Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bmwoodwo, Jgomeskuehner, Bilschne. Peer reviewers: Andhenne, Jelcohen.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Function vs. Fashion[edit]

While the entirety of the page could use a revamp in terms of information, I also believe it would be helpful to include details on the distinction between platform shoes' function vs. fashion. While reading the article for platform shoes, I found myself interested in the purpose of their presence for different cultures and specifically who wears them, where and why. For example, the historic timeline jumps from "Ancient" to "Modern" to "1930s," which is confusing, but also neglects to identify their cultural influence beyond a few words like "enjoyed some popularity." Going through the "History" section of this page and accurately presented the timeline with engaging information about platform shoes' function and as a fashion trend will really help this improve this page!

Jelcohen (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oops I realized that I accidentally copyedited jelcohen's post... Anyway, this article was super cool. I loved learning about how platofrm shoes have evolved with a pique in the 1970s! I think that more information should be added about the older, early 20th century versions of platforms. I also want to see more information about the resurgence of platforms in the late-2010s, with brands like FENTY Puma glamorizing platform sneakers, like the FENTY Creepers that Rihanna launches seasonally (I love mine!). In addition to how this brand revived platform shoes for our generation recently, I suggest talking about how other brands like Steve Madden and Vans have started producing this style and how people wear them. It was interesting to learn that platforms are fetish objects, so perhaps more information on that would be good. Andhenne (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Let's have some better pictures of platform shoes[edit]

There are no pictures of classic bright colored high-heeled platform shoes from the early 1970s that everyone used to wear to discos. Someone needs to provide these pictures. Keraunos (talk) 03:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added this picture to the article of a classic 1970s men’s platform shoe for going out dancing at a disco from an Internet wardrobe costume rental site: [1] Now, THAT is a REAL authentic platform shoe from the 1970s like the kind that everyone used to wear to go dancing at discos! Keraunos (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What about fish tank shoes?[edit]

The shoes with the fish tank in the heel or sometimes front part are real, usually as retro-style novelty-wear (Google search and see for yourself), though I suspect the kind with actual living fish inside may never have existed. Should the article mention them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.85.190 (talk) 08:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notable[edit]

Is this really significant enough to need a paragraph in the article, although the reference is nice (but what company did this?)? (Moved to talk) RJFJR (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In February 2006, a Texas-based company opened a website, claiming to be the legitimate successor to the original Kork-Ease company. Their site claims that the original company had been founded in 1953, implying further that their platform sandals also originated in 1953. This is somewhat suspect: aside from being less than entirely consistent with Linda O'Keeffe's book, Shoes : A Celebration of Pumps, Sandals, Slippers & More (New York: Workman, 1996), pp 388–9, it further implies that the footgear in question was introduced just as the last gasps of the brief 1930s and 1940s platform shoe fads were waning, survived for a decade and a half in almost complete obscurity, then rocketed to ubiquity at the beginning of the 1967 platform fad, only to be forced into obscurity, and near-total extinction by successive waves of the fad by the late 1970s.

Also this (although if we created a section on notable manufacturers of platform shoes it would belong there)? RJFJR (talk) 19:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Buffalo Boots is a brand whose platform models were popular, especially in Europe (notably Germany and Scandinavia), from the mid 1990s to the early 2000s.

Apparently nonsensical statement[edit]

"During the Qing dynasty, aristocrat Manchu women wore a form of platform shoe with a separate high heel, a style that was later adopted in Europe during the 1590s.[2]"

So this style was "later" adopted in Europe during the 1590's, from the Qing dynasty which did not commence until 1644 ?Eregli bob (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Modern Late90's to Early 2000's[edit]

Small text"Britain generally is not as concerned with women's feet appearing as small as possible;[citation needed] the long pointed shoes of the early 2000s, giving an elongated look to the foot, have been more popular in the US than in the UK."

↑- This part makes no Sense. It implies that in America we like women to appear to have small feet (this maybe, I never heard it and there is no citation but idk). however it then states that the popular Trend was pointed toe shoes that Elongate womens feet. This is contradictory. It may just be he put the wrong countries in parts or phrased it wrong, But probably just has no idea what they are talking about


"The trend re-established itself in the late 1990s and early 2000s with a much higher threshold of what was considered outrageous: parents of 1997 to 2004 typically thought nothing of buying their preschool daughters and sons platform sandals that parents of 1973 would not have wanted their older children wearing"Small text

Actually in the late 90's - 2000's The popular styles were not high heeled "stripper" style shoes or any other real "shocking" heels etc. The most popular styles were sneakers or "Doc Martin" style boots/shoes that were just like regular ones except with a thicker sole. These were often refered to as "Chunky" soled shoes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.11.91.140 (talk) 21:47, 4 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Platform shoe/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
In 1972 my partner (Joe Bascetta) and myself (Carole Reidford) created handmade platform shoes called Pelican Footwear. They were worn by David Johansen, David Bowie, Cyrinda Foxe, Cher, and many other notables. Pelican Footwear was featured in Life Magazine, Vogue, Interview, and The Village Voice, to name a few.

The shoes were not only gorgeous, handpainted with glitter, rhinestones, and satin, but they were also comfortable. We researched feet and footwear, and made the shoes with resilient insoles, ample toe-spring, and rubber soles. In addition, the shoes were the first to be made of molded plastic, a manufacturing method that is now mainstream.

I would like to edit this article so as to add Pelican Footwear to the list of platform shoe makers, and to point out the innovations we made. We stopped making the shoes in 1974, and the few samples we have left are not for sale, so this is not a sales promotion of any kind. I just want to set the record straight. Reidford 01:19, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Substituted at 21:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the Wikipedia page as a whole, besides the external sources category, there is a lack of discussion about the media coverage/back lash around the platform shoes and social opinion, and uproar it may or may not have caused. Would you ever consider adding a category about media coverage and opposing views about the platform shoe over its history and development? I feel that touching on some of the sources at the bottom of the article would add more of a claim to the Wikipedia article as a whole. Jordynh (talk) 20:40, 5 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Platform shoe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 10 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ideas for what can be added[edit]

More could definitely be added to the section on platforms in ancient times such as: The Okobo (Japan) The Kabkab (Lebanon) The Paduka The Chopine

[1]

References

  1. ^ "The History of Platform Heels". Fabulous Platform Shoes. Retrieved 6 February 2018.

Fish Tanks And Light Bulbs On The Feet[edit]

I have removed an assertion which suddenly appeared here a few weeks ago which states that some people were wearing fish tanks (with live fish in them) on their feet in the 1970s - and lighted bulbs, which would have been impossible to engineer at the time. These 'facts' are based on an article which cites no reliable sources or documentary evidence. This has brought me into dispute with another editor. I would be grateful for the thoughts of other editors on this matter. I must admit to feeling slightly fazed and harassed by the actions of this editor, as the article in question does not meet Wikipedia's specifications.

(Ethel D (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 11:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree that the source does not appear reliable. As Talk:Platform_shoe#What_about_fish_tank_shoes? suggests, I think these may be urban myths. AJ2265 (talk) 11:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Could well be. It's not hard to find photos of platform fish with plastic fish in them, like here or here. These may be more modern send-ups of a legend of 70s shoes that never existed. And then you have reports like The Truth Behind the Infamous Fish Tank Platform Shoes. Given the hedonistic zeitgeist of the time, it seems plausible, but I don't think we'll ever know for certain unless someone comes up with a reliable photo or multiple, independent sources. In the 1970s, cell phones didn't exist yet, and while small cameras did exist, they were expensive items that were marketed as "spy cameras" and required film that was expensive. Most cameras were bulky, and weren't carried everywhere to record everything someone was doing. So a novelty shoe like this could have existed with no surviving photo, leaving behind just stories about it. So we probably shouldn't say that platform shoes with live fish existed in Wikipedia's voice based on that one article, unless the evidence gets stronger than this. But there do appear to be persistent rumors about it, or urban legends, or call it what you will, and it would be okay to say that, if there is sufficient independent sourcing to show that the rumors keep popping up: "Accounts of platform shoes with live fish in them have circulated[5][8], and manufacturers later reprised these accounts by marketing shoes with plastic fish[12] but the original accounts may be urban legends[15]." Something like that would be acceptable, but would require appropriate referencing to fill in those blank refs. AJ2265, I'm not a habitue at this article so doubt I'll be back, but if you are, feel free to take it from here (or not). Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories