This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hazmat suit article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article refers to suits as Level A, B,C and D "suits". It is actually "Level A, B, C and D *protection*, as defined in NFPA 471 (Chapter 7). Manu 21:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Picture of level C suit, from the Department of Justice website. Not sure where in the article it should go, so I put it here instead. Fuzzform 04:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Does the NBC suit article means the same thing? Just pointing out 201.51.71.179 19:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I have proposed that NBC suit be merged into this article. Both cover much the same material, but the concept of a "HazMat" suite is a bit broader, as well as older. Pzavon 02:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I support this idea: that article says little this doesn't. Platte Daddy 05:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
```` I also oppose this as it now is "much the same" and by leaving each different it allows you to make additions to one or the other as research and technology progress, keeping uses and future uses different and making additions that may be quite expensive to one and not the other etc. Things change. If they are merged, more definitive explanations should be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roger A. Newman ( talk • contribs) 22:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
I was thinking wouldnt the mopp suit go in this catagorie?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.84.116.200 ( talk • contribs)
I am quite sure that Hazmat is an American English word and not used elsewhere. Please use a more universal English word. Hazmat is not a word at all but an acronym. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.84.198.34 ( talk) 00:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the article seems to be more about US applications of hazmat suits, but ¿how would you suggest it be edited to be universal? I’m not really sure it can be. 97.120.230.36 ( talk) 05:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)A REDDSON
For one thing, all claims made in the "In Fiction" section of this article are conclusions made by whoever's been writing the section and is not from a source that can be cited per Wikipedia policy.-- 60.43.34.23 ( talk) 08:41, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I suggest this remain as a separate article with an overview and link in the personal protective equipment article; I think this is a suitable topic for its own article. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
The article currently has little or no information about the history of these suits: when and how were they developed? It would be great if information about that could be added to the article. — Lowellian ( reply) 23:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hazmat suit article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article refers to suits as Level A, B,C and D "suits". It is actually "Level A, B, C and D *protection*, as defined in NFPA 471 (Chapter 7). Manu 21:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Picture of level C suit, from the Department of Justice website. Not sure where in the article it should go, so I put it here instead. Fuzzform 04:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Does the NBC suit article means the same thing? Just pointing out 201.51.71.179 19:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I have proposed that NBC suit be merged into this article. Both cover much the same material, but the concept of a "HazMat" suite is a bit broader, as well as older. Pzavon 02:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I support this idea: that article says little this doesn't. Platte Daddy 05:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
```` I also oppose this as it now is "much the same" and by leaving each different it allows you to make additions to one or the other as research and technology progress, keeping uses and future uses different and making additions that may be quite expensive to one and not the other etc. Things change. If they are merged, more definitive explanations should be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roger A. Newman ( talk • contribs) 22:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
I was thinking wouldnt the mopp suit go in this catagorie?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.84.116.200 ( talk • contribs)
I am quite sure that Hazmat is an American English word and not used elsewhere. Please use a more universal English word. Hazmat is not a word at all but an acronym. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.84.198.34 ( talk) 00:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the article seems to be more about US applications of hazmat suits, but ¿how would you suggest it be edited to be universal? I’m not really sure it can be. 97.120.230.36 ( talk) 05:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)A REDDSON
For one thing, all claims made in the "In Fiction" section of this article are conclusions made by whoever's been writing the section and is not from a source that can be cited per Wikipedia policy.-- 60.43.34.23 ( talk) 08:41, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I suggest this remain as a separate article with an overview and link in the personal protective equipment article; I think this is a suitable topic for its own article. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
The article currently has little or no information about the history of these suits: when and how were they developed? It would be great if information about that could be added to the article. — Lowellian ( reply) 23:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)