Talk:PVC clothing

a comment
some sewage pipes are from PVC too — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.36.84 (talk) 17:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Clear PVC Clothing Fetixh
Folks:

I propose to add a section (with some photos from my website at www.clearplastic.com) on clear PVC clothing.

I currently do no see any mention of it and I know it's around.

I have no commercial interest in this as I do not sell my clear PVC clothing; I make and wear it as a fetish.

Allyn (talk) 04:23, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Cheryl nude in a photographic studio.jpg

Unsourced entries in "PVC clothing in the media" section
A number of unsourced entries have appeared in the "PVC clothing in the media" section of this article. In some instances these seem to be rather trivial. I suggest that unsourced entries in this section should be removed. -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 11:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 16 June 2021

 * The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. The article's title must describe what the article is about, and (as referenced below) this article is clearly about... clothing made out of PVC. A separate article about PVC laminate sounds like an excellent idea. Red  Slash  19:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

PVC clothing → PVC laminate – This cloth is commonly used for upholstery, wipe-clean tablecloths, raincoats, aprons and other protective clothing, bags, shoes, roll-up chessboards, etcetera. Much of the article is info relevant to the laminate textile in general (much potential content, too). Scope could reasonably be expanded. Name by analogy to polyurethane laminate article. HLHJ (talk) 03:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. I  can’t think of anything controversial about the move, and the redirect will still get people there. -2pou (talk) 18:46, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Strongly oppose -- this article is 100% about PVC clothing with no other mention or coverage of other uses of the material. If the article could be expanded to cover PVC laminate then an article about PVC laminate should be created, but not at the expense of this one.  Curved Space (talk) 20:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Pretty much the entire article is about wearing PVC clothing. J I P  &#124; Talk 22:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose - this article is about the clothing. If you would like to start PVC laminate to focus on the cloth itself, I think that would be the best solution.  Mysterymanblue  21:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC) See below for changed !vote.  Mysterymanblue  01:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * We already have an article on Plastic clothing, which is pretty much entirely about PVC clothing, and one on PVC fetishism. This article evidently needs a rather broader scope or it will simply duplicate that content. The article currently has four words on rainwear ("to some degree they were worn in public" in the 1960s and 1970s? they were standard wear for fishing). It also has one word on boots (are boots clothing?).
 * The lede information on what PVC cloth is, and the section on "Caring for PVC clothing", applies just as well to other PVC cloth. The few hundred words on fashion is tied to technological development, which would be easier generalized to all PVC cloth. The list of media appearances is somewhat unrepresentative (there is one raincoat) and not terribly encyclopedic. Substantial changes would be needed to make this a representative article on PVC clothing, and I think it would be easier to make it a more useful broader-concept article on PVC cloth. If we moved all of the more general PVC-cloth content to a new article, we'd have a tiny stub on PVC clothing in fashion (which could go in a "clothing" section of a cloth article), and a long list of media appearances. HLHJ (talk) 00:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining. Your points on changing the scope of the article are compelling. I support the move, but I would hope that we make sure that it's not a "lazy" move and that the content of the article is actually substantially changed to match the title.  Mysterymanblue  01:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Support  Mysterymanblue </b> 01:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Just to explain my reasoning a bit further, as I was unaware of the Plastic clothing article. My main reason is still valid.  If it is felt that an article should cover PVC Laminate in depth, then an article on PVC laminate should be created and cover the topic.  Taking an article that covers topic X adding in a tonne of topic Y and then changing the article to topic Y is not the way it should be done.  The Plastic Clothing article is a poor stub in comparison to this one, and should really be deleted or merged into this here.
 * The argument saying that this article may just duplicate the Plastic clothing argument goes both ways, and it seems logical that the worse article (Plastic clothing) should be merged into this one in order to create a better article on PVC clothing.
 * I am not averse to a PVC Laminate article, I am just against it being created at the expense of an already existing article. Curved Space (talk) 10:40, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you both. Topic X, PVC clothing, would certainly be a substantial section in Topic Y, PVC cloth. Actually, I think we'd need to expand the existing PVC-clothing content to make it more representative, regardless of the title of this article. If a PVC-clothing section expanded enough to be a separate article, I'd be fine with Curved Space's suggestion. However, I suspect that if I draft a PVC laminate cloth article, using content from "PVC clothing" and "Plastic clothing", it would contain more info on PVC clothing than either of the old articles. Would everyone be okay with starting such a draft, and then restarting this discussion once we know what content we are organizing into articles?
 * I agree that merging the Plastic clothing article content into this article, whatever it may be called, would be a good idea; since we are discussing it I've templated the articles accordingly with a discussion link pointing here. Perhaps the "plastic clothing" page itself should be a disambiguation page, as the current article seems to be trying to include all plastic components of clothing, not just plasticized cloth, but things such as polyester zippers, bakelite buttons, and EVA foam clogs; this seems a bit unwieldy. There seem to be a lot of little articles in this topic area, including a separate one on plastic pants, and one on rubber pants. I haven't gone through exhaustively, there may well be more that could do with merging. HLHJ (talk) 23:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I would suggest the best option is as you allude and that you create a new article called "PVC Laminate" and then propose that "PVC clothing" is merged into that one, to see how much support you get for that.
 * Also, to be honest, I am puzzled with your statement of "If a PVC-clothing section expanded enough to be a separate article..." because this is perverting the initial premise again. We already have an article on PVC clothing.  What you are proposing is changing the article name from X to Y, adding a whole lot of detail about Y and then after all is said and done, if there is enough detail about X creating an article about X...
 * I am not sure if there is some procedural or MOS edict in place about an existing article having its name and topic changed, minimising the original content to make way for new topic content. I am not familiar with MOS, but it is an interesting possibility.  Curved Space (talk) 17:56, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Would everyone be okay with starting such a draft, and then restarting this discussion once we know what content we are organizing into articles? Yes, I think this is a good idea. Colin M (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.