Talk:Shorts

School

Does any body know which school the boy with the purple blazer and grey shorts belongs too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.60.43 (talk) 23:30, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup TODO List

The following have been identified as issues in this articles. Wikipedians from countries other than the USA are asked to help resolve some of them as many result from a lack of a broader multicultural worldview. Please add to this list if needed.--Lendorien (talk) 17:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

1. The socialogy section suffers from an Monocultural tone focusing on fashion and style in the USA. A more multicultural tone is needed.
2. Definitions of types of shorts simularly needs to be revised to represent a more multicultural worldview.
3. Much of this smacks of Original Research, especially in the section defining types of shorts.
4. Sourcing is desperately needed.

---

Short shorts

I added the missing (!!!) Short Shorts to the list along with annotations and external references. (Daisy Dukes and hot pants were a much later spin-off of short shorts.) The entry also mentions The Purple People Eater and the Short Shorts song. For those who might be interested, I didn't consider the lyrics appropriate for the main article (feel free to disagree), but I include the gist of the lyrics here.

In the Short Shorts song, these lyrics are repeated 3 times interspersed with saxophone and guitar solos:

Who wears short shorts ...

We wear short shorts ...

They're such short shorts ...

We like short shorts ...

Who wears short shorts ...

We wear short shorts.

In The Purple People Eater song, the chorus and the people eater itself refer to the earlier Short Shorts song as well as the fashion in two of its stanzas. For example:

Well bless my soul, rock and roll,

Flying purple people eater.

Pidgeon-toed, undergrowed,

Flyin' purple people eater.

(We wear short shorts.)

Friendly little people eater

What a sight to see!

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 16:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

breeches

I wish someone would write about breeches, specifically where I can get some nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.183.112.208 (talk) 21:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

June 2008, vandalism detected

The article seemed to be riddled with vandalism and inaccuracies. Speculation runs rampant and even goes so far as to insult a university which seemingly has nothing to do with the article. True clean up is desperately needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.105.34 (talk) 03:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Asociation with scouting

Since the beggining of the scouting movement there has been an asociation with shorts and until not so long ago, was one of the very few reasons why a grown man would wear shorts in the UK.(86.152.184.218 (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC))

My pants

My pants definately never cover my entire leg as the article says. Not that you'd be able to see, because not being insane, I wear trousers or sometimes shorts over them. 89.243.204.148 (talk) 21:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

New picture needed

Agreed! This is silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.156.37.54 (talk) 13:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Preferably one that wasn't taken by a stalker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.237.55.2 (talk) 08:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm assuming good faith, but still, I do think it's unnecessary for the article to have two photographs showing rear views of walking females wearing tightly-fitting, short-inseam shorts. Perhaps a composite image showing different types of shorts would be more informative as a main image.75.36.159.238 (talk) 07:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Totally agree that a new photo needs to be used, I'm supportive of a composite if "everyone" is represented. Anyone able to take this task on? SarahStierch (talk) 18:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Multiple Issues

I've tagged this article.

Poorly written:

The "board" refers to surfboards although many others also wear them.

Inaccurate:

Hot pants were very popular in the early 1970s, especially with baseball's Philadelphia Phillies, who created a unit of usherettes called the Hot Pants Patrol.

Despite the name, the Hot Pants Patrol wore a kind of all-in-one tunic with short, tight legs attached, so although they gave a hot-pants effect, they were not hot pants at all. See [here] and [here]. Also the popularity of hot-pants began in the late '60s.

Contradictory statements:

...but the perception of shorts as being only for young boys took several decades to change and to some extent still exists in certain circles.

but:

Today, shorts are worn by either sex from birth through old age without any stigma attached.

Description of boyshorts does not match that on boyshorts page (problem may be with either definition).

Bad definitions and baseless generalisations:

Slackettes: A term coined in the late 20th century by the fashion cognoscenti of the New York City neighborhood of Nolita

Hoaxy or too limited in usage. The term might have been coined in Nolita, but it doesn't seem to have ever been known anywhere else.

Indeed, the Times of India is the only source listed for "Slackettes" -- and the link is a fashion column reporting it as pure hearsay from half a planet away. Seems like a hoax or a joke. 72.244.120.22 (talk) 23:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Zip-off shorts: A pair of long pants that zip off at the knee, allowing the wearer to change from pants to shorts as the weather changes. These have become a common casual fashion item all over the world in the past decade or so.

I'm not convinced these are called 'zip-off shorts', I have more normally heard them called 'zip-off pants' and 'zip-off trousers', unsurprising, as the whole garment is a pair of trousers that can be converted to shorts by unzipping the lower legs. Google is of limited use here in checking use of the term, as the vendors of these garments form the majority of google hits, and on their pages the word 'pants' (or trousers) is always used close to the word 'shorts' in describing these garments.

The Switchback trousers worn at certain times by the Boy Scouts of America are in their WKP article referred to as cargo pants that convert to shorts, not vice-versa. Even the picture in this article of the ventilated garments illustrating 'zip-offs' refers to them as trousers rather than shorts. Perhaps that paragraph needs moving to the trousers article, as (surprisingly) there is no mention of zip-offs there at all.

I've made a start on these issues. There is an obvious unmentioned cross-over between the outerwear style of bootyshorts, hotpants and 'short shorts'. Meanwhile Daisy Dukes (which are just home-made denim hotpants) have their own article. Hmm. Also bootyshorts are marooned in the boyshorts lingerie article. Centrepull (talk) 07:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

And the mention of both "hot pants" and "Daisy Dukes" in the Transatlantic terminological confusions section imply that they are generic synonyms for shorts, when they refer to specific, female only, garments. Wschart (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

"Shorts" as "Underpants"

Matters are further complicated by the fact that "shorts" in American English can refer to underwear

Despite being born and raised in the USA, I have never heard this usage, except in the listed (British?) exception "boxer shorts." Can someone find a citation to verify this statement? Perhaps it is regional usage? Carychan (talk) 08:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Seconded. Also lifelong USA, also never heard that usage outside of "boxer shorts" or the obviously related "boyshorts." Six months later, there's still no cite or response. This really needs a citation or someone should consider deleting it. 72.244.120.22 (talk) 23:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

This is according to List of words having different meanings in British and American English: M-Z#S. Alarics (talk) 09:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I was sure I had come across this usage, so I looked it up in some dictionaries.

• The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language says "Short trousers extending to the knee or above; Men's undershorts."
• Merriam-Webster says "(a): knee-length or less than knee-length trousers — usually used in plural; (b) plural: short drawers".
• Cambridge Dictionary says "trousers that end above the knee or reach the knee, which are often worn in hot weather or when playing a sport; (US) men's underpants".
• Dictionary.com says "(a). trousers, knee-length or shorter. (b). short pants worn by men as an undergarment. (c). knee breeches, formerly worn by men."
• Google Dictionary says "1. Short pants that reach only to the thighs or knees; 2. Men's underpants".

-- Alarics (talk) 08:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Carychan and the subsequent contributor. Having discussed with friends and relatives, with origins in the southeast, south and west of the USA, that shorts are shorts and not underwear. Male underwear might be briefs, drawers, or specific colloquialisms such as boxers or tighty-whiteys, but never shorts. I found this confirmed by various web sites for clothing and department stores (jcpenney, sears, walmart, yahoo shopping, amazon, etc), where searches for "mens shorts" invariably produced results that are not underwear, and only words such as "briefs" or "underwear" produces what you expect. I recognize that dictionaries have authority, but this example suggests that what they define is not necessarily as accurate as you might think. Whatever might have been true in the past, the reality of life today in the USA is that shorts are not male underwear. So if the comment is to be retained, it should be mentioned that dictionaries suggest what reality denies.74.177.60.150 (talk) 17:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Dictionaries should record usage, which means a source of that usage in better dictionaries. If there is no source there is an error in the dictionary. 91.154.169.156 (talk) 06:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Men's underpants are normally known as "skivvy shorts" (or just skivvies) in the US Navy. 66.232.244.253 (talk) 02:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Style Reverse?

The style of shorts are not reversing. They are actually getting longer. Usually only older men wear short shorts now a days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.82.187.246 (talk) 14:51, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Either way, the problem for this article is finding reliable sources to support such claims. -- Alarics (talk) 18:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Slackettes

Slackettes is not a term used regularly. The only sources listed here is a six-year-old article from the Times of India. Suggest deleting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.74.181.170 (talk) 19:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Agreed - despite the claim that "by the early years of the 21st century, [the term had] had worked its way into the everyday parlance of the community of fashion-savvy Manhattan residents" Google is reticent on the subject with no notable commentary. While it does return some results, the images are so varied that it's hard to pin it down to a specific style.

I've been bold and removed it. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:06, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Where is history of shorts?

It did not start in 19th Century, and it was not out of the blue, there is history that starts with ancient times. Why there is nothing about it in this article? 37.144.65.76 (talk) 20:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

If you have information that is missing from an article, it is up to you to add it, but you must cite a reliable source. This would be more constructive than asking why somebody else hasn't added it. Maybe nobody else was aware of this history that you say you know about. Wikipedia is a collaborative volunteer project which anyone may edit. Every Wikipedia article is a work in progress. -- Alarics (talk) 06:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I put a lot of effort/time into researching this topic & yes, people most certainly would have wore some version of shorts long ago. The problem is that; shorts preceding the 19th century, just doesn't seem to be a very well documented thing & thus what appeared to me to be zero references. Here is the summation of literally everything I could dig up on the topic. Crazybitterunicorn (talk) 12:10, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

That article may not be factually reliable, as it is a commercial advertisement for a particular product, and does not cite any source for its assertions. -- Alarics (talk) 09:19, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Main Image of Shorts

I can see the benefits of having the main image showing people wearing shorts, but I don't think having the majority of the pictures being of women's behinds in tight/short shorts is very representative. I've changed it to a picture of two men in swimming trunks for now, but I don't think it's the best option.

I do think that any image used as the main one on this page should show a style of shorts that is one of the ones that is listed and described in the article. Anarchyshake (talk) 04:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

City shorts

I am reading queen Camilla and this is in the book. Yet I do not know what city shorts are. 91.154.169.156 (talk) 06:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

They are mentioned in the article. Go to the Styles section, and look at the tail end of the sub-section about Bermuda shorts. HiLo48 (talk) 07:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)