Talk:Bangs (hair)

Bangs and shaved heads

Growing out a shaved head will always result in bangs...should we add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.219.144 (talk) 20:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC) isn't that just common sense?

Hmmm...that's great. I have Afro hair, so if I shave my head, it will always grow out with a fringe..!!! 2.121.223.104 (talk) 18:22, 12 April 2014 (UTC)Lance Tyrell

Eyes

Why can a fringe not be over the eyes?! This is one of the most common styles of fringe/bangs... 82.29.77.158 19:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Bangs?!?

Why is the article called "bangs" when only Americans call them "bangs"... call it a fringe >_< 222.153.147.13 09:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You mean Americans and Canadians. And the simple fact of the matter is that Americans and Canadians are more Common than people from the UK, so it makes more sense to call it bangs.--71.36.43.16 18:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC) We (I am American) are Not more common than the UK, but as a group are a MUCH larger group by numbers. Common with a capital C implies a UK or royalist (like Royalty) snub against Americans. Wfoj2 (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Likewise, why is it called "fringe" when a majority of the native English speakers are found in North America? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.232.144.109 (talk) 22:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, because the majority of English countries (eg. UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, etc.) are outside of North America (hint, the language is called 'English', not 'North American') Also, the majority of English speakers are non-native English speakers who, despite English not being their first language, use the English Wikipedia. The majority of them use Commonwealth English.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

It's wikipedia.com, not wikipedia.co.uk. Go to your own site!

Actually its wikipedia.org--2.97.89.48 (talk) 19:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

This talk page is read by me with a high humor content. I am Ok with current page name, URL and the redirect from bangs to here. Some of my point to add- I consider bangs as a term to apply to both men and women- yet seems to lack any comment reference to fact most men have bangs. . Vast majority of men do have bangs. Among women what percentage have bangs? (I am not looking for an answer, throw question out to make reader think). IF a woman hang bangs and want to change away, then cannot be cut out, but must take the time and bangs allowed to grow out to become no longer bangs. Without bangs, it is am easy haircut to create bangs. I have known one women who did not have bangs but "looked down" on women with bangs. For a woman having bangs can be user to hide a large forehead, Or a receding hairline(men), and also alter the appearance or shape of the face. Wfoj2 (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Francesca Dani image - not fair use

I've removed the image of the model Francesca Dani from the Bangs (hair) page, as it is certainly not fair use of a copyright image. It'd be fine on a page about the model herself, but not about the hairstyle she happens to be sporting. Also, I note from the edit history that this removal had been done before, by User:MattKingston, so I'm not entirely sure why I have to do it again. Unless people are feeling anarchistic about licensing law - I know I do sometimes. -- (James McNally)  (talkpage)  02:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm

I'll have to see if I have any pictures I can use. Someone should also put this in a section about style or something, since it seems to be a "growing" fashion trend.

SwedishConqueror 23:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)SwedishConqueror

A boy in my chorus class a few years ago had fifteen inch bangs, long enough to make that kid's hair look short. Our class made up a song for him that I have always found exceptionally funny, though it may be that you "had to be there." In any case, here are the lyrics:

To be sung to the tune of "Do Your Ears Hang Low"

Do your bangs hang low, can you touch them to your nose?

If I tied them in a knot, would you cry and clutch them close?

Have they grown and grown and grown and grown and grown and grown and grown?

Do your bangs hang low?

Do your bangs hang low, do you comb them down for show?

And if someone cut them off, would you ever be consoled?

Can you touch them to your shoulder, if you bend your head real low?

Do your bangs hang low?

I'm almost certain that this song applies here.

Be Bold

As per the first entry, why is this listed as bands and not fringe? Thus, I moved it to what the entire world (minus one country) knows it as. No disrespect intended by this, I just figured that the majority of viewers would be stumped trying to work out what's going on when looking for this article. Jachin 09:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Jesus effing christ what an argument to have! I am from the UK, hence would prefer fringe, but how can you presume to speak for the Chinese, Brazilians, Indians and Polynesians of this world? You are sure they use "fringe"

I'm South African, and over here we also call it a fringe... (Personally I'm sure most Aussies, New Zealanders and other members of the Commonwealth call them fringes... And I presume that the rest of the world, when speaking English, say fringes.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I would have thought there were better things to worry about. Such as this sentence "In the late 1980s and early 1990s, poofy, curly, teased fringes were in fashion." What's with the word "poofy"? 164.143.244.34 14:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Disagree, Bangs are not Fringe

I disagree, fringe and bangs are clearly not the same thing, as far as popular culture in the United States is concerned. The article here clearly states "except that it does not cover the eyes." In the US, when referring to bangs, it absolutely can cover the eyes (and is quite acceptable and I hung out with a girl who had this style last night). In fact, in the broadest sense I'd say bangs in the United States are loosely defined as curled or straight hair which covers some part of the forehead using hair across the full width of the forehead. It can include the eyes. The most typical definition being "hair with the ends pointed generally downward and when viewing a profile of a person curls outward over the forehead."

It seems to be a case where loosely translated fringe and bangs are the same but within their own culture usage there is a subtle but important difference and I think they should be separate articles. 216.253.200.145 18:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

IMO fringe can cover the eyes. It's called a long fringe. :P --pfctdayelise (talk) 12:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

$Insertformulahere$

Whoever wrote that fringes can't cover the eyes doesn't know what they're talking about... Fringes and 'bangs' are exactly the same thing.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

How come this page is called "Fringe"? Why shouldn't it be called "Bang"?

67.87.184.150 20:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought fringe was the correct term and bang was more of a slang term. *shrug* I don't really mind where it is. Liam Markham 12:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The thing is that most of the world says Fringe instead of 'bangs'. It's only Americans and Canadians who call it that.--Zimbabwe for the British 17:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be no evidence that "most of the world" uses fringe instead of bangs, beyond the word of this "Zimbabwe for the British" user's word. The links cited in the article do not specify what most of the world uses, only that UK and Americans use different terms, and are inappropriately sourced as evidence that "most of the world" calls it fringe. Indeed, one of the links is simply to some forum of people arguing over the term. Someone needs to provide definitive evidence of what the majority term is, or else give both terms equal credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.61.224 (talk) 05:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Can someone explain to me why an entry on bangs has been changed to fringe? Great, they call bangs in the UK "fringe." Guess who else calls fringe "bangs?" All of North America, including Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.200.117 (talk) 04:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Should be bangs

For Americans seeking information, this article should be changed to "bangs" rather than "fringe." Fringe can be referenced, but should be excluded beyond that. This is wikipedia.com. It is not wikipedia.co.uk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.200.117 (talk) 04:58, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Just going to point out that it's not wikipedia.us either 124.148.216.40 (talk) 12:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Look up at the top...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bangs_%28hair%29#Bangs.3F.21.3F

I should, of course, point out how rude it is to assume that .com is purely US-ian. It's also quite rude that the US government has chosen the domain level .gov for its government web pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.181.60 (talk) 03:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Givwn that '.org' is not country specific, and that Wikipedia's policy is that it's global, not US-centric and really, that's all that matters. If we can agree that this isn't just for American users, then the next point is to ask "How many countries are there that use the word 'Fringe', and how many are there that use 'Bangs'?" I think that as both terms are used, BOTH should be at the top - I just wonder which one should be first? Given that a greater amount of countries and cultures use 'Fringe' then that should go first. However, I'm waiting for someone else to come along who will insist it should be 'Bangs', then another for Fringe', etc., etc... groovygower (talk) 02:54, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Both terms are needed

The problem

Some considerations:

• Bangs is obscure to a UK reader. I arrived here to find out what it meant. Because it's used here, I found out.
• Bangs is standard in North America. We don't know who else does or doesn't use it. Other countries tend to use some mixture of US and UK vocabulary, so it seems likely that some countries will use bangs and some will use fringe.
• Given that the population of the US is only something like 250 or 300 million, fewer than half of whom have English as their first language, US speakers are unlikely to be a majority of English speakers. Just a larger minority than British speakers are.
• Readers will search for either term, depending where they're from and why they're searching. Some, like me, will have intentionally searched for the "foreign" one.
• If the two are not synonyms, the differences need clarifying. If that's not possible because of disagreement about whether they're the same, then the disagreeement's existence is a piece of information belonging in the article.
• As the article stands, the grammar is a mess in many places where it tries to use bangs (plural) and fringe (singular) in the same sentence.
• If only one term is used, the article will have geographical bias towards the countries which use that term. So for neutrality, both are needed.

Suggested solution

Assuming the distinction between the two can be clarified but is not huge:

• Rename the article Bangs, fringe, and redirect both bangs and fringe to it.
• Include a general section containing information that's indisputably applicable to both. Use bangs or fringes early on, then refer to them and they as much as possible. Avoid repeatedly using one term without the other.
• Include a section Fringe versus bangs or similar, mentioning (i) the different UK and US usage, and (ii) the differences of meaning if any.
• In the list of hairstyles, include both the US terms which refer to bangs, and the UK ones which refer to fringe. Where they're equivalent, say so. Where they're not, explain both.

It doesn't make sense to have two sides each protesting "But why doesn't the article use the term that's common in my country?". Both terms are relevant, and the difference of usage is surely one of the pieces of information that belongs in the article. Musiconeologist (talk) 00:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

As this article was written in US english first, and then changed to UK english, the original terminology was restored. The page should be moved back to bangs (as it was originally written, as per the URL..and history). 2.222.152.109 (talk) 07:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)21/10/13

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Speedily closed and relisted (non-admin closure) Red Slash 16:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

---

Fringe (hair) → Bangs (hair) – Was originally Bangs, and then moved without debate on this talk page (at least as I can see). 2.219.46.24 (talk) 09:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose, per WP:COMMONALITY. I'm from the United States, where "bangs" is the usual term. But "fringe" is fairly familiar as a secondary term here (while my understanding is that the reverse isn't true in most of the English-speaking world), making it more recognizable to the site's international readership. This is why I corrected the 2006 copy-and-paste move instead of undoing it. —David Levy 10:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• I stumbled on this today. I have never before heard bangs called a "fringe". I'm from Canada. I have no opinion on the move or on the cause of my ignorance. Srnec (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose - Both 'Bangs' and 'Fringe' are used in North America, but 'Bangs' isn't used outside of North America. WP:NC states Recognisability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject will recognise. "Fringe" is the most recognisable name throughout the English speaking world. Also "bangs" is more of a colloquial word, whereas "fringe" is more formal; this is an encyclopaedia, we should use formal wording as it is more professional. IJA (talk) 14:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  I agree with most of what you wrote, but I'm curious as to what makes 'bangs' "more of a colloquial word" and 'fringe' "more formal". —David Levy 14:37, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Support per WP:ENGVAR. If the article did start with one variation of english, why not keep it that way. It appears that someone was WP:BOLD and changed it from the original version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.46.24 (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  WP:ENGVAR doesn't advise us to always retain an article's original English variety, regardless of good reasons not to. Did you read the above discussion (wherein justification for the change is provided)?
  Also, please note that supporting your own move request (by essentially reiterating your original rationale) won't help, irrespective of whether you sign your post. —David Levy 15:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  --Sorry, I thought it was a given I support my own idea! Is there a wiki-split-personality policy? Didn't mean to not sign, I often forget to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.46.24 (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

  Yes, it's obvious that you support your own idea. It's okay to say so explicitly, but please be careful to acknowledge that you're the same person. (Wikipedia:Sock puppetry is a relevant policy. It focuses mainly on the use of multiple account names / IP addresses, as simply omitting a signature is unlikely to have the effect in question.) —David Levy 21:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

• Strong support per WP:RETAIN and WP:ENGVAR. Red Slash 16:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • On second thought, I'm just gonna revert and relist. Red Slash 16:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

RM

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page from its original position, Bangs (hair), to the title Fringe (hair). Additionally, there was no consensus that national varieties of English are not at stake (WP:ENGVAR). Thus, per WP:RETAIN, the page has been returned to Bangs (hair). Dekimasuよ! 16:38, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

---

Bangs (hair) → Fringe (hair) – Someone boldly moved this page from Bangs (hair) to Fringe (hair), apparently in violation of WP:RETAIN. An RM was filed to move it back to the original title, Bangs (hair). I carried out the move speedily in order to re-file this request. I'm not sure what justification if any there is to override WP:RETAIN, but if anyone wants to present such evidence, they are welcome to. I am not supporting this move request. Red Slash 16:57, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

• David Levy, Srnec, IJA...
• Oppose per WP:RETAIN. The article began at "bangs" and should stay there. Fringe isn't used in North America, and is not a common phrase as others have tried to claim. Hot Stop talk-contribs 17:58, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
• Support

Catalan: franja (fringe)

Danish: frynser (fringe)

Spanish: Flequillo (fringe)

Esperanto: franĝo (fringe)

French: La frange (fringe)

Italian: La frangia (fringe)

Norwegian: Pannelugg (fringe)

Portuguese: Franja (fringe)

International English: fringe

The word "bangs" is not particularly well-known in the English-speaking world outside of two countries in North America. The word bangs is a more recent derived word, I suspect, and North American slang, as opposed to the older established word "fringe". Finally, on a common sense note, and not to offend anyone: As much as I like many Americans, and much of US culture etc, I am very dissatisfied with the 'cultural imperialism' of people from the USA. Yes, they are probably more prolific on the Internet, but they don't own it. Please accept that there is a world out there besides your own. --75.176.181.60 (talk) 03:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Why is the French/Danish/Italian/etc. term relevant? This is the English Wikipedia. In English, bangs and fringe are both equally valid depending on where someone is from. So per RETAIN, the article should stay at bangs (or more correctly move back, as people decided to move war during the discussion). Hot Stop talk-contribs 22:36, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

• Strong Support - per this and my previous argument in the RM above. IJA (talk) 10:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
• Strong support - Wikipedia is not exclusively American English. As a Brit, it took me AGES as a kid to work out what "bangs" exactly were supposed to be, I thought for at least a year that bangs were American curly fringes that banged against your head like door-knockers. The term "fringe" is much more widely known and recognised internationally. Mabalu (talk) 13:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose - Wikipedia is not exclusively British English either. As per per WP:RETAIN, and WP:ENGVAR we need to keep the diversity in Wikipedia. Getting off the high horse, I hadn't a clue what a "fringe" was, much like the other posters have said they didn't know what "bangs" were. As 75.176.181.60 pointed out though, Americans are more prolific on the internet, and if someone started this article in American English, it was probably partly for those prolific people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.91.173 (talk) 23:28, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

• Fringe (hair) is the far better title. "Bangs" is informal, colloquial, and problematically ambiguous with "bang" in other parts of the world. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Fringe is a better title to "you." Fringe may be just as informal and colloquial to others --8 March, 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.91.173 (talk) 09:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:RETAIN. Bangs is not informal or colloquial in American English. It is simply the American English word that refers to what British English speakers call "fringe". I had no idea what "fringe" was for many years, just as British English speakers do not know what "bangs" are. And just as "bangs" has other meanings, so does fringe. When Americans hear the word fringe, they think of Fringe (trim). There is no reason to favor one over the other, except that "bangs" was used first. So WP:RETAIN applies. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Just to respond to a couple of things (again, without trying to offend or cause a war!)... Fringe (trim) is entirely related to the same word applied to hair. You can see the ends of the tassels are more or less in a straight line. Much like the two current photos in this article. Also, bearing in mind my limited knowledge of hairstyling etc, I had always grown up to believe that a 'fringe' was a definite border laying on the forehead. A sideshade therefore was kinda fringe-less. I've noticed that 'bangs' is perhaps more loose with this definition. Compare this photo, which is described as "hairstyles with bangs" with either of the two in the current article.

The reason I included the other language definitions is because English is a more recent language, developed from other languages. In the case of 'fringe', the English word derives from the French word frenge (ultimately from Latin). This highlights the fact that the word bangs is wholly North American in origin. It probably comes from the description of horse hair (like pony-tail): descriptions of horse mane and cut horse tail hair was bangtail or bangtail, perhaps in the late 1800s.

The word 'fringe' is definitely not informal or colloquial. The word bangs certainly may have been slang originally, but given that it appears so widely used in North America, it has undoubtedly evolved beyond the status of mere slang. It still strikes me as more of a colloquialism though, given that it is confined almost exclusively to one region of the English-speaking world.

Another point about the naming of this article is that (as I've said above) the word bangs is not commonly known outside North America. Nor is it easy to work out if you are unfamiliar with the term. A fringe, however, since it is similar in meaning when applied to a haircut, would be easier to translate for most people from the North American continent, I would imagine. People outside North America wouldn't necessarily be able to work out the etymology of bangs and how it could possibly refer to a hairstyle, because the etymology is much more obscure or oblique. I have lived for several decades, and I've only understood what bangs means for about five years.

Ending on a slightly humorous note, and to highlight the prolificacy of US culture, I typed the word 'fringe' on its own into Google and clicked on images. Dozens and dozens of images of a certain TV show, but one of the first results I found relating to hair spoke about "fringed bangs hairstyles"! Searching for 'bangs' the same way produced, exclusively, images of hairstyles. --75.176.181.60 (talk) 17:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

It's not a new argument on this talk page, nor any talk page where there's a difference between American and British usage. If it started one way, and then was moved to appease one english speaking faction, then it should be moved back. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.91.173 (talk) 08:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

This move proposal should be relisted because I suspect systemic bias is interfering with a correct or appropriate decision.

The simple fact is that few people outside North America know what a "bangs" is. The word "fringe", however, is descriptive because of its common meaning: it is easier to work out what a fringe is.

Also, WP:RETAIN states:

With few exceptions (e.g. when a topic has strong national ties or a term/spelling carries less ambiguity), there is no valid reason for such a change.

I would suggest that the word "bangs" has strong regional ties (Canada/USA), and that WP:RETAIN logically supports the case for a rename. --75.176.181.60 (talk) 23:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

• I think that "bangs" and "fringe" are actually not equivalent. "Bangs" refers to locks, their uniform abrupt ends. Apparently is comes from a style of cut of the horse tail. "Fringe" does not necessarily require "bangs". "Fringe" refers to the edge of hair that borders or frames the face. It may use bangs, or it may use a graduated cut or upturned hair of mixed length, a fashion of the 1980s. Of course, the overlap is huge. I think that neither deserves its own article, and that both should be placed in wider context at hairstyle. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:32, 14 April 2014 (UTC)