Talk:Albright special

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Albright special article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This article is part of WikiProject Knots, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to knots. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

[edit] "Correct" form of this knot

NOTE FROM READER:knot shown is incorrect; tag end should pass through loop the same direction as it was originally passed through. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.69 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC) on article; moved to talk page 01:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I have looked at several web and one book source to verify this, including Vic Dunaway's Baits, Rigs & Tackle. Regrettably for the person who took the time to make the graphics, the above editor is apparently correct. This graphic shows the know tied correctly. CyberAnth 18:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I also concur that most web references show the knot with the tag end exiting the bight the same way it went in. However at least one book, The Complete Book of Fishing Knots by Geoffrey Budworth, shows the tag end coming out of the bight on the opposite side than it went in. I'm not sure whether Budworth is in error, or whether both variations are valid.

As far as the diagram Image:Albright knot diagram.png goes, the only deviation from the tying instructions found in the Budworth book is in the first panel showing the tag end passing through the bight rather than in front of it, as in the next three panels. Thus the diagram is internally inconsistent and needs correction in any case. Future diagrams should also attempt to better show the three lines being wrapped held more parallel, forming a tidy triangular cross-section. --Dfred 15:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)