Talk:Clog/Archive 1

""Cloggs"" are a UK Brandname for clogs, which already has an entry. User:Wetman


 * As a brandname, I don't think "Cloggs" should redirect to this article, no? --SeekingOne 01:49, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

I tweaked this article a little bit. Nothing major. Question, though - what is this about European safety standards at the end of the 4th paragraph? The sentence doesn't really mean anything. Also, it doesn't seem appropriate to have that final paragraph about prices. I didn't want to take the responsibility of deleting it myself, though, without bringing it up here. --SeekingOne 02:00, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

In the European Union there are very strict rules for the footwear of industrial and agricultural workers. Should clogs not meet the safety standards, it would in many cases be forbidden to wear them at work - and the employer would be punishable for allowing it. In many cultures the price of something is considered an essential piece of information. For a Dutchman e.g. it's wellnigh impossible to conceive of anything material without wondering about its monetary value - for him that most fundamental aspect of social life: economics, is not a taboo subject.

MWAK--217.123.73.210 09:31, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * We just don't like taboos. Money isn't the most important thing in the world, but wasting is seems a bit silly. Giving everything an irrational 'symbolic' value is just as weird btw =D. Just look at diamonds and caviar. Shiney stones and fish eggs. whatever *rolls eyes* --Kraftwerk--

clogs
Clogs can be very sexy when used properly by slapping, dipping and dangling. Why does spinster want to delete this part of the definition? Any guesses?

Wooden clogs don't look like they'd have been comfortable at all. Anyone ever tried them and felt comfy in them? -- Jack Blueberry (t)⁄(c) &bull; 00:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Wear thick socks while wearing clogs!

And every year again people walk the Nijmegen four days marches (4*50 km!) on their clogs, so if used to them, they cannot be that bad ;-) Arnoutf 07:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Patten
There is a redirect from Patten to this article. Very bad, because that should be a disambiguation page. There is at least one town called Patten in Penobscot County in Maine. Since I don't contribute to EN-WP, someone else should fix that ;o) . Grtx, --Thogo (Talk) 08:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

High-heeled clogs for men?
It is commonly accepted that men and women can wear low-heeled or high-heeled clogs. Can someone cite a source for this statement men wearing high-heeled clogs? Otherwise, I think this statement should be removed. Georget99 20:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

"They were usually worn without socks which exuded a hotlook." What does that mean??? Mtiffany71 12:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Probably depends on your definition of "high-heeled." Many clogs worn by medical professionals in the US are clogs with "higher-than-average" heels, by both men and women.

Japanese Geta
This article should also cover Japanese traditional wooden sandals (Geta), especially since the article is linked from the generic term "wooden shoes". 12.48.196.9 17:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

They have Geta (footwear) but I have added a mention with a link here. Johnbod 18:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Klompen
There is a redirect from Klompen to this page. But Klompen is also used to refer to Klompen dancing, which is performed wearing clogs.

Chantal van De Sande
One such professional dancer was Chantal van de Sande of Newcastle under Lyme, who appears in the English census of 1871 and proudly proclaims her employment as "Professional Clog Promoter" This may possibly be factual, but it seems very likely to be spurious; whatever the case, it appears not verifiable. Google "Chantal van de Sande" or "Chantal van" clog census or similar searches, and the only relevant results are the article itself. Sentence removed. A pity - were she was a real (or even fictional) person, she sounds rather interesting. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Sabots redirect
If sabots redirects here why is it not mentioned in the lead (emboldened) or even the main text? Jack (talk) 00:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No idea, as far as I know sabot is the french word for clog. In any case, I think that is for the Sabot redirect page to discuss, not here. Arnoutf (talk) 09:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I also found it mentioned in the main text. I will remove the hatnote for now and redirect sabots to sabot. Jack (talk) 12:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

United Kingdom
Clogs are not traditionally just associated with Lancashire, but also with Yorkshire and to a lesser extent The Potteries. My late father could recall hearing them in Burslem pre-war. I'm not about to start an edit war, but should the reference to Lancashire be removed, or perhaps Yorkshire added as well? I'm also adding a link to Walkeys, they are the largest clog manufacturer in the UK (and they are in Yorkshire). Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Irons and shod clogs
In UK tradition the bottoms of the clogs need to be protected in some way, bare wood quickly wears. Wearing a pair of clogs daily with no soling will show wear within a week or so (particularly from driving) and within a few months the clogs will need to be re-wooded. The noise of the bare wood on stone flags may also be unacceptable in some locations. The traditional method was to use clog irons, but soles can also be protected by rubber soles. Typically these are "half shod", a rubber version of irons or "fully shod" a complete sole. I have seen clogs shod with the tread from old push-bike tyres which gave good grip and quieting. Shod soles and irons are not recommended for driving, they can interfere with the use of the pedals. The use of rubber heels and soles decreases the noise of the clogs, but increases the grip, I have amended the picture caption accordingly. I'll look for citations for this, but most of it is personal experience and conversations, so falls foul of WP:NOR Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

See Also - Crocs
I propose removing this link. Crocs are not clogs, they contain no wood. I raised the issue on the Crocs talk page and an editor called User:Lexin seemed to prefer the company's description over the definition. I would suggest that the OED is more scholarly than the company website, indeed the latter might even be regarded as WP:SPS. If there are no objections I will remove the section in a week's time. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Partly support. I support to remove the link "Crogs". I do not support to remove the "See also" section. Crogs do have the shape of Swedish clogs, but I think is better to maintain the "See also" section to wooden shoe variants. I propose to remove the section "Overshoe" and place the links "Pattens" and "Geta" in the "See also" section. Maybe not this is the place; I propose to remove the section "Clog fighting" and put the information into "United Kingdom". The subject is to British on this international clog page. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 12:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed about clog fighting. When I reread it the current clog dancing section is also entirely UK based, so I have moved both there.  I vote to keep overshoes as a separate section and not loose it in the "see also".  If you can find any other "see also" links by the end of next week put them in, otherwise I'll delete the section. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:23, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Clog-dancing is something international, but the current text is British orientated. So I support the move, until someone writes a more international orientated text about clog dancing (the main article is British orientated too). Pattens are historical wooden footwear. I think the clog making business from yesterday till today and from east to west and north to south, is to complicated and varied to make a historical section on this international present day page. But maybe the introductionary section of "traditional clog" can be rewritten a bit (in the same length of text) and they could could be mentioned there? I am thinking about it, but writing takes time with me. I am thinking about: how old clogs are, handmade then machine made, europe "unclogged" after WWO"", but they are still used today!. If someone else comes up with something it is okay with me. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 14:04, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Pictures
I've tried to rearrange the pictures to keep them closer to the text. Although I think it's better I'm still not very happy with the results. Perhaps we ought to put the different types of clogs in a gallery below the text? What do other editors think?

Can anyone expand the Germany section? I put in a few words for alignment purposes, but the section badly need expanding. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 19:02, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I think we should keep the pictures in the text. I Support a gallery for pictures when there is no text. For example the German clogs. Maybe someone will add a picture of other Belgium clogs, or Danish? That would be nice. I put the Dutch picture back on top. It is a page about present day clogs and not about traditional clogmaking. Further, Dutch clogs are almost a clog symbol. For this reason this page is part of the Dutch Wikipedia Project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berkh (talk • contribs) 07:09, 12 November 2011 (UTC) Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 07:17, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

The trouble is that the misalignment is back. Perhaps if we moved the picture of the clog maker down to the Museum section it might improve things. Are you adverse to the alternating pictures or was that simply knocked out when you moved the Dutch clogs back to the head? I won't do anything until tomorrow to give you a chance to respond. BTW, I've always thought of English clogs as typical and Dutch as a variant. Probably because my family hails from the North of England! ;-) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:00, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Martin of Sheffield,


 * I don´t like the misalignment neither. But placing pictures on the right and the left makes, in my opinion, a to chaotic impression. I changed it back by hand yesterday. I forgot to mention it above here. Placing the picture with the man carving clogs down to “museum” is a good idea. On the other hand I have written a new and a bit longer introductionary text that could solve the problem to. If it will be accepted as a replacement. This is not my page, of course. The text is now being translated for me. It will take a few day before i can place it my userspace and show you (and others). I will open a new section to discuss it on this page. If you place the picture down below it is fine with me.


 * In The Netherlands we translate the shoe always as “wooden shoes”, not clogs. Where the term “cloggies” for Dutch people comes from I don´t know. The all wooden model can be found from Spain till Scandinavia. Every region has its own variant and sometimes different variants can be found in the same region. In the Netherlands, Belgium and France you can also find an open variant with a leather strap on top, the “tripklomp” in Dutch. You can find pictures in google of them. I hope someone will upload a picture of it (and put it in a picture gallery). In Scandinavia there was also a model with a leather cap. That model became a fashion accessory and well known because of that. But the “Dutch” model (träskor) was known there too. If the all wooden model is still used in Scandinavia, I don´t know.


 * So the all wooden traditional model is more common than the British model. And the Dutch one became historically the most famous model of all wooden shoes. The Netherlands are known for their windmill, tulips and ... their clogs. Strange enough no one in The Netherlands pays any attention to clogs, in contrast to windmills and tulips. Strange enough, no one in Europe pays any attention to wooden footwear, which has been used for more than thousand years, until recently. Clogs are truly forgotten cultural heritage. I only realised it a few weeks ago when i bought my first pair (in a garden center) since I was a child.


 * Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 11:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about which is the dominant form, there was a smiley after my comment! BTW, I wear Gibsons (black not red however) virtually the whole time, and have done so for many years. They are by far the most comfortable footwear I've owned, and contrary to assumptions you can happily run in them. I've moved the clogmaker picture down as agreed. I will await your new section before doing anything else such as creating the gallery. Regard, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Martin of Sheffield, That is a relief. I got an eye for what happens abroad, but I am truly Dutch ... Enough fun, I cannot see smileys. Nice that Gibson´s are still worn everyday. Dutch clogs make to much noise. Therefore you dont see them in cities any more. Clogs look 7 sizes bigger than your actual shoe size, but they do fit perfectly and they walk okay. You got to bend your toes when walking and it happens intuitively. Every years there are people who walk the Four Day March of Nijmegen on Dutch clogs. Thats 4x40km. Well, thats not me. You can also run on them. See 3:00 min at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkAxsqg7FTo. Well, thats not me neither ... Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 12:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Martin_of_Sheffield/my_sandbox for a first stab at a gallery. Have you any idea how the Italian clogs are secured? You mentioned that for Dutch clogs (and I assume all whole foot types) you curled your toes. For English clogs the laces or buckles do the job, and for slip-ons like the Swedish the foot is just jammed in until tight. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Martin, Making a gallery with three section according the Oxford English Dictionary definition would imply that the same must be done for the section "Traditional clogs in Europe". I don´t support that because it makes the text at this moment over-sectioned and in the end to complicated. I prefer short texts, or I must state it otherwise, I think on Wikipedia texts tend to become to long and complicated. When I see a long text, I simply don´t start too read anymore ... Madonna (entertainer) for example. Buy a book! For this reason I am not enthusiastic about the section you put in the lead about wearing clogs. It is written well, but I would leave this information out of the text; half of it everyone already knows.


 * I like the build-up of the text with European clogs in alphabetical order and I like the pictures next to the text of each country. It gives something to look at instead of only boring text (a lot of people only look pictures! They see what they want to know at once). Therefore I support the current lay-out of the text including one picture per country and a general gallery below, for more pictures per country or for pictures when there is no section of the country it comes from. I don´t support to put in the gallery pictures of historical clogs. When you do that you open the door for all kind of historical and folkloric stuff wich confirms peoples misbeliefs that wooden footwear is something of the past -and makes the text looong.


 * In Asia there is wooden footwear too that can be called clogs according the definition. Japanese Geta´s for example. I read that in Turkey and Afghanistan people also use some kind of wooden footwear. So it is possible to make a section "Traditional clogs in Asia" and put there "Japan" and a short text of getas (including a picture!) with above "Main article: getas". The same can be done with "Overshoes" and "pattens". I am thinking of writing a text for Dutch clogs only (Main article: Dutch clogs). In this I can put a historical section and a section of hand- and machine made clog making. I rather see this page develop this way (woodens shoes and wooden sooled shoes per continent and country), than splitting everythingup according the definition of the OED.


 * Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 19:39, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Traditional clogs in Europe - Introduction
I have written a concept text for a new introduction of the section "Traditional clogs in Europe". See User:Berkh/Notebook. I think the existing text does not cover the topic enough. If there are no objections I will replace the section in a week's time. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 12:05, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've made a couple of minor spelling corrections to your draft and slightly changed the last sentence. The existing first paragraph describes the production of English clogs and ought to be moved there (for instance there is no welt on a Dutch clog).  The present second paragraph can be deleted.  I've had a go at improving the lead to give a reader a concise definition of a clog, and to point them towards the different types. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the definition and the description of the three kinds of clogs in the lead paragraph is an improvement. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 14:06, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I replaced the text. I also removed the picture at the section museum. It gives the impression the museum is to much a museum about Dutch clogs. Kind regrads, Berkh (talk) 10:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)