Talk:Knitting

There should be men

To prevent discrimination, I vote for putting pictures with knitting men. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.176.194.10 (talk) 09:33, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

YES! Though I don't know precisely where in this article I'd put them. As a male knitter, the history of knitting, and the fact that it was predominantly a male "thing" should be mentioned. I'm looking to revive this article so any help is welcome!--Kobuu (talk) 17:18, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Knitting with roving and knitting with locks

Knitting with roving is common amongst peoples that do not have spinning equipment. I have seen it done in Andean knits as well as having done it myself. Knitting with locks is the oldest form of knitting. It requires neither combs nor spinning. It requires only needles and the fingers to lay successive locks in place. But niether of these forms of knitting is mentiontioned in the literature, so it would not be permitted here. As the oldest form of knitting, knitting with locks should be mentioned. My Flatley (talk) 04:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

older entries

This is a good article about hand knitting, but is missing information about semi-industrial and industrial knitting machines.

Achury

GA On Hold

I know a thing or two about knitting, so I thought I'd give this article a review:

• There doesn't appear to be enough references and cites in this article. It is commonplace to quote page numbers when quoting from a book and is unclear where large chunks of the infomation comes from. A good example of a well referenced article is Iron Maiden.
• I think it is inappropriate to mention Yahoo groups, ...but I could be wrong. It seems like the article is advertising a social group and it's not common for all knitters the world over.
• There appears to be no mention of casting on and not enough references to the different names used for the stitch styles throughout the world. (BTW: Personally, I am looking at this from a British perspective and it doesn't seem neutral enough)
• The History and Culture section seems to be quite short for a function that was traditionally enjoyed by both men and women for thousands of years.

I have put the article On hold in hope that you will have time to fix the above.

Fluffball70 20:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to do this! It may take me a little bit to get to this; I hope you'll allow me a few days before you pass or fail this article. I may require the full seven day maximum, as I am rather busy, unless someone else steps in to do this, as well. Again, thanks! – Dok^{(talk|contribs)} 00:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been 7 days and I see no progress. As the GA Nominee list is long, it's probably best if I fail the article and let you re-submit it when it is ready. Sorry!! Fluffball70 23:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Totally understandable. Thanks for your help! – Dok^{(talk|contribs)} 12:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I just had to mention that knitting is not necessarily thousands of years old. The earliest example of knitting is from c. 1100 CE. Any earlier examples of fabric that look like knitting is often "nalbinding", a technique using a needle and short lengths of thread. it looks very similar to knitting and so if often confused, even by experts. For citation purposes, I used The Cambridge History of Western Textiles and 5,000 Years of Textile History.

I was expecting to find here an encyclopedia of knit stitches. Is this a good idea? Is this page being actively edited?Newbohemianknitwear (talk) 11:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

New external link

I'd like to added the following link to this page

• "Knitting". Fashion, Jewellery & Accessories. Victoria and Albert Museum. Retrieved 2007-09-22.

The pages in this section give examples of knitting from the V&A's collections (many early examples), articles about knitting and various free patterns. VAwebteam 08:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

• • I've added this link as I've not had any answer or comment to my request. VAwebteam 12:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Knit stitch

Note: I moved the message of User:Newbohemianknitwear from Talk:Knit stitch that the main page has been redirected here. Dekisugi (talk) 15:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The knit stitch is the basic building block of all hand knitting. This is the text I would like to add to this page.

method

The best way to learn the basic methods of knitting is to be shown by a more experienced knitter. If you do not have access to somebody to show you, the following instructions may be helpful.

Hold your knitting in your left hand, with the empty knitting needle in the right hand.

Slide your right hand needle into the first loop. Just the tip needs to go through.

Wrap your yarn around the tip of the right hand needle so that it rests between the two needles.

Using the right hand needle catch this yarn and pull it down, forming a new loop on your right hand needle.

Pull the old loop off the left hand needle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newbohemianknitwear (talk • contribs)

Re-organization of article

I think that this article needs to be pretty majorly re-organized, with parts of it perhaps being moved into other or new articles.

As far as knitting is concerned, there are two branches that would interest two different demographics: machine knitting and hand knitting. The article knitting should deal with content that is common between the two; properties and appearance of knitted fabric as it pertains to the loops and things. Perhaps "Properties of knitted fabric" should be incorporated/merged into Knitting.

Then there should be two separate articles: an article that treats knitting as a craft (where all the stuff about needles and yarn and the cultural aspect of hand-knitting would go), and another article that deals with machine-knitting.

I think this approach would effectively get rid of whatever cruft there is in the article, eliminate the craft-knitter bias, and organize the content based on what the reader is looking to learn.

What does everyone think about this? And if so, what should be included in the main Knitting article and what should not? – DroEsperanto^{(talk|contribs)} 17:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm just beginning to get back into editing this, and I see that I've come at a good time! :)

I agree that it would be most sensible to add two daughter articles, hand-knitting and machine knitting, and focus on the properties of knitted fabrics here, regardless of how they are produced. From my perspective, though, it might get a little tricky; for example, much of the material now in the Yarn section would pertain to both types, no? Perhaps not ball-winding and whatnot, but all the material about spinning, twists, plies and dyes would be common, right?

I'd also like to put in a plea that we allow a description of fabric structure and also the techniques by which such a fabric can be produced. Some might object that the latter is a "how-to" and doesn't belong in Wikipedia, but I look at it as a mere description, in the same way as you might explain how lumber is produced from a tree. Other encyclopedias have included such descriptions, no? I'm not asking that we include detailed stitch patterns, but that we at least be able to discuss the principles behind the methods. I say this because I was recently surprised by the deletion of bobble (knitting). WillowW (talk • contribs) 18:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Summary style would be fine when the subtypes become detailed enough to require their own daughter articles because of space constraints. For the present, I agree that craft knitting gets undue weight (especially with respect to economic importance). For now, one daughter article seems right because of the material contributed so far. If you know more about industrial knitting (I don't) then by all means expansion is welcome. Durova^Charge! 01:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

BTW, excellent image additions. Especially using similar backgrounds; looks neat and crisp. Durova^Charge! 01:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I think a lot of what ends up reading like "how-to" material is really about how it's worded. If you say "yarn is drawn through the back loop into the front" or whatever, it's encyclopedic, but not if it's written as in "the knitter puts the needle into the back loop" or "pull the yarn through" or something similar. However, part of the problem is that there are just so many different little stitches and techniques that it's difficult to tell what's worthy of inclusion and what's not. I agree that it can be helpful to give a couple or a few examples of things, but that often quickly grows into a crufty list.

However, those are problems that we should probably deal with when we get to them. First, let's just do the messy work of splitting the articles and deleting articles that need deleting. – DroEsperanto^{(talk|contribs)} 01:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Confusion of Stockinette and Garter stitch

According to every source I've ever read, Garter stitch is when one simply knits or purls. Stockinette alternates between purl and knit. This article has them reversed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.251.205 (talk) 17:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

That's definetly right. Also, stockinette stitches are made on round needles whether one knits or purls, because the knitting is just going around and around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.158.1.153 (talk) 14:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

huh?

This sentence is very hard to read "A sequence of stitches in which each stitch suspended from the next is called a wale". Is it grammatically correct? It seems to be missing a word somewhere. -67.160.246.224 (talk) 05:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

You are correct. It does not parse. I do not use the term, wale. I will not correct the grammar for fear of an inaccurate definition. My Flatley (talk) 04:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Was missing an is between "stitch" and "suspended" - fixed. - 2/0 (cont.) 16:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Ribbing

The picture of the ribbing sample is not that clear. I can tell it is ribbed, but the variegated yarn obscures the ribbing.
The picture ought to be replaced with a a sample done on a single color yarn. E.Zajdel (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Cultural Aspects?

It seems obvious to me that, at least in the Anglosphere, knitting as a hobby is strongly associated with women and/or the elderly. Of course there is nothing about knitting per se that requires this, and no doubt many males and young people practice and enjoy knitting in reality. But the cultural perception, at least, is strong and it's very strange to me that the section of the article titled "History and Culture" doesn't at least mention this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.119.10.182 (talk) 05:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

My own experience is that a) the association of knitting with women is weakening, and b) over the past fifteen years or so, at least in North America, "knitting as a hobby" is very strongly associated with younger people: witness the popularity of "knitting kits", learn-to-knit books, and project books marketed directly to teenagers and even pre-teens. Cactus Wren (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable source that discusses it, then go for it. — DroEsperanto (talk) 03:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I do not see a citation for this sentence: "Hand-knitting has gone into and out of fashion many times in the last two centuries, and at the turn of the 21st century it is enjoying a revival." I think that sentence is superfluous. Huntgoddess (talk) 22:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

What is a wale?

There is a section heading "Courses and Wales" which defines a course but then makes no mention of a wale other than in a caption to a picture. The word is not included in the OED in connection with knitting, so I am wondering where the term originated. The OED does have the word as a term for a ridge in woven textiles and a horizontal band binding off in basketry. MidlandLinda (talk) 22:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

A course is a horizontal row of stitches; a wale is a vertical row of stitches. Courses and wales are defined and discussed in Richard Rutt's History of Knitting.--Storye book (talk) 08:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, though it still doesn't explain the shift from horizontal to vertical alignment. It's not a term I've ever come across in over 50 years of knitting. Perhaps it's a regional term not used in the UK.MidlandLinda (talk) 19:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

After further reading around I have come to the conclusion (and yes I know this is original research) that no one else uses the term wale and it is an idiosyncratic usage by Richard Rutt which has not been taken up by other experts. Unlike Mary Thomas' suggestion of "combined" as the term for knitting western, purling eastern, which has been taken up by everyone using and describing that technique. MidlandLinda (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Knitting Patterns

I think that we should have a knitting and chrochetting pattern avaliable... where various knitting patterns are avaliable. Jose Pablo S. Martinez (talk) 20:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. Ravelry.com is where you can find all the patterns you need. I don't think that a Wiki article is where those belong. --Kobuu (talk) 15:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Arm knitting

Hi. Could someone have a look at this orphaned article and try link to it or merge it or afd it? Gbawden (talk) 06:45, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey Gbawden, done. Merged this morning. Good call on that, by the way. We need some more sources in the "Types" area and idealy we should breakout Felting from that, but still. Thanks! Kobuu (talk) 13:12, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Section Edits

There have been a lot of edits where large chunks of this article have been removed and put into hand knitting. I think that future large-scale edits should be discussed so that there are not further reverts. Kobuu (talk) 15:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

What is Knitting

Per other Wikipedia articles, knitting is a craft handcraft, an art fiber art, and part of the textile industry. This article is almost exclusively about knitting as a craft; the other aspects are not well covered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.81.84 (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Knitting. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070227135129/http://www.alamacknits.com/knitting.htm to http://www.alamacknits.com/knitting.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://littlehenrescue.co.uk/Hensandtheirjumpers.aspx

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 04:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Knitting. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061231110819/http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/knit.php to http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/knit.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.knitwitspenzance.co.uk/news.php?n_id=8

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 16:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Ravelry

Not sure how to go about fitting it in, but the Ravelry site would be a good resource to include for people who are looking for a community and free stitch/pattern guides. Medises (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2020 (UTC) I've added Ravelry as an external link Noracrentiss (talk) 05:36, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Personal web sites and blogs are not reliable sources

Some of the information here is linked to "hobbyist" web sites and/or blogs. Some of the latter are on the sites of vendors or manufacturers. In general, on Wikipedia self-published texts cannot be used as sources for facts. This is particularly difficult for many crafts because they haven't had formal analysis that would appear in, say, academic publications. I don't have an answer for this, but would like to know if there are reliable sources that could be used here that could replace some of the informal sources that have been used here to support this Wikipedia page. Lamona (talk) 19:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I haven't had time to dig into this yet, but the University of Illinois has a publicly available library guide for research on Historic Knitting that might be a starting point for more scholarly sources. Here's the link: https://ischoolillinois.libguides.com/c.php?g=1093640&p=8006599 Erinldoyle (talk) 22:34, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Erinldoyle! I'll add this to the external links, and will dig around to see what it can provide.Lamona (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Erinldoyle, I finally got back to this and it's not available to me - it requires a local login. I'll keep hunting for sources, and if you can make use of any of these for the article that would be great. Lamona (talk) 21:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I haven't had much time either, but I'll see if I can get access to any of these through my uni library.

Erinldoyle (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

4 pictures

Kyle Cassidy donated these https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Knitted_Sweater.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Double_Pointed_Needles_(2).jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Knitting_with_Double_Pointed_Needles.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Circular_Knitting.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Knitted_Sweater.jpg

Not my topic, hope they help ;) Midgley (talk) 21:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Introduction Citation

I added a citation to the beginning of the page. It was a small edit, but I figured I would mention that I did so in this talk page anyway.--NoFace23 (talk) 09:01, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Should we keep defunct blogs in external links?

I invite @Yngvadottir: and @GreenLipstickLesbian: to discuss the defunct blog they would like to include on this page, including why a defunct WordPress site is encyclopedic. Butter made from smashed nuts (talk) 04:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I mean, the information is really useful, and it's accurate, and it has education value. You questioned the Cafe Knit site and compared it to the CYC resource, which I don't think was entirely fair. I'll copy my response to you on my talk page.

The CYC link only links to the basic table used for decoding standardized ball bands; it's useful if you wish to deal with yarn, or deal with research material and patterns dealing with yarn that was manufactured in the late 20th/21st century in North America. However, for much of human history, and in the rest of the world, other systems have been in place. Many vintage knitting patterns, and ergo many books on vintage knitting patterns, will make reference to the old UK sizing system (before they went metric). These older needle sizes, due to their similarities to the US needle sizes, are often confused by modern researchers and knitters - I've even seen this foul up experienced knitters working on the Ravelry database. Similarly, the CYC chart uses their own names for each of their categories of yarn, based on wraps per inch irrc. Those alternative names they list are much more common in everyday speech, pattern books, and knitting-related materials from former commonwealth countries/the UK. The blog has actually tied these names to their country of origin, and their chart will quickly reveal to readers that the "ply"-based terminology, somewhat diverged from the actual concept of plying, especially in the fashion yarn world, is much more common in UK yarns, pattern books, and knitting books. However, it does have other uses; I believe Özbel's translator used the terminology, though I may be misremembering? It's very common in many of the original EZ books and televion series, that much I'm sure of. The blog also gives what sorts of garments are typically made with each weight of yarn; maybe outsiders and new knitters struggle to understand this, but the weight of the yarn combined with the size of the needles affects the drape and sturdiness of the resulting fabric. This isn't emphasized as much in many modern sources, which is a shame because when these are not taken under appropriate consideration, the actual garment itself will disintegrate or felt from the friction of every-day use. Obviously, I'm not putting that in Wiki-voice, but it's useful information for an external link, no? Anyways, the CYC source doesn't reflect this; the blog does. The blog also gives standard abbreviations used by many publications. They're accurate, not found in the other links, and, for obvious reasons, much more useful as a link than written out on the page in full. Unfortunately, it has become a trend amongst digital designers to forgo these abbreviations, or use custom abbreviations and lock them away in some glossaries. This is a new phenomenon, and when combined with the fact that many older knitters would simply have these abbreviations memorized, it's easy to see how these terms have become more lost on the modern internet. Just try and show a North American knitter a Drops pattern, and see what they do with it! GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) And I invite you again to find a better link containing the information. Many things have been hosted on Wordpress, not just blogs in the strict sense, and there's nothing inherently wrong with linking to an archived version of a now dead page. But it's the information that's useful. Please demonstrate your endorsement of the WMF (your edit summary) by improving the page while preserving the information, as is the wiki way. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:04, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, only blogs. It is blog software. Self published charts are of dubious truth. We can't do original research to verify the hobbyist you linked to was correct. Butter made from smashed nuts (talk) 05:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I feel a bit bad saying this now that you can't respond, but for anybody listening: these are accurate. I have confirmed them and verified the contents with my own personal collection of books. Verification may be done with old Nancy Bush, EZ, or really any decent book. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like you know this topic, so I will leave it alone. Hope you have some cool scarves. Mashed Nuticles Butter (talk) 05:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Scarves, cowls, sweaters ... higher quality socks :) (A pun I'm a little disappointed you didn't make yourself. Like, come on.) GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 05:32, 1 February 2025 (UTC)