Talk:Jeans

Some more in depth info about slavery?

I added a small tidbit about slavery into the origins of jeans... If anyone finds the source to be unreliable but finds something more dependable, that'd be great! I feel like it's an important factor in its history. Ameliaober (talk) 06:31, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Edit

Initial paragraph said that traditional jean manufacturers included Jordache. Jordache is not traditional and originated in the 1970's. Replaced it with Lee Jeans.

Also, I hope I speak for most when I say: Ted Fox, you have contributed nothing constructive to this conversation. Please keep your offensive comments to yourself. Johnbradleytlh (talk) 21:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Types section

This lists types of *denim clothing* -- not jeans. I have moved it to the denim page. Naniwako 18:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Naniwako[reply]

"Corduroy" jeans?

Aren't jeans supposed to refer strictly to pants made out of denim? I think that's supposed to be their defining characteristic.

As I understand it, jeans were canvas before denim, tho when you think of jean jackets and jean skirts the term has indeed come to imply denim. It would be good if the article could actually DEFINE jeans,which it doesn't at present.IceDragon64 18:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like at 17:13, 15 October 2007 , someone added "not" in front of the word "corduroy" in the first paragraph. It now seems out of place in my opinion, because there are lots of fabrics that are not included in what can make jeans. However, I'm almost positive I've seen corduroy pants marketed as jeans. Without a reference, it's hard to say, but I think this opening bit could use some revision no matter what the end result. Dwringer (talk) 06:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how anyone could consider a pair of corduroy trousers 'jeans', I've got a suit made out of corduroy (You'd look pretty daft in a suit made out of denim, I don't like jeans, I only ever had one pair and I threw them on a bonfire last year, Although they were the right waist size they crushed my privates, I always thought Americans had no balls, turns out it's true)-Ted Fox 13:59 23 March 2008 (GMT)

Perhaps you shouldn't have stolen your sisters levi's, and maybe bought a pair meant to be worn by a man. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.204.174.250 (talk) 04:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you'll wear a corduroy suit but you won't wear jeans? wait scrap that... So you'll wear a corduroy suit? Furthemore you obviously didn't get the right cut. And no corduroy do not count as jeans. [[[Special:Contributions/91.106.177.107|91.106.177.107]] (talk)] —Preceding undated comment added 02:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

To me Jeans refers to a styling/cut of the pants. They can be Jeans without being of demin- I agree with this. First characteristic- top of front pockets - ON jeans this is closer to horizontal than vertical. For pants- front pocket edge is vertical. On jeans the back pockets- added onto the seat of pants, NOT possible to to pull back pockets of Jeans inside out. Jeans should NOT have a crease on the front edge (either by manufacturer, user/owner or dry-cleaners). TO be jeans, grab along the in-seam on out inside- note you have about a quarter-inch of fabric doubled up. And same at the hem at bottom of leg. IN some cases- both sides of this quarter inch of double fabric is stitched. This is the styling of them - cut shape of the seat of pants/ flair line of the leg makes NO difference. Pant could be made of demin with a totally different styling such that they are NOT jeans. (But near all American would not agree with this. 23:59, 8 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfoj2 (talk • contribs)

"The Good LifE"

"In Eastern Europe, blue jeans symbolize American culture and "the good life". - Removed that false statement which isn't citated or backed up. In My firsthand experience in life in eastern europe the statement doesn't apply at all or thought about that way. Jeans are a global fashion, though originating from America. If it isn't false, it is surely an outdated statement. Mehicdino 20:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're French not American. (91.106.177.107 (talk) 02:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Sizing?

I'm not very familiar with the current standard in jeans sizing. I believe several countries have their own systems, sometimes multiple (USA's male waist/inseam vs USA's female single digit). There seems to be no online source for a conversion table or explanation and a wikipedia article would be perfect for this. 24.108.153.22 10:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And even more confusing, the different brands of jeans have their own sizing systems. A size 6 in one brand can be quite different than another brand. There is a very valuable tool available for women that provides an online digital tailor which is very easy to use. All you have to do is answer a few questions and the site will choose the best jeans for your body style. This can be found at #REDIRECT [[1]] Suzik 22:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pair?

Why is it a pair of jeans? Jigen III 11:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same reason it's a "pair" of pants? Pnkrockr 15:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it's just one of those things you don't question. thatdarngirl 13:21, 29 November 2006 (FR)

I think one leg is a pant while two legs make it a pair of pants. 156.34.208.130 01:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though people specify "pant-leg" when referring to one leg or the other, rather than just saying "pant". But then, Larry the Cable Guy says "buffet-bar" instead of just "buffet" so maybe that's just another grammatical feature of English vernaculars. Dwringer (talk) 06:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, Wikipedia is not the place to debate/question customary English speech. It's a "pair" and that's that. HunterXI (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wiukipedia is just the place to question!! And hopefull find the answer. The reason is it relates to trews - or trousers - that came from a Norse garment that was strapped on - thus in a pair. by analogy it is a pair of pants, jeans etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.96.60 (talk) 18:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cost of Jeans

I completely disagree with the assessment that a pair of jeans costs $80 these days. If you're shopping in Urban Outfitters or Banana Republic, then yes, they can be that expensive, but most people (among Americans, anyway) wouldn't pay more than $30 for a pair. Thoughts? HunterXI (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, jeans are NOT $80 (only designer ones), they are around $30 almost everywhere, like Walmart or JC Pennys. Someone needs to correct this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.252.64.3 (talk) 19:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're both misreading the statement in question. The claim is referring to modern jeans with 1880s standards of quality and workmanship. It has nothing to do with what most people are willing to pay for jeans or what the average person buys. Doctorfluffy (wanna get fluffed?) 19:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the source of that citation is difficult to find online, what proof is given in that source that the $50-$80 jeans are actually the same quality as the ones produced in the 1880's? How do we know that the $30 jeans aren't just as good (if not better, as is the case with my own experience)? 63.87.189.17 (talk) 22:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just changed it to $30-50, because that's my experience, and that's what Levi's 501s and 505s cost on their web site--and if those aren't as high quality as average 1880s jeans, please include information about what is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iain.dalton (talk • contribs) 23:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

smaller pocket

was wondering if anyone knew anything about the smaller pocket within the right hand side pocket of many jeans?

I believe it was also used for a coin pocket.

its a watch pocket

In Australia I grew up calling it a "fob pocket" — Hippietrail 02:19, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I just found out today that that pocket, on all of the jeans that I own, snugly fits a Zippo lighter Zoobtoob 23:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it's where the fob when wich is the danggly part of a pocket watch

Levi's ran an ad where a man uses the pocket to keep condoms ending with. "The watch pocket, invented in 1873, misused ever since." BKnoss 17:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While Cigarette Lighters fit in easily as well as coins, pocket watches do NOT fit (I tried with my Smiths Empire Pocket Watch, prehaps American Pocket watches were smaller, since my Watch is English-made)-User:GeorgeFormby1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by GeorgeFormby1 (talk • contribs) 10:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably a mix of the watch and the jeans--if one tries to fit a larger watch into a smaller watch pocket, the fit will be off. I have an open-faced Vacheron Constantin watch (Swiss-made) from 1908 that could fit into the watch pocket of my Levis. However, the watch pocket, unlike the larger side pockets, is generally unlined, and I wouldn't want to expose either the glass or the gold of my watch to rough denim. I wouldn't suggest wearing a pocket watch with jeans, but if you do, I think it would be wise, indeed, to keep the fob in the watch pocket (making the Australian term probably the more sensible), and the watch itself in the larger pocket, where it has at least some protection (the lining is usually still rough, but softer than denim). Anglican (talk) 18:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the last three decades, I have always called it my "plectrum pocket", for the obvious reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.32.253 (talk) 05:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure, but in the article it is described as a "pill pocket". This description was cited, but I removed the citation because I found no mention of it in the source cited. Zmarquez (talk) 06:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When washing

Why do you have to turn them inside out before placing them in the washing machine? Is it to protect the washer from rivets and buttons? Or does it wear out the color like this link suggests ([2]), ([3])?--Jerryseinfeld 14:40, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Jeans and water

What's with the heavy focus of the page on wearing jeans underwater?

LOL yeah... you'd think they were designed for swimming and that there is no other technology suitable for that role. There really should be a lot more about the trendy fashioncentric aspect of jeans which IMO much better represents them in the past 30-40 years. And some non-Levis info. I'd do it myself but I don't really follow jeans or fashion myself. Gabe 01:47, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree, the article's focus on jeans as water clothing is pretty odd. Rhobite 00:16, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

I removed it, removed it all!!! OK, maybe I was right, and maybe I was wrong, but most of it was unverifiable. Anyone who wants to re-add the nonsense about "Jeans and Water" had better do so with plenty of verifiable and unbiased sources, but otherwise, the article was looking like a joke. func (talk) 00:27, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A User:Gary1850 placed this on my talk page:

Am sorry to see the part about water and jeans taken out as it is information that is hard to find and relevent to history of jeans and WWII.I have seen the photographs of solders in south pacific wearing 501 levis during WWII and because of that the south seas natives wore cutoff levis shorts up till about the late 1960s.One of the problems with todays search engines is they ar'nt good at getting information on articals from magazenes and newspapers that had a lot of usful information on obscure subjects such as jeans in south pacific during WWII but arnt well indext and not digitalized.As the WWII veterens are dying off in such numbers the storys of the levis in south pacific may be lost forever and you may be doing disservice by removing one of only places that that information would be found and some veterin coming forward with the information and photos.I am trying to get the DVD of Victory at Sea that I beleve there are shots of solders wearing the levis 501s.I will go frame by frame to get any photos of them, also may be some books with the photos but my library doesnt have the quality needed.As to scuba diving that also was true in coral reefs to protect yout legs.Also dificult to sabstantiat as it took place befor digital age and iformation is lost in magaziene artical that may never be digitalized in our time.

Gary Wilkerson

have no idea on how to post to jeans discussion?

func (talk) 01:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fits

It would be helpful if someone knowledgeable in the different type of fits (straight, bootcut, etc.) could put some photos or sketches distinguishing the different types of jeans styles.

Agreed. I can't be the only person who finds it rather confusing... --11:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)EddieBernard

Ditto: I arrived on this page only because I was looking for a sort of schematic comparison of different types of jeans. Evil.Iron.Owls.

jeans were nused as a flotation device. tie the legs together and capture air in the open part and vwala a flotation device

JEAN ZENTELLA ANGELES — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.138.208 (talk) 23:45, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup - Jeans in popular culture

'Levi's are known for their rugged construction, personal "shrink-to-fit", and versatility. Originally worn by miners, farmers, and cowboys, Levis are worn and seen in all walks of life.'
What is this, a Levis ad? And what does it have to do with the section it is in, Levis in popular culture? I've added a cleanup tag. - David Scarlett 22:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

proposal for "styles" subsection

i think that something explaining all the popular types of jeans, like low riders, torn jeans, bell bottoms, etc. would be beneficial. i was surprised that these topics already didn't get more coverage in the article. Joeyramoney 21:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pressing jeans?

"Western Europeans may press their jeans like dress pants for a more formal appearance" - sorry but this is nonsense! I've removed it. 143.252.80.110 18:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Western Europeans" don't even exist! (I object entirely to being called a European, I'm BRITISH, I'm seperated from those garlic eating, jackbooted bad losers by 26 miles of water)-Ted Fox 14:04 23 March 2008 (GMT)

prohibition

Didn't a couple of kids in the soviet union get executed (or arrested) for wearing jeans

That's changed my entire outlook on the Soviet Union, They can't be that bad if they banned jeans!-Ted Fox 14:00 23 March 2008 (GMT)

No, of course not. Jeans were difficult to find in shops in the USSR, since they had to be imported from America (and, for many and obvious reasons, trade between the U.S. and USSR was at a minimum). However, if you were able to find them, there were no restrictions on wearing them. In fact, jeans were a major fashion statement in the Soviet Union: if you were wearing jeans, somehow you were able to own a piece of the West. In addition, Soviet citizens who visited Western countries often brought back quantities of jeans to give away or sell once they returned home. In some extreme cases, jeans became a kind of substitute currency, when money alone wasn't enough to entice someone to do or give something. --Ericdn (talk) 20:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to add your material to the part of the article about Jeans in the USSR?Vladimir Baykov (talk) 09:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Such a small article

Kinda surprising since jeans are such an important part of global fashion --AnYoNe! 13:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As so often happens on Wikipedia, an important section was lost during a clumsy reversion of vandalism. Instead of actually reverting the vandal's work, an anon user deleted the nonsense, not bothering to check that the nonsense replaced a whole section of the article. --Tysto 04:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting the 'fits' list

Well, I just finished sorting the 'fits' list so then it's all in alphabetical order (with the exception of '"mom's" jeans') and also added "Relaxed fit" to it. --Ampersand2006 ^{( talk · user page design )} 02:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bootcuts and bell-bottoms

If the two are listed as different styles, why does the page on the former redirect to the one for the latter? I'd fix it myself, but I'm not actually too savvy on the difference. 90.198.88.230 (talk) 21:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added bootcut to the list on bell-bottoms and fixed the wikilink so it wouldn't redirect. Carl.bunderson (talk) 04:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prices

In 1885 jeans could be purchased for $1.50. Today, some jeans cost $200 to $500 with limited-edition and collectibles costing up to $2000.

Sorry Guys, but even though they might have cost 1.50, due to inflation 1.50 was worth much more than it is today. Could smnone edit it, so it doesn`t look they increased prices by 1000%. --87.185.96.57 (talk) 13:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Anyone can help me to add a picture? It is an ancient painting of General Giuseppe Garibaldi and the garibaldini troops or mille wearing jeans during the campaign of Marsala of 1860. Thanks. http://img183.imageshack.us/my.php?image=garibaldijeansmw9.jpg Karanko 12:18, 23 Jan 2009 (UTC)

Average ownership of seven pairs?

This strikes me as too much, unless it actually refers to "accumulated over lifetime", and then it would make more sense to me. I really do not think seven pairs in a wardrobe at any given time is an average... I'd say 1.5 is more like it among people who do use jeans, and 0 among those who do not (duh!), for an actual average of less than one. elpincha (talk) 17:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously haven't seen the closests of some of my college roommates. Back in high school and college, I knew (far too many) classmates who owned no other pants but jeans, often including a black pair for "dressier" occasions. --Ericdn (talk) 20:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know it is a small sample size - but my family of 5 probably owns 10-12 pairs of jeans between us. Seven per person at any one time also stikes me as quite high (but then again I probably own 3 or 4 pairs of unused jeans - not counted above). However seven per person over a lifetime strikes me as very, very low. I am only 20 and I would have owned at least 15 pairs of jeans - so far! Most kids are going to go through at least a pair every two years and probably a pair every 5 years as adults. 130.56.87.136 (talk) 01:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pockets

I think something should be noted about Denim Jeans' unnatural ability to ruin anything vulnerable to scratching. If you repeatedly put a cell phone in your pocket, its only a matter of time before the screen is covered in scratches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.32.240.148 (talk) 23:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it's not caused be the jeans fabric it's caused by the stitching and cheaper pocket fabric. Markthemac (talk) 12:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ripped jeans

Could some of the experts have a look at this article and see what they think? At the very least some citations would be nice... ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should be deleted outright or redirected here. There is no suitable content to justify a separate article. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 19:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Riveted Jeans

The story about how jeans started is different here than the story on the Levi Strauss page, which cites a source. Maybe we should copy the story that's used there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iain.dalton (talk • contribs) 23:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Quotes about Jeans"

What is up with this section? It seems ridiculous at best, inviting shilling at worst. Also, doesn't seem to be encyclopedia worthy. Propose deletion? 68.162.167.207 (talk) 19:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Removed. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 21:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Randy Bister? Seriously!?

"Randy Bister, a potato farmer from South Carolina, was the first to utilize "over-alls" as farm attire."

This REALLY needs a reference. I mean, do we actually know for a fact that the first farmer in the US to put on a pair of overalls was a dude named Randy in SC?!

Who is this Randy Bister? What year did he put on the overalls? How do we know some other farmer in Michigan was not already wearing overalls the year before? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmvidal (talk • contribs) 18:56, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sanforized jeans

The article mentions "pre-shrunk" jeans as being sold no earlier than the 1970s, treating it as a late innovation. Yet "sanforized" denim trousers, which were treated to produce minimal shrinkage prior to being sold, have existed since the 1930s. While it is certainly true that various "aging" techniques came about later (both stonewashing and the various "pre-distressing" techniques used to create an already ~~ruined~~ worn look), "pre-shrunk" is not such a recent phenomenon. --Julian Grybowski (talk) 01:49, 6 December 2010 (UTC) According to Levi Strauss's website, preshrunk Levi's were introduced in 1963. That's a verifiable source, unlike all the garbage that's in there on the subject now. I personally can recall buying preshrunk Levi's throughout the 1970s. 67.170.84.219 (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology needs citations. Anyone?

Etymology needs citations. Anyone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.228.158 (talk) 09:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing section

An oft-told "attractive myth" is that Levi initially sold brown canvas pants to miners, eventually dyed them blue, turned to using denim, and after Davis wrote to him, Levi added rivets to his blue jeans. However, this story is false and probably due to the discovery of jeans made of brown cotton duck (a type of bottomweight fabric), which was one of the early materials used by Davis and Levi Strauss after 1873.[1] Finding denim a more suitable material for work-pants, they began using it to manufacture their riveted pants.

This is very confusing. I don't see where the "false" part of the story ends and what the "true" story exactly is. They seem to overlap. Could someone clarify?

50.161.35.73 (talk) 08:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh

Is Bangladesh the only place Jeans are made? All the image gallary is from one country. --Inayity (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assalamu alaikum. I don't hv any iamge of jeans rather than Bangladesh. Once I hv sure will share.--Fahad Faisal — Preceding undated comment added 08:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"created" by Davis

How much is jeans trousers his "creation"? What is the key point that we can underline as original idea? Use of rivets to reinforce two pieces of material is not his invention, as it was used for quiet a while in leather military belts for example ( and probably in more products ). Denim was also know for few centuries already. What would be a feature distinct enought to call Davis "creator"? Such information seems to be missing. Was it set of pockets? Don't see any originality either. I hardlee even see why he recived patent back in times ass all main ideas and materials were already known. 195.150.224.69 (talk) 23:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dungaree

Has dungaree fabric anything to do with jeans ? This section reported below is confusing because it doesn't say anything about the relationship between jeans and this other fabric. A better place would be a page about Dungaree. One already exists and the content put in the jeans page should just be moved there.

Dungaree was mentioned for the first time in the 17th century, when it was referred to as cheap, coarse thick cotton cloth, often colored blue but sometimes white, worn by impoverished people in what was then a region of Bombay, India a dockside village called Dongri. This cloth was "dungri" in Hindi. Dungri was exported to England and used for manufacturing of cheap, robust working clothes. In English, the word "dungri" became pronounced as "dungaree".^[1]

Luigi 09:45 26 February 2020 (GMT)

References

^ William, Carrie (September 3, 2017). "Origin and History of Dungaree Fabric". Historyofjeans.com. Retrieved October 28, 2015.

Merge?

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived:

See proposal to redirect and merge content from ripped jeans to this primary article. Guliolopez (talk) 23:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done Merged per above and related thread Guliolopez (talk) 00:03, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Other construction details

Note sure whether it should be under it's own section, or sub'd to one of the existing ones, but surely there should be some note of the typical distinctive construction features of jeans:

Deep curved front pockets
The secondary 'fob' pocket
Contrasting bar tacks
External manufacturer's label, larg one on the back, small 'tab' elsewhere
Topstitched felled seams
Back yoke

While not all jeans will have all of these features, other styles such as chinos or dress trousers have none of these features. Snori (talk) 09:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental impact

What is the point of this paragraph? Without comparison to other fabrics and their cleaning methods and durability, it seems to be more 'leftist 'do-gooder" propaganda/criticism' than anything else. For example, what effect does production of synthetic fabrics have on the environment? If you buy pants that don't last as long, and they're obviously 'replaced', they still use the same amount of water to wash them, and production of them more affects the carbon cycle. And what about sending clothes to the dry cleaner? Trips to drop off/pick up also have an effect on carbon cycle and the environment that jeans you wash at home don't. Simple, 'obvious' questions; maybe the answers aren't, but this kind of entry is a 'loaded' one, with only half-the-story told. It "smells". Typical. 66.81.105.36 (talk) 04:28, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@66.81.105.36: I don't understand what's "typical" - anyone is invited to edit and contribute to this encyclopedia, including you. If you don't like the way a paragraph sounds or feel that only half the story is being told then fix it yourself. Garchy (talk) 04:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jeans. 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:

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) 16:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion

There are several references to youth, students, and subcultures in this article, but no references to the eventual popularity of jeans among all age groups. In particular, heiress Gloria Vanderbilt developed a line of jeans in her early 50s popularizing the item for middle-aged (and wealthy) women. Martindo (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Genes and blue

"Gênes, the French word for Genoa, may be the origin of the word "jeans"." Indigo in French was called "Bleu de Gênes" which gave birth to the word jean. Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 11:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] William, Carrie (September 3, 2017). "Origin and History of Dungaree Fabric". Historyofjeans.com. Retrieved October 28, 2015.

[1]