Talk:Jewellery

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Diamond Jewellery is part of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Gemstones, Jewelry, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · refresh)

Looks nice, but I suggested adding to Materials and methods) a section about use of gemstones.

I am downgrading the rating for now to GA. Large portions of the article go uncited, and work should be done to correct this. SauliH 18:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
This article is supported by WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, jewelry subpage.
WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry To-do:
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Everydaylife article has been rated A-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] Opening discussion

I cut the section on Art Nouveau jewellery and made it its own seperate page because I thought the content was strong, but having only one time period/style discussed on the main Jewellery page didn't seem to make any sense. Better to have a general discussion of jewellery history/styles on this page, and links out to more detailed pages (I can envision jewellery by country or culture and jewellery by arts movement, such as art nouveau, for starters). I added links to all relevant pages to the new page. Brassratgirl 04:33, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Would anyone have a heartache if I did some shuffling on the types of jewelry table? Rather than organizing by common/less common I was thinking about bodypart worn on or some such - brooch for instance is definitely not 'less common' thna nose jewels in the West. & this listing thus appears a bit POV. Bridesmill 01:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

{{move|Jewellery}}

  • Support - This page was cut & paste moved against policy in June of this year by an anon IP. Jooler 12:49, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose Anglo-American dialect meddling should be reverted immediately or left alone. Three months is too long; leave it as it is. Move edit history though. Septentrionalis 16:07, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
I wasn't aware that there was a statute of limitations on issues like this. The vote now irrelevant, as an admin merged the histories, this page can be moved (as per Wikipedia policy) back to the title at which it was created back in 2001 and as it stood until this cut and paste move ([1]) in June by and anon IP. Jooler 22:42, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jewellery or Jewelery?

What was the final word on this issue? I thought we were using American/Inetrnational English unless the subject demands a regional English spelling? Glowimperial 21:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You thought wrong. And I don't know what you mean by American/International English. Generally there is British/International and American. Jooler 12:01, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Since the article's name is jewellery, I've taken the liberty to change all instances of "jewelry" to jewellery for consistency. Of course, I left the references as-is. --Dayn 02:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Third Opinion:

Does William Calley belong under famous jewelers simply because he is a famous person who is now a jeweler?

My opinion? No. His fame derives in no way from being a jeweler, or from making, designing, or marketing jewelry; his fame (or infamy) comes from his role in the My Lai Massacre, and being a jeweler is simply how he makes his living today, that's all. --Calton | Talk 06:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Seems to me that "famous jewelers" is a different category from "famous people who later become jewelers." However, if they later gain fame as a jeweler, then they're a "famous jeweler" and belong on the list. Seems like William Calley at worst works in a jewelry store, or at best runs a jewelry business, neither of which rise to the standard of gaining fame as a jeweler, and therefore does not belong on the list. - Mr. Zarniwoop 13:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Suggestion: Why not put a reference to him under a trivia section? He's not a famous jeweller, but it's probably notable that he became one. If enough other people qualify, you could add a "famous people who are jewellers" section or something similar. Fagstein 18:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I like this idea -- good compromise solution. Posterofwilliamcalleyinfo 19:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What the heck is with the name "Jewellery"?

The talk page above says it's some foreign spelling (wikipedia is in America so we should use American spelling I think). Basically the article needs to explain the whole strange "Jewellery" spelling. I used to have problems always spelling it "Jewlery" so now this bothers me seeing the article spelled even funnier. DyslexicEditor 14:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Article mentions both spellings, so I don't see a problem. My understanding is spelling within a page should be consistent (e.g. 'color' or 'colour', but not both in the same piece) Bridesmill 22:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The article also lacks how jewelry become more common in recent times because people stopped using gold as currency. I came here to verify this fact and the article is missing it. DyslexicEditor 14:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it did; if anything, decrease in use of gold as currency would have the effect of making jewellery less readily negotiable. If anything has increased use in recent times, I would think its because of increased disposable wealth. Would welcome any evidence & evidence of cause for either trend Bridesmill 22:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

An article should be consistently British or consistently American English. So not only should an article not have both "color" and "colour", it should not have "color" and "jewellery" (or "colour" and "jewelry"). Also, the primary title should match the article itself. So if an American author wants to make extensive edits to the article, the redirect should be swapped so that the American title dominates; otherwise, if we leave the British title we should fix the rest of the article to ensure proper British spelling and grammar. --LDC 02:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
The article is not supposed to switch back and forth. If an American wants to make substantial edits, he/she should stick with British spelling and grammar. Please see WP:MOS where this is explained. Johntex\talk 04:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Genital Jewellery

Would like to propose writing the genital jewellery artiicle, and linking the individual types (e.g. anal jewelry) from there rather than from this page. Your thoughts please, before I get yelled at for removing the more (ahem) unusual jewelry from the table on this page. Before anyone says 'prude' or 'censor', please be aware that I make genital jewelry myself, so it is not a matter of having a problem with it - just that it is very unusual (making up well under 1% of jewelry production) and on this page the types only serve to shock - in short, my proposal is that if someone wants to explore genital jewelry, let them got to the Genital jewelry page to find out more.Bridesmill 00:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jewellery lab certificate

May I suggest this source as an external link? Jewelry lab certificate article.

[edit] Moved

[edit] Timeline

This is a timeline of jewellery production from the first uses of metal in history to the Renaissance.

[edit] Famous jewellers

[edit] Sound of jewellery

This article or section is not written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article.
Please improve it or discuss changes on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.

The sound of jewellery has played an enermous part in many stories, poems, and religious literature (more details and sources to come). Different jewellery creates different sounds, ie plastic bangles create a high pitched clink sound, while others such as baxelite produce a "clunck" sound. Knowing how a particular piece of jewellery sounds can help someone identify whether or not a piece of jewellery is fake. Indeed people have written about the sound of "fake gold", and jewel makers such as Sharon Alouf, a famous jeweler have praised the high frequency pitched noise of gold bangles(most likely real gold she is wearing). To this day, the jeweler claims, "the sound of bangles clinking together is very soothing to me. It always reminds me of motherhood."Alouf is even partial to particular tones. "Gold produces my favorite sound," she says, "the pitch is higher and clearer, which I find energizing." [2]

--I placed this here until my editing of the article is complete, but I think the above stuff is obsolete, so it could stay here. Opinions?... Spawn Man 02:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Concur.Bridesmill 03:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

On another issue though, the Tiffany mounting picture is, well, a plain-jane Tiffany style mounting, no indication that it is actually a Tiffany designed mounting - if there is a pic of Tiffany jewellery, it should prob be something that is a. a bit more spectacular than this department store pattern, and b. confirmed to be a design from their house.Bridesmill 03:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find any other tiffany pictures, & this does use the tiffany mount style. So we have options, 1) Delete picture. 2) Delete picture & hope a new tiffany picture pops up somewhere that is free use. 3) Reword caption from "Tiffany & Co. diamond ring" to "Tiffany style diamond ring". I'm not too fussed on whether it's an awesome picture, but it is in the tiffany style, so I would hope that would be criteria for it to be used. Thoughts? Thanks again, & BTW, thanks for your kind words on my talk... Spawn Man 03:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC).

Will poke around; I really think this one is a bit tacky to show off Tiffany with...given the famous commisions they did (Lincoln's wife's jewellery for example) there must be something public domain around.Bridesmill

Also, Faberge, Cartier, and Morris at least need to be somehow put back nto the article; esp as Tiffany has such prominence - & their forte wasn't really just Jewellery.(makes it a bit US-centric).Bridesmill 03:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't want to get too detailed & tiffany is probably the most famous of the lot. You make a good point that their forte wasn't jewellery, so another option would be to just delete the whole section, or add a briefer section on famous american jewellers... Spawn Man 03:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Only in the US & because of the movie ;-) But I think that some of the others can get woven in - I'll have a look in the AM (agree on the FA, but it does need a bit of work yet I think - only a couple days worth at this pace.)Bridesmill 03:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Form & Function

I think this has massaged some of the old masters in; have some examples to flesh out the amulet para, will put in when I check my ref. (done)Bridesmill 15:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Body Mods

Point I was trying to make is that it is difficult to draw the line between the two - earings are not body mods or used to create/enhance them, but "sometimes" they are; same with collars. Then there are unintentional body mods (deformation of the finger form wearing rings is an obvious one). Then there is the jewelry - labrets etc - that are an integral part of body mods, and where do implants fit in - the are body mods. Hopefully the rephrasing makes it clearer.Bridesmill 14:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that is a much better phrasing. The original sentence made no sense to me. FWIW, I think the wording of the last sentence in the Body Mod section is also quite awkward, but I wasn't able to think of a better way to put it. Perhaps you could try your hand at that one as well. Kaldari 21:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Is that better? Really just trying to close the paragraph of in a reasonably elegant fashion, & tie in to rest of modern jewelry.Bridesmill 22:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Version 0.5 review

Reviewing this for Version 0.5, this seems like a nice article (though I can't say I'm an expert), and I've added it to our listing. One point, though, under Materials and methods the only material included seems to be diamond. Surely there should be a section on other Gemstones, with a link that as the "main" article, to discuss use of rubies, sapphires, etc? Walkerma 02:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Techniques and Tools

It would be great if a knowledgeable jewelry designer/craftsman could discuss the various techniques and tools involved in creating jewelry, both in hand-crafted jewelry and jewelry produced in a factory setting.

[edit] Wikiproject Gemstones and Jewellery???

Would anyone else be interested in a WP for this subject. I see a lot of holes that could use expansion. Anyone? SauliH 17:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Newly created. Please sign up and help out at Wikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry. SauliH 19:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rendered picture

The earring from the top of the page was removed because it was a computer render. I don't think this is a particularly good reason to remove it, as it serves as a nice, clean, general example of the subject at hand. I'd like to restore it, but I want to know what other people think. --Eyrian 21:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it should stay removed. Pics of real jewellery are easy to find so we have no need for a pic of a piece that probably doesn't exist. I'll add one of my own pics - Adrian Pingstone 16:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I've added two amber pendants my wife owns - Adrian Pingstone 19:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/e/w/Talk%7EJewellery_1742.html"