Talk:Boxer briefs

Countries

"...a compromise between the two main types of male underwear in the United Kingdom, United States and Canada." Shouldnt the countries be in alphabetical order? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.103.136 (talk • contribs) 22 June 2006

Manufacturers

Does this article really need every manufacturer under the sun listed? JonEastham 17:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

• Actually, there are quite a few missing. We should feel lucky, I suppose...Weirdoactor 18:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks like advertising to me. Too much like a list too. 70.48.179.36 22:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate content

Is there a valid reason for including a photo of an alleged 13 year old child in boxerbriefs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.81.135.206 (talk) 14:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

As well, does this page really need five pictures of men in boxer briefs, with one being a teenage boy and another of a guy's clearly outlined and half erect penis? 70.67.2.56 (talk) 01:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

This is an article on boxer briefs. I don't see why there's any reason not to have variations in style and function shown here. —Peco! Peco!^TALK 16:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Delete ALL the pictures of the men wearing boxer-briefs, and instead... upload more pictures of the different styles of boxer-briefs. I mean pictures of ONLY the clothing. There should also be a section of the evolution of boxer briefs. This sounds dumb, but it is true. They were originally available in only Classic White, and then solid colors, and now there are patterns and designs similar to boxer-shorts. Also, what happened with the section where it said that Boxer-Briefs have had a rise in popularity over the past decade, and also in various countries????? The number of Boxer-Brief sales is now tied with Boxer-Shorts. And no I don't have any sources to provide. In-Correct (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Meinboxerbriefs.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Meinboxerbriefs.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Nonsense

"Boxer briefs were first sold around 1990[citation needed]. Prior to this time, only a few underwear manufacturers made boxer briefs, but they were actually called mid-length briefs or thigh-length briefs." So, prior to 1990 a few manufacturers were making boxer briefs without selling them? --81.132.134.191 (talk) 22:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't make any sense and it was tagged citation needed for years so I've just gone ahead and deleted it. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 01:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Boxer Brief were NOT NEW new in the 1990's but were actually called mid-length or thigh-length briefs/underwear

Information needs to be fixed. Anyone can grab a quote from somewhere, it dosnt mean that the information is actually true. It depends what you actually call boxer briefs, and NEW. Boxer briefs up to above the knees existed and were an "older" style of underwear, but they were not not tight.

All the "designer" did was made them shorter, and made them tighter/elasticized like tighty "whities" that were popular until the mid 1990's and which were in style since the late 1960's. By the mid to late late 1980's the close to knee length, underwear that didn't have a a lot of elasticity to them (and became droopy quickly), they were seen as grandfather underwear (like long johns), as opposed to the tight fitting clothes of the 1970's/ 80's. I actually saw a pair that was bought for a family member as a kid and it was not worn, as it was seen as antique, old mens clothes. I was shocked to see them later as high fashion. By the mid 80's they were seen as old fashion mens cloths

He did not invent anything, he shortened a older style of mens underwear and made it more elasticized/ tighter like a brief.

They are sometimes called "trunks" in the United Kingdom and Australia. and you can add english commonwealth countries. Versions of these were around since the 1950's as swimwear, before speedos.

There seems to be a continuation of trunks/swimwear/ boxer briefs and the other side speedos/ tight briefs.

This line that was written and removed is 1000% percent true. "Prior to this time, only a few underwear manufacturers made boxer briefs, but they were actually called mid-length briefs or thigh-length briefs."Starbwoy (talk) 18:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Fit

According to this article, boxer briefs are looser than 'classic' briefs. However, in my experience they are both equally snug. Perhaps some people are wearing the wrong size. BlackAdvisor (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hipsters?

is it worth mentioning that some UK companies market them under the title "hipsters"? rossb (talk) 22:43, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

As Swimwear

I have inserted a subsection on the swimwear version in this article because I think it could most likely be found. These are made out of spandex or nylon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teknikingman (talk • contribs) 08:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

@Teknikingman: Do you have any sources which meet this criterion which support the use of "aquashorts" to denote boxer-brief-style swimwear? A google image search doesn't count, and all I could find was marketing material from Speedo etc. The material you've added to the article is OK but without reference to reliable sources it will be removed. Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 10:11, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

This addition is new, I think I should have really worked on it in the sandbox, actually I am still learning these things, not to compose directly to publication where there is not time to satisfy criteria.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Teknikingman (talk • contribs) 11:10, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

@Teknikingman: I think that working directly in article space is fine, even for things that are unfinished, as long as you base them on sources which you cite. There will always be other editors to build on your work! A couple of requests, though: please indent and sign your posts on talk pages. The latter you can do by appending four tildes (~~~~) to your message, which will add an automatic signature. Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 11:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

The citation now disagrees with the current article edition because one key point is that it is a bad idea to wear nylon underwear. roger that with signiture (see if it works)Teknikingman (talk) 11:33, 26 October 2019 (UTC) There are hundreds of online mentions denoting boxer style swimwear as aquashorts, but they are commercial, non commercial is scanty. There really is not much argument though. It means longer than swimtrunks but shorter than jammers.(Teknikingman (talk) 14:46, 26 October 2019 (UTC))

Yes, that's what I thought – I couldn't see anything that I thought was appropriate to use as a source. I suspect that you've looked deeper than I have, though. What's the most useful source that you managed to find? Wham2001 (talk) 18:57, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

There is a mention on trip advisor comparing the styles of form fitting swimwearI will continue to look.(Teknikingman (talk) 07:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC))

That's user-generated content, so we can't use it as a reference, I'm afraid. My conclusion after some searching yesterday is that "aquashorts" is a neologism to describe what used to be known as "swim trunks". There's nothing wrong with that, but until that usage is picked up by a reliable source like a dictionary it probably doesn't need to be in a Wikipedia article. What might make sense is a redirect from Aquashorts to the swim trunks article, which I will go ahead and make. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Roger that, have a good one (Teknikingman (talk) 09:59, 29 October 2019 (UTC))

References

boxer briefs worn by women/girls

I have seen it in person the no fly kind is what they prefer Anayguy (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2020 (UTC) User:AnayguyAnayguy (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

@Anayguy: If you have a reliable source to that end then it could go into the article. Personal observation cannot be used as the basis for article content on Wikipedia: see our policy on original research. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 03:18, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

stores sells them  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anayguy (talk • contribs) 13:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC) 

sources www.girlsaskguys.com/fashion-style/q2322439-can-a-girl … and afbmt.com/before-bmt/meps-military-entrance-processin… https://www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q2322439-can-a-girl-wear-boxers-without-being-weird — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anayguy (talk • contribs) 13:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Those web pages are not suitable sources for use on Wikipedia. Please read the Wikipedia guideline on reliable sources - for this sort of material, reliable sources might be articles in reputable newspapers or (ideally) academic publications.

You should also indent your posts by prefixing them with colons - one more than the comment that you're replying to - and sign them with four tildes (~~~~). See here for a simple introduction to how to contribute to talk pages. Wham2001 (talk) 14:24, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Vandal

User 2001:14BB:A2:9BA2:149A:385:A26C:823B is insistent on posting a bizarrely inappropriate pic on this page. Please don’t let them get away with it BlackAdvisor (talk) 15:51, 13 November 2020 (UTC)