Talk:Clog (British)

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shiploads to The Netherlands

I read something about shiploads of British clogs to The Netherlands and the "inferiority of Dutch clogs"? Are you sure? Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have included the full quotation as a note, it suprised me too. In the article I changed "clearly inferior" to "perceived inferiority" since it was only one man's opinion, though as the owner of Walkeys his views do carry some weight. I suspect that the leak may have been over-topping rather than leakage through the wood, but that is my guess. With boot style clogs the seal comes much further up the ankle or leg than with klompen. See for example [[1]]. I do also wonder if "shiploads" actually means "containers" - perhaps he meant "shipping-loads" but that is my personal guess. The newspaper is a respected mainstream paper, thus satisfying WP:SOURCES. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As the owner of Walkeys this is not a view of an independent testee, although he knows a lot about it. But I think it is okay to leave it in the text. At the klomp page you see something likewise. There is talking about the advantage of wooden shoes over steel capped shoes. But these steel capped shoes does not need to be Walkeys. They can have rubber soles. These steel capped shoes with rubber soles are used a lot in industry and the field of freight and logistics. This because of their seal and laces, and because they are more representative. Most wooden shoes are made of poplar wood. These are not waterproof. Traditionally they were worn by fisherman ass well. Wooden shoes made of willow wood are waterproof, but a little more expensive. So in The Netherlands there are good reasons to use steel capped shoes, but being waterproof is not one of them. Besides most Dutch would consider Walkey clogs as too expensive. For size 8 Dutch poplar wooden shoes costs ± EUR 25, Dutch willow wooden shoes ± EUR 30 and Walkey clog ± £70. And the world knows all about Dutch people and money ... Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 09:50, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sole & upper

The information about the wood used is interesting. Found a site according which kip leather for the uppers was used. Maybe you can do something with it? I am surprised about today's prices. A 19th century pair should have cost £1,50. I don´t how much that is in todays £'s. The price of a pair of today's Dutch clogs is about the same compared to one of the 19th century. Unfortunately I cannot find it back where I have read it. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 17:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found it. Dutch clogmakers could make 6-7 pairs a day. In 1910 these were sold for HFL0,50-0,65. To present day standards that is EUR5,17-6,73. Week income of clogmakers was the HFL5,55-7,00. That is EUR51,74-72,44. No wonder nobody had a computer then ... For the calculator, see this site. Apparently I used something else a while back ago. A bread costed then HFL0,13. That is EUR1,35. Well, that is right in my supermarket. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 18:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Hi, I've added some information on the leather (and also a bit more on wood). Based on the prices we have to pay (too often) for my rapidly growing son, mass produced shoes in England are £40- £60. These are, of course, made with the minimum of labour. I hate to think what hand made shoes would cost! Clogs are craftsman made either with Victorian machinery (£80, Walkeys) or hand tools only (Atkinson £155). The pair I have on now are about 7 years old, but I did have them re-wooded a couple of years back after I let the heels wear too much. They are used in the office, garden and even snow. All in all I think, for me, clogs work out cheaper than all-leather shoes. Regards Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Martin, You've done a lot of work and found some interesting references! The polka dotted shoes my brothers 7 years old daughter showed me proudly recently were for free. No other option possible. Gladly she did not choose red polka dotted clogs, because clogs are never worn inside, but left outside by the door. Then the whole neighbourhoud would see them and, belive me, you don't want that ... On the other hand, Dutch clogs are never resoled and last only a few years. Luckily her leather shoes will not fit her in a few months anymore. BTW for the financial clog picture I found some an interesting English site and a £-calculator. Dutch minimum wage today is EUR 334 per week. Lets pretend clog makers earned the minimum wage. So EUR 334 / EUR 51,74-72,44 - 6 times. Clog prices EUR 5,17-6,73 x 6 = EUR 30-35. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 16:59, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing and citations

An enquiry elsewhere:

Can I ask you, on the Clogs (British) article you use your (almost trademarked) formatted cite references in the bibliography- is there a reason why you miss out a |ref=harv or a |ref={{sfnRef|TEXT|NUMBER}} so we can establish full linking from sfn-> reflist->Bibliography ? -- Clem Rutter (talk) 10:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no need for |ref=harv or a |ref={{sfnRef|TEXT|NUMBER}} on {{citation}}, it is automatic. You only need |ref=harv on {{cite}} style citations. If you notice footnote 6 links through perfectly, it uses sfn which picks up the automatic linkage.

I inherited the referencing system and have not sought consensus for a change. I think it's about time I did: has anyone any objections about moving from <ref name=XYZ> style references to {{sfn}}?

It is always good to improve something into something better. Kind regards, Berkh (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Many thanks for doing this Clem. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clog fighting

It seems to me that clog fighting deserves its own article - see this report on a current exhibition. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:21, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to generate such an article it would be fine by me. Clog fighting is a bit of an oddity in a page that is principally about the clogs themselves. The report is a good starting point, but ideally it needs additional citations and detail. You could try http://www.galleryoldham.org.uk/ or http://annafcsmith.tumblr.com/post/113299781828/purring-sport-of-the-people-major-research as starting points. I'm in the midst of a big shakedown on clog dancing/clogging, so won't volunteer at the moment! Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I won't do it myself, thanks - there are too many highly skilled and experienced editors in the north of England who I'm sure are much better able than me to construct an excellent article. I wouldn't want to get in their way, but thought I would flag it up. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Clog (British). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:19, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question.

Why no reference to the well known expression, "To pop his clogs"?213.205.242.114 (talk) 15:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Good question. I found a suitable source and added an explanation under "Trivia". Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:16, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Clog_(British)"