Talk:Backpack

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Backpacking, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BackpackingWikipedia:WikiProject BackpackingTemplate:WikiProject BackpackingBackpacking

Fashion Low‑importance

	Fashion portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Packaging

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Packaging, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of containers, packaging, and related articles 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.PackagingWikipedia:WikiProject PackagingTemplate:WikiProject PackagingContainers

Possible copyright infringement

possible COPYRIGHT infringement !!! see: http://www.wordiq.com/cgi-bin/knowledge/lookup.cgi?title=Backpack — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.82.120.245 (talk • contribs) 23:58, 8 January 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we know they have stolen our page, as well as most of the rest of wikipedia, without attribution. See Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content#wordIQ. We've asked them to stop. Morwen 00:01, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry! 82.82.120.245 00:02, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

No problem - better safe than sorry.... Morwen 00:04, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)

Merge

I'm all for it, as long as someone can figure out how to deal with the issue of Knapsack (band). I know there's a newfangled way to do it cleanly. --Smack (talk) 04:07, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

A good backpack should be made of material that protect from water and wind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frap (talk • contribs) 13:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. As far as water goes, it's better to have an external waterproof pack cover. First, it's hard to make a single-layer material light, sturdy and waterproof at the same time. Second, if you have a pack cover, you can leave it at home if you know it's not going to rain (yes, that is actually possible in some parts of the country). As far as wind goes, why does it matter? --Smack (talk) 04:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Most modern backpacks have a certain water resistancy (although the diminishes over the years). Lightweight plastic covers are a good idea. They have the added beniefit you can use it to sit on wet grass; and imporvise a waterproof nightcover for your pack if you are camping without tent (or a very small one) Arnoutf 19:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A rain cover is good on the out side of a pack unless it is windy. External rain covers have a hobbit of blowing off in high wind environments. The solution a waterproof internal liner. The pack protects the liner from wind, rocks, brush... — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrTyson (talk • contribs) 09:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the correct german word for back is not rücke BUT rücken — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.147.102.63 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

School

This article doesn't mention its use by schoolchildren, one of its most common uses. - Mmace91 04:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well just add it. Arnoutf 12:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rucksack

>The British created the names rucksack (a German loanword - 'rücken' being the bodypart 'back'),

can anybody verify this? because the word "Sack" also meand "bag" in german, so it seems more like a word that ist completly german in origin. (and dropping some letters or changing them ü->u is not very uncommon in german words) Elvis 12:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thikn the intention was that the whole word was a loanword from the German word Rucksack. But that the German is just the same as the English Back-Ruck Pack-Sack. Arnoutf 13:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, the word "rucksack" is a typical german word construction made of two different words combined to another meaning. A "sack" is in german the same as in english - something to put things into it. "ruck" comes not from the german word "Rücken" wich is "back" in english. "ruck" in the word "rucksack" comes from the german word "Ruck", wich means to move or lift something with a fast strong and powerfull motion. "Rucksack" is a sack that you have to lift with an "Ruck" to your back, and so this word has a complete german origin. Sorry for my english, and greetings from Germany, Volker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.190.211.13 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but that is truly pseudoetymology. It comes from Rucken [1]. It is a bit like saying that Jogging is derived from the Dutch sjokken (which means slowly walking, very tired, bent head etc) - which is also only pseudo-etymology. Arnoutf 20:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my german ethymological dictionary states clearly that the word was used as early as the 16th century in switzerland (the u instead of the ü indicates alpine dialects also) and was commonly used in German language countries in the 19th century. Therefore the whole word is a loanword from German. Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.47.0.119 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I learned at school that "rucksack" is a Dutch loanword, from the word "rugzak", a bag on your back. We were told that this loanword was introduced in English in the 16th or 17th century (the age when the Dutchmen ruled the seas), as Dutch sailmen (/marines) wear "rucksacks". Has any of you heard about this version? Greetz, W. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.174.41.124 (talk) 20:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well the spelling for "Rucksack" is definitely High-German, and IMHO the pronunciation of the Dutch word should be pretty much the same. Looks for me like the Dutch took the word from their neighbours. Anyway in the 16th century "Dutch" was a synonym for German. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.97.64.142 (talk) 00:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In all the other Germanic languages, Dutch still means German. (or rather, its equivalent does). Only English switched it to mean Nederlandish instead. Firejuggler86 (talk) 16:52, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The "alpine" theory seems to be evident, since, in the southern German dialects, other words containing the element "rück" lack the umlaut too ("zurück" => "zruck"). The pronuntiation of the Dutch "rug" [rYx] is different from German "Ruck" [rUk]. - The Main article contains the statement "... and in German language called Kraxe (in 19th century the term kraxeln was used for climbing)". It should be updated like this: "... an in the Bavarian dialects of German called Kraxe (the term kraxeln is Bavarian for climbing)". - Another "alpine" trace thus; ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.158.196.16 (talk) 12:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Laptop Backpacks

There's no mention of laptop backpacks, which are one of the most specialised and customized types of backpacks available today. 124.43.210.15 10:31, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganised the article

I reorganised the article into three main sections.

Daily use (ie book bags; laptop bags; purses etc etc)
Professional use (mainly military)
Leisure and travel

I think this organisation allows the sections to develop as the different types of backpacks have more similarity through usage than through the fairly random order given untill now. Arnoutf 11:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Types of fabric

When the article talks about the different types of fabric, could someone go over what the D rating is? As an example, I just came across this ad: "Fabric backpack features 420D Diamond Ripstop Nylon, Two ton Fabric and 600D Polyester with 1000D Kodra bottom construction." What does that mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.228.93.202 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Units_of_textile_measurement#Denier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.38.230.2 (talk) 00:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling backpacks

Why does the article not mention anything about rolling backpacks? A rolling backpack is a hybrid of a luggage and a backpack. These backpacks put less strain on one's back and shoulders than regular backpacks. Can someone mention these backpacks on this article with an appropriate image and citations please? Johnny Au 22:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard or seen any of those, they seem pretty much a marginal thing to me; perhaps a one liner. Arnoutf 07:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you go on Google and search "rolling backpacks" and "chiropractors", then you can find evidence that most chiropractors support the use of rolling backpacks and are beginning to be less marginal as a result. Johnny Au 15:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I look at the images through Google it seems it is more a luggage with shoulder straps than a backpack with wheels. Arnoutf 17:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, they're pretty much what they sound like. I don't know how widely available they are around the world, but I can find them in any of the big outdoors stores near me (eastern Massachusetts -- REI, EMS, LL Bean). That said, I'd be a little more impressed if I heard it from an orthopedic surgeon than a chiropractor. (But what do I know -- I use an internal-frame camping pack as a manpurse.) Haikupoet 17:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I would not like to take such a thing up a mountain carrying my stuff along cliffs though. Can someone else add the information. Arnoutf 17:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haversack

Isn't the haversack a shoulderbag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.211.191.229 (talk) 18:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. Removed. Arnoutf (talk) 17:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bergan or Bergen

Both spellings can be found at the mod.uk web site, but the balance seems to be for bergan and this site [2][3] suggests that Wikipedia should probably spell it "Bergan". --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 01:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling is "Bergen", and if you want to get advice from a website called "arse" you do so at your peril. :-) Seriously though, reread the sentence that says "Bergan" comes from the manufacturers name "Bergens" and tell me it doesn't sound idiotic...139.48.25.61 (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Besides that the quoted site is a wiki-like project and the articles are not referenced hence not reliable. Arnoutf (talk) 17:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External link

Sorry, but I can't find any expert advise by following the link provided. I only found a commercial website trying to sell me backpacks. Aldo L (talk) 16:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. I'm going to remove the link for now. 130.49.221.178 (talk) 16:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

repetitive

theres 2 sections that go thru kinds of backpacks (leisure/professional) and then go into framless/frames this needs to be merged or one of the sections needs to be deleted. theres some good information. ALSO not in first person --RCNARANJA 21:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KLETTERSACK?

I see no mention of klettersack here or anywhere on WP. I think of a klettersack as a top-closing, top-loading style of pack. Can anyone update this or comment? --Smilo Don (talk) 10:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Special-purpose backpacks

Perhaps the function as a container for energy storage devices may be mentioned. See http://www.quirky.com/products/53-Trek-Support-Electric-Backpack

KVDP (talk) 09:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 15 January 2012

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi, just wanted to inform you that there is a new type of backpack that provides comfortable upper body support while seated and additionally provides security of bag contents if the user is asleep. Effectively when worn on the front, it combines a chin support on the top of the bag - this type of bag is known as a napsac backpack. You can check it out at <link removed> The bag is patent pending in USA and Europe. If you want further information, you can contact me at <redacted> Thank you.

Joemaginness (talk) 13:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done, Wikipedia is not for advertising--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daypack

I created a couple articles, day pack and daypack to redirect backpack. I believe in the simplest form, a backpack is worn on the back with two shoulder straps. To me, daypacks fit this category. I'm can see just adding it as another word, then explain it in terminology. Other ideas? Alrich44 (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

question

I can not find the source for the information on the topic of the Terminology section, where source? Also there are some new backpacks types. update info on solar backpacks and built in battery packs,some even have built in speakers for audio Pcolina (talk) 06:00, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very few inline citations

I'm not active enough on Wikipedia to know whether this warrants the "this article doesn't cite enough sources" template, but it sure seems like it. There are several sections that appear to be independent research, or at least don't cite their sources. Just flagging that it might need that. nhinchey (talk) 13:20, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This should be corrected/shortened.

I noticed following strange sentence in the Terminology section.

"In Middle High German ruck(e) means "back" (dorsum), which led to the Upper German and Swiss word ruggsack."

There is no Swiss language in that sense, the Swiss-Germans speak variations of Allemannic German dialects. Allemannic German dialects are, among others, Upper German. Therefore this should simply be shortened to:

"In Middle High German ruck(e) means "back" (dorsum), which led to the Upper German word ruggsack." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.24.247.206 (talk) 01:42, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]