This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Gemology and Jewelry: Jewelry Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gemology and JewelryWikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryTemplate:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryGemology and Jewelry Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Jewelry subpage. Fashion Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merged with silk knot.[[User:Zhengfu|Zhengfu (talk)]] 15:37:58, 2005-07-27 (UTC)

"An alternative type of cufflink is the cheaper silk knot, which are also known as monkey's fists, a Knapton's Knuckle or Turk's head." I am going to change this, as I have never heard silk knots referred to as Monkey's fists, or Turk's Heads, or Knapton's Knuckle. As a Boy Scout, I am aware that these are the same knots used to make silk knots, but they are not referred to by their knot type, so I will adjust it to say that these are those knots, but not that people actually call them that. In other words, no one says that their shoes are tied in an overhand knot followed by a bow knot, they are simply tied. Does that make sense? Please show me if I am wrong with references, I can't find any.

Also, I can't find a Knapton's Knuckle anywhere on the internet, so I removed it. I've never heard of it, and can't find it on Google or any knot sites. If it is true, I will gladly admit I am wrong- but I think it needs to be sourced. This article, I think, could benefit from a more sartorial viewpoint and less of a cufflink salesman perspective, but it's getting there.Coemgenv (talk) 15:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All that talk about iKuffs looks a lot like an advert to me.

Seconded. Astroturf!

This page has quite a lot of information, yet the article on cuff is almost blank - Matthew238 02:18, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

22/2/07 It would be good to see some more seperate articles on the cufflink designers.

The first photograph should be replaced: it is a grave sartorial solecism to wear cufflinks with single cuffs...

A single-cuff with cufflinks is not to my taste either, but the dress-code sometimes mandates it... remember that it is incongruous to wear a double-cuff with a cravate, but when wearing a cravate, links or studs would be far more appropriate than buttons. Links that are fastening single cuffs are not in themselves a "grave sartorial solecism", but if there is choice in the matter I would sooner wear the double cuffs and links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.59.43.240 (talk) 16:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. Members of the clergy also frequently wear single-cuffs with the mitre collar, which is usually single cuff. I know because I bought a clerical shirt for my wedding and used a boss wing from Brooks Brothers. Single-cuff with wing collar is actually the traditional formal choice, and therefore is sartorially preferred. However, this is more of an exception than a rule, obviously.Coemgenv (talk) 15:11, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article says that silk knots are made from Turk's Head knots, but the article for Monkey's Fist knots says the same thing. Which is it?J.J. Bustamante 22:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So a Turk's Head knot is usually wrapped around something like a post, or is tied two-dimensionally in a circle, as seem on the article page. If it is pulled taut on itself, it becomes a Monkey's fist.^[1] I've updated the article to omit this confusion. a Turk's Head can't work as a cufflink by what I just said, but it can be tightened down into a ball. I used to love making those things. Not that hard. We called them "volley ball knots" until a Scoutmaster corrected us. Hardly an academic point there, sorry.Coemgenv (talk) 15:03, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems to have a constant habit of turning into an ad. originally it was through people adding "external links" to retailer websites; now there's a section saying "leading retailers of cufflinks are...". i dont think we need a list of retailers for cufflinks in an encyclopedia. it seems like a silly ad.

I'm gonna go ahead and "be bold" and delete the lot. I'm posting here to make it very clear that I'm doing this so that someone can reverse if it they feel it's inappropriate to delete it. however, please post here with your justification if you plan to reverse my deletion (Otherwise i'll just assume it was an advertiser who did it and we'll end up in an edit war) Hugzz 22:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Following this, the mentions of "Baade II" look a lot like ads and don't add anything informative to the article (other than what company would be happy to take your money). I'm going to delete those references. The references to Cigar Aficionado might also fall under this category, but provide enough information that I'll leave them for now. Reid burkland (talk) 04:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I second the description of this article as "magazine-like". Sentences like:

Thanks to their gently curved but rigid shank, dumbbell style cufflinks deliver unrivaled ease of attachment and removal, a pragmatic asset in the context of Yankee ingenuity and America’s no-nonsense man.

That might be an interesting take on Americans' fashion preferences, but it's not verifiable, encyclopedic information. Presumably there is another article for properly sourced opinions regarding the underpinnings of American fashion, which can be linked to as appropriate. Oconnor663 (talk) 00:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article would benefit from some photos of individual cufflinks (and silk knots), not just those installed in cuffs. -- ToE 00:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The area titled "Cufflinks Today" sounds dangerously close to a sales pitch, and it doesn't look as if any of the information is sourced. One sentence that stands out in particular is:

" the mere fact that a man uses such an accessory says a great deal about his attention to detail"

That is blatant opinion unless some kind of respectable study can be found that men who wear cufflinks have more attention to detail. Sounds like someone trying to sell cufflinks if you ask me. Patrick of J (talk) 23:43, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, trimmed Johnbod (talk) 03:26, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]