This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 21 October 2013 for a period of one week.
Liturgical dress
I'm just wondering if the addition by @
David Condrey: (
here) about liturgical dress belongs in this article? The reference discusses the origin of the
Geneva gown, so perhaps it would be better in that article since a Geneva gown is worn by church ministers, not by the the religious groups discussed in the plain dress article. I very much appreciate David Condrey's well-sourced contribution, it's great to see users adding content to articles. I'm just curious about what others think. Thanks, Ry's the Guy(
talk|
contribs)08:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)reply
I do think that a tag or something should be added to the top of this article explicitly describing the subject of this article. Because I'm currently not clear on what the subject of the article or how it differs from similar topics as Penny mentioned.
David Condrey logtalk 18:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Okay I'll move it in a few days if you haven't gotten around to it. I'm not sure what you mean by adding a tag. Do you mean modifying the lede? Do you have any suggestions? Thanks, Ry's the Guy(
talk|
contribs)13:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)reply
I was thinking that the gallery looks a little cluttered and maybe has too many images. I don't think it's necessary to include more than 1 or 2 photos of each religious group. Maybe it would help to remove a few of the photos of Schmiedeleut Hutterites, Old Colony Mennonites, and Amish since there are multiple examples of each? Ry's the Guy(
talk|
contribs)15:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)reply
Suggested re-wording
What do editors think about re-wording this sentence from the fourth paragraph in the lead?
Here is the sentence now:
Among the Amish and other plain groups, plain dress is not considered to be a costume but instead is an expression of their religious philosophy.
Suggested re-wording:
Among the Amish and other plain groups, plain dress is not a costume but rather an expression of their religious philosophy.
Rewording, heh? Well, that’s a good idea. As it is now, the lede reads either as a hugely biased, pious selfpromo tract penned by the most obsequious follower of this fashion style, or as the most tongue-in-cheek mockery of the same. I personally adhere to the latter and guffawed reading it, but it then struck me that eitherway that’s not at all what’s needed from an encyclopedia.
Tuvalkin (
talk)
19:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)reply