Talk:Dashiki

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fashion Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Africa Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article appears to be of an appropriate length for the subject matter under discussion. It is also appropriately categorized and wikified.

By nature, stubbing and tagging articles devalues them, giving them an aura of unreliability and making them seem less credible. As part of my personal campaign to free up articles that have been stubbed and tagged without cause, this article has been disenstubified.

If any editor disagrees, and would rather re-stub it than improve it by adding actual content, please discuss here. The Editrix 20:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where a stub tag by nature devalues anything. My take is that is identifies articles that need immediate expanding/are not balanced/that sort of thing. Dome people LIKE searching through stubs to find work that should be prioritized. Stubs are not inherently less credible; we've got some garbage articles of greath length and some very factual stubs. And, actually, this article inherently has some degree of unreliability, inbalance; it's lacking in the actual history of the garment beyond a nod to its use in the US, what language is the word "Dashiki" from, a movie citation and the fact that Bill Cosby and Marion Barry wore them is trivia or misc.--of passing interest but hardly encyclopedic.

Length alone does not indicate stub-ness IMHO.

Having said all that, I don't care enough to start an edit war. Leave the stub notice out if you'd rather.

Quill 23:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article could use a picture...

That phrase really doesn't say much about the garments, implying that a dashiki is nothing more than any colorful clothes worn in west Africa. Is there a typical form of this garment? Is there something unique about the garment that must be present to call it a dashiki?

I don't know, and these are things I came to find out, so I am asking here.

This article is disjointed, confusing, and it lacks a picture for reference. I suggest finding an editor for this article.

Tom Laverty II 06:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pronounced "dah-shee-key", this common name is derived from the Swahili language in which it means doggystyle.

When I read this piece about Dashiki meaning doggy style part in Swahili I was reminded of the movie 'Don't be a menace to south central while drinking your juice in the hood' (see: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116126/ for example) where one of the characters, whose name in the movie is Dashiki says this line to her boyfriend. A quick internet search ascribes the word Dashiki to Yoruba (Language spoken in Nigeria) origins. Could the piece in this article have been added as a joke perhaps??? Mlodewijk 16:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect I removed the above mentioned piece about Swahili and doggystyle, I don't master Swahili as a language, nor do I have direct proof or good references for this, but I strongly feel that this piece is a misinterpreted to be a fact by the person writing it or else it was a joke. Mlodewijk 10:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the footnote citation for this, a tabloid article about how royal purple was becoming a fashion trend, as it had absolutely nothing to do with the article's claim that it has any connection to "African royalty". "Africa" is not a single unified culture and therefore any such blanket statement is likely bullshit, and of course the tabloid article in question made no statement whatsoever suggesting that purple/lavender has any suggestion of royalty anywhere on the continent. I suggest the statement be removed ASAP unless someone can provide a credible source that actually backs up the idea in question. 96.237.59.92 (talk) 23:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It seems that whoever put in that reference got confused by the color "royal purple". The royal part refers to the ancient Byzantine emperors, who used to be the only ones who could afford the color. Now, it's just part of the name. The article doesn't say anything about "African royalty" at all, or weddings. 75.22.193.15 (talk) 05:15, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that someone undid the deletion. I removed most of the links to the Sun articles; none of them talk specifically about how those colors are relevant to dashikis or weddings. The only link I kept was the one referring to white symbolizing things for Christians, but even that is sketchy, at best. The first link about white being a traditional West African wedding color is suspect, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.181.76 (talk) 16:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia sources should be reliable, and should directly support the information in the article. Please review Wikipedia:Reliable_sources if you are unfamiliar with the reference source policies. An article from the New York Times is not automatically a reliable source, if it is an opinion piece, like most of The Sun articles linked (see Reliable sources: News organizations). A wedding album on The Knot where someone happens to be African and wearing purple does not directly support the fact that purple symbolizes royalty in Africa. When you find better sources, add them, but until then, I am changing these to needs citation. I'm also shifting the sections around a bit to hopefully make more sense. 75.22.198.126 (talk) 16:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recently added information (cited) regarding the design of the garment, but it seems that anonymous users are removing it without explanation.

Not sure if this is page vandalism or something more innocent, perhaps they did not agree that the source cited was authoritative or maybe the origin belongs elsewhere on the page.

Open to any suggestions on how best to include new information to make this page more complete, but I ask that we discuss and add/remove based on good information, not personal whim. Thanks. 2600:4040:272D:CA00:A1BB:E5CC:CDB6:A396 (talk) 17:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is an anonymous editor deleting design and origin information and accusations of racism. I find this troubling because the designer of the dashiki is well-documented, and I am unsure how this information is racist. If there is a competing claim for the origin of the dashiki, please add it, but unless there is better information, it's detrimental to the user community to resort to ad-hominem attacks and anonymous deletions.

Can we get this page protected against vandalism like this? 2600:4040:272D:CA00:E461:CC23:42DA:A824 (talk) 01:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the section on representative Pearson being sworn in wearing a dashiki there's a reference to "referenced non-existent dress rules for the house in an effort to support what was widely criticized as a racist response to Pearson's choice of attire."

I beg to differ on the existence of a dress code for state legislators but in any event, a statement like that really needs a reference or two to back up what's sounds like biased claims. John Simpson54 (talk) 04:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]