Talk:Justacorps

"oriental servant"

That seems like a very racist description, is it a quote? If so, it doesn't appear marked as such. 199.193.235.226 (talk) 22:17, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Where

The article talks about the garment's "French origin", but it never says where-all it was really worn. I notice that one reference is about Stuart England, not France. —Ruakh_TALK 20:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

"incredibly uncomfortable"

It's been here for a year and a half, but is that description really from a neutral PoV? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.15.229.221 (talk) 14:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

"Most common accepted origin"

Edit summaries from @PCC556:

1. "Added more information regarding the origins of the justacourps"
2. 1185908169 "Eliminated some information regarding the origins of the justacourps which wrongly attributed the origins of the piece to Charles II despite it clearly originated in France from the previously worn cassack.It also wrongly cites sources throought blogs that don't contain the claimed information at all"
3. 1185909751 "Eliminated some information regarding the origins of the justacourps which wrongly attributed the origins of the piece to Charles II despite it clearly originated in France from the previously worn cassack.It also wrongly cites sources throught blogs that don't contain the claimed information at all and eliminated a pictures of garments that have nothing to do with the justacourps but show other garments"
4. "... Restored to previous because they deleted the most common accepted origin of justacourps that was backed with multiple references"

Apart from the lack of evidence supplied to suggest there is any "most common accepted origin", these edits do not appear to be improvements. Just as an example, re edit number 2, above:

• The article in no way attributed "the origins of the justacorps to Charles II". There were sourced paras about his promotion of it in England. That's not saying the garment was not used in France or elsewhere. The only "blogs" citing this was a course website on the Restoration written by an academic belonging to and hosted by the Central Washington University:

1. Robinson, Scott R. "Restoration". Costume History. Archived from the original on 2016-08-16. It was also cited by a standard text in the field
2. Motta, Giovanna (2018). Fashion through History: Costumes, Symbols, Communication. Vol. II. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 39–40. ISBN 9781527511965. and
3. Tortora, Phyllis G.; Eubank, Keith (2010). Survey of Historic Costume: A history of Western dress. New York: Fairchild Publications. ISBN 978-1-56367-806-6. See also next sub-section below. AukusRuckus (talk) 12:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

And seeming copyvio

On the other hand, PCC556, your edits included a copy-paste copyright violation from a French article at https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/cd/1998-n55-cd1043339/7918ac/ which you inserted wholesale from a machine (I assume) translation into English of:

Sous le règne de Louis XIII, la «casaque», vêtement qui a l'apparence d'une courte cape atteignant les hanches, est en vogue pour se protéger des intempéries. Les soldats auront vite fait de constater que la casaque se prête mal au maniement du mousquet ou de l'épée. Les militaires modi fieront ce vêtement pour l'ajuster au torse et lui ajouteront des manches. De ces mutations naîtra un habit procurant une plus grande liberté de mouvements et qui prendra le nom imagé de «juste-au-corps». Ce vêtement aux origines guerrières plaira à Louis XIV. La sanction royale assurera au justaucorps un succès fulgurant auprès de la population civile. À partir de 1670, le jusfirmation de Furetière qui veut que lejustaucorps «ne se portoit autrefois que par les gens de guerre». Ainsi, en 1662, le sergentmajor de la garnison de Montréal, Lambert Closse, possédait une «casaque de façon de juste au corps».

The justacorps evolved from the european "casaque", a garment that resembled a short cape reaching to the hips which became fashionable during Louis XIII times for protection from the elements. Soldiers soon discovered that the casaque was unsuitable for handling muskets and swords. The military modified the garment to fit the torso and arranged it for buttoning. The short sleeves were retained, but they were lengthened by the addition of a piece which could be worn as a turned-back cuff. These mutations gave rise to a garment offering greater freedom of movement, which came to be known by the colorful name of "juste-au-corps". This garment with its warlike origins appealed to Louis XIV. The royal sanction ensured the justaucorps' dazzling success with the civilian population. From 1670, Furetière's jusfirmation states that the justaucorps "used to be worn only by people of war". In 1662, for example, the sergeant-major of the Montreal garrison, Lambert Closse, wore a "casaque de façon de juste au corps"

—Francis Back (Autumn 1998). "Un justaucorps du règne de Louis XIV" Cap-aux-Diamants: La revue d'histoire du Québec (55): 54–55 —Machine translation included in this edit by PCC556 (talk)

Not only a copyvio, but it in no way negates the claim that Charles II introduced the justacorps into England.

Another editor has queried or expressed concern at your edits and one other editor previously reverted your changes. Your latest reversion undid lots of unrelated article improvements. This is now becoming disruptive and may almost be on the edge of WP:edit warring. Please do not revert again without discussing here. I'd be happy to work towards some mutually acceptable form for the article. Thanks. AukusRuckus (talk) 12:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

A further editor also commented with this edit 1189963726: "Please check what you are deleting before performing mass deletions. None of these information contradicts the French origin of the justacorps, and all have been verified as academic sources." I especially draw your attention to "None of [the] information contradicts the French origin of the justacorps, and all have been verified as academic sources." The lead (introductory paragraph) says: "It is of French origin", and Louis XIV is mentioned several times. What do you see as the actual problem? AukusRuckus (talk) 12:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)