Jump to content

Talk:Yoga pants: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Reverted 1 edit by 172.56.30.191 (talk): WP:EVADE (User:Fangusu). (TW)
@Ivanvector: You are not a bot. You are a human. This means that you are perfectly capable of disobeying Wikipedia's rules. Why don't you just make an exception to my talk page posts then?!
Line 42: Line 42:


[[User:Apanas13|Apanas13]] ([[User talk:Apanas13|talk]]) 21:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
[[User:Apanas13|Apanas13]] ([[User talk:Apanas13|talk]]) 21:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

== Edit request ==

{{edit semi-protected}}
Please restore [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Yoga_pants&oldid=706655300 this revision]. The person who undid it has not explained its flaws. Also, there is no evidence that yoga pants are actually worn for sexual titillation. They are worn for physical comfort. [[Special:Contributions/134.154.255.3|134.154.255.3]] ([[User talk:134.154.255.3|talk]]) 00:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:45, 25 February 2016

Bizarre Factoid

Currently this article contains the sentence: "Other types of yoga pants can be made out of cotton which was discovered in a cave near Tehuacán, Mexico, and dates back to around 5800 BC."

I'm a little confused at this. Is it saying that cotton was discovered in a cave, that the fact that yoga pants can be made out of cotton was discovered in a cave, or that yoga pants can be made out of some cotton found in a particular cave? All of these except the last seem incorrect, and the last seems irrelevant. --Earin (t) 17:11, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Circular explanation

The article contains the phrase "Many schools have already banned the wearing of these pants, because they do not follow the dress code." If the pants did not follow dress code, weren't they already banned? Or did they ban them using some other disciplinary instrument? Mattman00000 (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


removed irrelevant lawsuit info that read like an ad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3032:C3C0:6C84:74E3:B323:5D9F (talk) 03:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lawsuit Section Tone

This reads like it was written from Lululemon's press release. - unsigned

overly detailed and citation issues

This page has too many obscure and irrelevant details. Also, there's a glut of citations, many of which are coming from style/fashion blogs. Battleghost (talk) 10:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of "Controversy" section & other edits

These edits were made as part of an assignment for a college junior composition class.

The controversy section and subheadings were added to highlight the public response to the growing popularity of wearing yoga pants in public settings. Individual school instances were added to highlight that the bans are nationwide and to demonstrate the fact that the discrimination against female student's choice of clothing perpetuates rape culture and gender policing. Also, the addition of the "business" subheading was added to show that wearing yoga pants outside of the gym is not limited to young, school-aged females. Other edits included removal of "Brands" section due to the impossibility to list each store and designer, therefore seemed biased and promotional. Sentences with irrelevant information were also deleted. Addition of sentences regarding statistics of yoga pants growth were also made.


Apanas13 (talk) 21:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Please restore this revision. The person who undid it has not explained its flaws. Also, there is no evidence that yoga pants are actually worn for sexual titillation. They are worn for physical comfort. 134.154.255.3 (talk) 00:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]