| Revision as of 23:30, 13 November 2012 edit203.213.90.41 (talk) →is it just about which fork to use?: links← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:42, 13 November 2012 edit undo203.213.90.41 (talk) →is it just about which fork to use?: updNext edit → | ||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
| in summary, if i have anything constructive to add it is that maybe there should be a link to 'politeness' and 'morality' on the page, perhaps ']' and ']' (though i think parts of those pages miss or misrepresent the broader point regarding the rationale behind these customs and attitudes, as hinted at in the 'manners' section on this page - that most, if not all, forms of polite behaviour are rooted not in arbitrary BS (like class or religion) but ancient axiomatic rationale: infidelity leads to the spread of STDs and hungry children, starting from the inside is just silly, usury is stealing, not taking the cookie from the cookie jar means we can play 'i spy' instead, hungry peasants start fires, no-one likes a sweaty bench, people who don't like you won't be inclined to help you, it's good to be the king, and so on... see ]), and i'd also point to my post on the talk page of ] regarding that page, a disamb. page and that ']' also needs some attention. (uh http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Manners#how_about_a_disambig_page) ] (]) 21:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC) | in summary, if i have anything constructive to add it is that maybe there should be a link to 'politeness' and 'morality' on the page, perhaps ']' and ']' (though i think parts of those pages miss or misrepresent the broader point regarding the rationale behind these customs and attitudes, as hinted at in the 'manners' section on this page - that most, if not all, forms of polite behaviour are rooted not in arbitrary BS (like class or religion) but ancient axiomatic rationale: infidelity leads to the spread of STDs and hungry children, starting from the inside is just silly, usury is stealing, not taking the cookie from the cookie jar means we can play 'i spy' instead, hungry peasants start fires, no-one likes a sweaty bench, people who don't like you won't be inclined to help you, it's good to be the king, fool me twice - shame on me, and so on... see ]), and i'd also point to my post on the talk page of ] regarding that page, a disamb. page and that ']' also needs some attention. (uh http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Manners#how_about_a_disambig_page) ] (]) 21:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:42, 13 November 2012
 | Sociology B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Philosophy: Ethics C‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Attention from an Expert - Tag added
This tag has been added because the Etiquette page seems a bit vague and limited, and because several other articles exist for synonyms to etiquette, which theoretically could be merged to create an excellent and informative article.
Specifically, "manners," "table manners," "Politeness," "social graces," and "deportment" each have dedicated articles, when in fact, they're exactly the same topic. I'd like to add "good form" to the list. In fact, perhaps there's a list to make as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wipfeln (talk • contribs) 03:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Australian Example
I have never heard of the last woman to take a piece of food being called a "spinster". I've lived in Victoria, and New South Wales, in Australia, for 25 years.
Louis XIV
Louis XIV did not write a book on etiquette. I rewrote the Louis XIV sentence. Wetman 18:11, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Etiquette category
I have created an Etiquette category and added all pages on wikipedia with Etiquette in their title to it. I am not sure if the link should be displayed at the top of the article. Should all of the articles at the bottom be in the etiquette category? Ravedave 05:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
"Common Norms of Ettiquette" Section
I submit that the "Common Norms of Ettiquette" section be removed. It doesn't further the interests of this article, and it flies in the face of what the introduction establishes, promoting a particular view of a particular type of ettiquette rather than observing the plurality of ettiquettes. Or perhaps it could be cited to a particular text and author and presented as simply the viewpoint of a particular authority on one culture's ettiquette. As it is now I'd argue that it does more harm to the integrity of this article than help.
--Techgeist 07:38, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree. I also know several cultures where the examples don't fit. (-T) 62.241.251.115 15:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
After seeing no arguments against or objections to my previous suggestion, I am taking it upon myself to delete said section, which I feel harms the integrity of this wikipedia page. I'm going to paste the removed text here so it can be referenced for future discussions.
Techgeist 02:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Removed Text: Though etiquette depends on culture, some expectations are widely shared.
Say "please" when you need something from someone else, even if this person is your subordinate.
Say "thank you" to people who help you, even if this person is your subordinate. Often, writing a note of thanks gains you significant emotional capital.
Say "I'm sorry" when you have injured someone inadvertently, or when you have injured someone intentionally and need to reconcile.
When someone has injured you, but says "I'm sorry," try to forgive the person. You can do this by saying, "I forgive you," or "Thanks for apologizing."
Use insulting humour very sparingly. While common in entertainment, many people find insulting humour to be offensive and hurtful. Often, you can use your same skills at creating insults to create teasing compliments, which makes everyone feel good rather than bad.
Do not abuse other people, especially those weak or disadvantaged.
Manners And Etiquette
They are the same thing, no?--GorillazFan Adam 23:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
They are two different elements. Etiquette are a set of rules established to determine appropriate behaviors. "Manners" describe someone utilizing proper etiquette. www.passportforsuccess.com
I suggest to merge 'manners' into this article since 'manners' has fewer content and it is just a habit of 'etiquette'. --Octra Bond (talk) 19:53, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- imo, manners means habits. when one uses prescribed or common social conventions, etiquette, habitually, it becomes one's manner. when we do not employ 'proper' etiquette, we are asked to 'mind our manners'. phrases such as "Where are your manners?" are simply idiomatic (as in that it was probably the subject's obnoxious mannerisms on display that prompted the phrase). perhaps put "good manners => etiquette" and "bad manners => faux pas" at the top of the 'manners' page, or similar. btw, i think that page might have been written with children in mind. i might go mention that there.203.213.90.41 (talk) 11:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Authority on Etiquette
(Näively, ) What constitutes a reliable source or authority on (popular) etiquette? Jethero 03:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Specifically, if an article claims a particular action is part of a common etiquette, and there is a dispute, what type of sources should be employed to resolve the dispute? Jethero 03:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Keep in mind that etiquette, (business, social, wedding, technology, international, etc.) is contextual, and although there are core elements that have endured over history, it is important to understand the context of the situation when initiating the best course of action to be taken. www.passportforsuccess.com
Took out the Australian/spinster garbage. Not true at all.
- "As noted above, across the world, Debrett's is considered by many to be the arbiter of etiquette; its guides to manners and form have long been and continue to be the last word among polite society" - this seems like a plug: the 'debretts' links to a similarly named website, and i'm not sure what is meant by 'as noted above', i can't see any other reference, besides those added under 'further reading' and 'external links'... so i'm gonna take it out. i'm pretty sure straight up plugs are against the rules - i'll leave the lower links fsr... ah 4got to leave a comment sry
- PS there is a debretts page but it barely rates above a plug itself. 203.213.90.41 (talk) 10:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Manners Section
The manners section contains a paragraph about American attitudes towards Etiquette
Many of the comments about etiquette probably are general attitudes towards etiquette rather than specifically American (certainly disparaging attitudes towards it exist in the UK too). Suggest this is rewritten to discuss various attitudes towards etiquette rather than making it specifically American.
Also to finish with the sentence
More advanced countries such as those of the EU have made such discrimination illegal and refusal of admission based on clothing or demeanour is a criminal offence.
hints that countries in the EU are more advanced than the US. This is a rather loaded comment that surely doesn't belong. Also which countries have this as a law? (Citation). And why does this make them more advanced?
Neilljones (talk) 15:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
ESSAY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.143.48.13 (talk) 09:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
is it just about which fork to use?
in regard to the use of the word etiquette, i'd say it can be used in reference to the polite or considerate fashion or convention in which to do anything that interacts with another person, directly or indirectly.
if you distinguish between prescribed etiquette, such as 'mrs gimblethwaite's guide for the comportment of polite young ladies' or 'forking in polite society', and the broader idea of 'common courtesy' (not 'Common Courtesy' or apparently respect), i'd direct you to the politeness page, where the author makes the point that different cultures have different standards of what is considered 'polite', and nailing down what courtesies are actually common may be difficult. or perhaps you distinguish between arbitrary or 'made-up' rules and rational behaviour or 'common sense', as in start on the outside and don't dip your testicles in the soup compared to women and children first, if it's yellow let it mellow, call the fire department, that sort of thing. well, firstly let me just say that i don't really credit the notion of 'common sense', in that wisdom of any kind is far from congenital - perhaps my meandering prose demonstrates that. but if you're talking about the social conventions that benefit both ourselves and wider society, irkn you're talking about morality, and that's just another word for SOCIALISM, so go back to your freaking commune, hippy.
in summary, if i have anything constructive to add it is that maybe there should be a link to 'politeness' and 'morality' on the page, perhaps 'respect' and 'rudeness' (though i think parts of those pages miss or misrepresent the broader point regarding the rationale behind these customs and attitudes, as hinted at in the 'manners' section on this page - that most, if not all, forms of polite behaviour are rooted not in arbitrary BS (like class or religion) but ancient axiomatic rationale: infidelity leads to the spread of STDs and hungry children, starting from the inside is just silly, usury is stealing, not taking the cookie from the cookie jar means we can play 'i spy' instead, hungry peasants start fires, no-one likes a sweaty bench, people who don't like you won't be inclined to help you, it's good to be the king, fool me twice - shame on me, and so on... see morality#Evolution), and i'd also point to my post on the talk page of manners regarding that page, a disamb. page and that 'mannerisms' also needs some attention. (uh http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Manners#how_about_a_disambig_page) 203.213.90.41 (talk) 21:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Categories: