to prove beyond doubt that Emily Post has said that tuxedo/black tie is too "informal" for a (daytime, i.e. before 6PM) wedding. - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 23:57, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Isn't she readily quoted implying that message in the following sentence? I fail to see how you could interpretate her quote quite the other way around. Chicbyaccident (talk) 00:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No, she most definitely does not imply that. What she says is "do not wear black tie/tuxedo for weddings, regardless of time of day", which if anything implies that it's too formal for daytime wear and too informal for evening wear... - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 09:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * A solution to this contention may be to rewrite it to acknowledge both points of view. For example: '… etiquette and clothing experts disagree on the appropriateness of wearing black tie for weddings. Whilst most discourage or condemn the wearing of black tie before 6:00[reference] or 7:00[reference] in the evening, others consider it either too formal[reference] or too informal[reference] for weddings’. Irvnik (talk) 01:55, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Did you miss the traditional distinction between day wear and evening wear? PPEMES (talk) 17:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Cummerbund
The article appears to contain an internal contradiction. In the section Cummerbund", it says "The material of the cummerbund should be silk satin, grosgrain (or faille), or barathea to match that of the bow tie." This already suggests that one might have a choice of tie colour.  Later it says (about the cummerbund), "... the Black Tie Guide endorses deep and rich colours ..." but a bit further down in the same section, it says "...the bow tie must remain black in any case."  At least in Switzerland, fairly high-priced clothing stores (e.g. PKZ) sell sets of matching ties and cummerbunds in colours other than (but also including) black. Some examples from online merchants can be found on Amazon and Absolute Ties  BTW, I prefer to wear non-black bow ties to avoid being confused with waiting staff (see Talk:Black tie). Rsbrux (talk) 15:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)rsbrux

Mention of Lounge suit
The lounge suit is mentioned in passing as a type of business suit. Actually a lounge suit is less formal than a business suit. Lounge suits are designed to be worn as leisure wear, for example lounging around. 198.144.208.148 (talk) 17:23, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No, a lounge suit is the standard terminology in tailoring for distinguishing from dinner suit, morning suit, frock suit, Norfolk suit, dress suit, etc. These other kinds of suit are now so uncommon that to most people, a lounge suit is just called a suit, and it's not commonly known that it's technically a lounge suit. Maybe you are thinking of a leisure suit? That's different from a lounge suit. Indefatigable (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Undue weight template on Weddings section
At present we have an Undue weight section template on the weddings section. I cannot find any discussion about what the perceived issue might be either here or in the talk page archive. I propose to remove the template unless someone can illuminate us as to what the concerns might be. Greenshed (talk) 13:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

The First Paragraph
"In British English, the dress code is often referred to synecdochically by its principal element for men . . ."

This is a terrible sentence, that doesn't belong here. Hugely pretentious ('synecdochically'? Really?), clearly irrelevant to the topic, and un-encyclopaedic. This English part of Wikipedia is a learning tool, for the average person who has a basic understanding of the language, not some kind of gymnasium for people to do one-handed grammar and diction push-ups. Get rid of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.88.17.195 (talk) 23:56, 27 October 2023 (UTC)