Talk:Chinese button knot

This article does NOT describe the Chinese button knot ABoK 599, but entirely the diamond knot ABoK 787 which is different!

The statement "Chinese button knot is essentially a diamond knot where the lanyard loop is shortened to a minimum" is not true, and the image on the upper right even does not reflect this statement, because the lanyard loop in the image is not shortened in any way.

Had the authors more thoroghly regarded Ashley's drawings then they would have seen that tyings of the two knots (Chineses button knot and diamond knot) both start with a carrick bend, but the eventual tucking of the loose ends differs!.

The citation on the bottom of the article is misunderstood by your authors, too, in that they state that "There is however a tying method that does not require a carrick bend as a first step". Had they understood Ashleys drawings they would have recognized that Ashley DOES tie a carrick bend here.

Conclusion: The entire article has to be revised (or removed), because it is erroneous and does not supply what its title promises. 88.67.50.60 (talk) 10:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Added description of tying steps and pictures for the alternative tying method starting with slip knot rather than carrick bend, and several video links for the carrick bend method, hoping this clarifies. If there is a third method with a different way to tuck the loose ends then online references, pictures, or descriptions will be appreciated Cobanyastigi (talk) 01:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the improvements! There still are two things which I feel can be improved further:

(1) Image in the upper right corner: It does neither show a tightened button (as the title states), nor a Chinese button knot at all. Evidence: If it was tightened it would have exiting parts on only one side, not on both sides (upper and lower)! This is why it is called (and can be used as) a "button". Furthermore, the knot on the image is made of two strands (which is obvious because of the two colors: red and white), whereas a Chinese button knot is a single-strand knot. Hence, this is not a Chinese button. I'd guess that it is yet another diamond knot ...

(2) Section "Tying": Why not remove this section's first paragraph and first series of images? They have nothing to do with a Chinese button knot, but refer entirely to the diamond knot. They clearly do not belong to this article.

By the way: I happened to find that the knot which has been described up to know: "Chinese button knot is essentially a diamond knot where the lanyard loop is shortened to a minimum" can be found in ABoK, too: It is #602 (single stranded) and #603 (doubled), and Ashley calls it an "Eight-Part Button":

602. If the final tuck of the ends is the same as in the KNIFE LANYARD KNOT (#787), a handsome EIGHT-PART BUTTON results, that, so far as I know, has not been utilized by the Chinese.

603. This EIGHT-PART KNOT may also be doubled. As the two ends have different cycles, both ends must be tucked each time a new ply is added to the knot. The illustration shows a DOUBLE or TwoPLY KNOT, which may be doubled either as suggested by the solid arrow or by the dotted arrow in #601.

— The Ashley Book of Knots

188.104.189.180 (talk) 21:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)