![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Infant car seat page were merged into Child safety seat on April 16, 2012 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Note: We need a history of Child Safety Seats.
Mind you, I'm fond of the place, but the main article's awfully, er, Canadacentric--laws regarding child safety seats in different regions should be linked externally. Pity I'm not the man for it. Nhrenton 18:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree! I can write the Australian section, but I don't know where/how to put it in...
Lizzie.gordon (
talk)
03:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
It makes a change from being USA-centred, as most articles are - so much so that they are written as if all readers are Americans. Sickeningly insular and parochial!
The description surely is wrong. A "car seat" is just that. It is not ambiguous, it is incorrect if used to mean a child's car seat. The same goes for "restraint car seat" - odd that the editor didn't see that as ambiguous. And "infant safety seat" and "child safety seat" are not the same, as babies, infants, toddlers and children imply different age groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 ( talk) 06:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
We didn't have any of this when I was a kid. back then rear seats didn't have those uncomfortable shoulder straps, windows rolled down all the way, and you could pull the belt out enough to fit an adult without it 'catching' and constricting you if you try to use it. Let's just admit it, cars are deathtraps. No amount of inconvenience is going to fix that.. and anyway if you get in an accident you might as well be dead because you can't afford car repairs -and- food.
Interesting attitude! I guess it's a personal thing but I'd never allow anyone - child or adult - in my car unless they had an appropriate and properly fitting restraint (seat belt or child seat). Lizzie.gordon ( talk) 03:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Edited my prior comments in response to balls. Mommy0406 05:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Mommy0406 05:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
The 'groups' of car seats listed here are not internationally applicable. I'm new to WIkipedia but I do know about Child Car Seats and Restraints. Can I reorganise these 'groups' into more general guides, or at least fix up the Australia section so that people can have some idea of what the Australian guidelines are?
Lizzie.gordon (
talk)
03:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Seats may have an "expiry date", but they do not "expire in 6 years"! That is a something ridiculously literal rendering of common guidelines. And on the topic of poor English, owners are not "strongly suggested" to replace the seats, they are "strongly advised" to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 ( talk) 06:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the New Zealand section, which was a blatant copyright violation, copied verbatim from here and here. Copyright in that site is reserved, except for personal use. -- Chewy m ( talk) 09:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone else see the consumerism ends of this product? New seats bought as the child grows; not usuable after an accident; don't buy a used product; expiration dates; recalls; this is not a product of a sustainable economy. Is the limited percentages of reduced injury in a crash worth sacrificing the planet to landfills and polution that nothing can live in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.72.58.68 ( talk) 18:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
66.81.199.98 ( talk) 10:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
danielmyles1 ( talk) 03:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
RESPONSE 1.Plastic degrades over time, that is why there are expiry dates....laws, not manufacturers choice 2.If a car seat has been in an accident or dropped there can be microscopic cracks in the plastic that can lead to car seat failure in an accident. 3. Appropriate child car restraints have overwhelmingly been found to save or minimise the risk of injury or death in most situations. 4. car seats have to be upgraded to larger sizes as they grow so they retain the safety relevant to age hieght weight... just the same as life jackets when out in boats...its not rocket science 5. as a parent child safety is paramount... anything that is likey to minimise risk of harm to my child is what I go for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.55.104.20 ( talk) 23:58, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The tone of this article is entirely unencyclopedic. A rewrite is in order. Contributions/64.211.50.218 ( talk) 21:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)Tiktok
Is "small stature people" another ridiculous PC euphemism for children? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 ( talk) 06:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The History section of this article reads like a child safety advocate, or car seat manufacturer's ad. Please review this article for neutral POV.
67.188.231.163 ( talk) 04:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
This entire article does not seem neutral at all. There is no history of car seats and everything seems really biased. A rewrite is in order. 24.107.165.221 ( talk) 15:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
TTo me it seems a bit stupid to reccommend forward-facing sitting when you know that it is safer to have the children under 4 years old rear-facing
"the swede" —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
95.124.33.159 (
talk)
23:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is the exact same thing as its source, breaking federal law. It needs to be completely re-written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.233.223.112 ( talk) 01:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
While we are at it, let's run the whole damn thing through a spell check one time. If the contributor can't properly spell it, the rest of the offering is probably for crap too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.39.82 ( talk) 19:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The unfortunate reality is: car seats are law in most countries. Regardless of the propaganda, consumerism, US vs Canadian etc etc. And the information/ laws/ brands and finite differences between them change at an alarming rate!! I'll be honest and say I am being hypocritical here - but I neither have the time nor energy to completely re-work this topic, - and it DOES need a COMPLETE re-work!!! We need one person from each country to volunteer, and move on keeping this information updated. MOMS! Someone just do it! (because as we can see most people don't care enough to) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TracyLoeppky ( talk • contribs) 20:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I have redirected maxi cosi to their parent company's article rather than this page. 188.222.188.169 ( talk) 15:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The article switches back and forth between hyphenating the term. Hyphenated seems more correct to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaorndor ( talk • contribs) 01:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Is everyone in agreement that the two should be merged? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zujua ( talk • contribs) 23:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I agree they should be merged and located at Child safety seat. A parent will need this information through the life of their child from birth to age 13. Having it all in one spot makes more sense to me. Notsonativetexan ( talk) 16:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)NotSoNativeTexan
In the "Europe" section, the article states, "Children may not be transported using a rearward-facing child restraint system in a passenger seat protected by a front air bag, unless the air bag has been deactivated." Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't make sense to me; a front-facing system would be dangerous in an air-bag deployment, but it seems to me a rear-facing system would be safer.-- Miniapolis ( talk) 20:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
There's no discussion about the revised guidelines that were released March 2011 by the US organization American Academy of Pediatrics. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/public_information/AAPPolicyStatement.pdf
"In a new policy published in the April 2011 issue of Pediatrics (published online March 21), the AAP advises parents to keep their toddlers in rear-facing car seats until age 2, or until they reach the maximum height and weight for their seat. It also advises that most children will need to ride in a belt-positioning booster seat until they have reached 4 feet 9 inches tall and are between 8 and 12 years of age."
Most parents turn the seats around far earlier than age 2 because the child gets extremely uncomfortable with their legs jammed against the back of the seat in the rear facing position and it's harder to keep an eye on them.
The booster seat recommendation has more to do with height at weight 4'9" and 100 lbs than the age of the child. Notsonativetexan ( talk) 16:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)NotSoNativeTexan
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Infant car seat page were merged into Child safety seat on April 16, 2012 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Note: We need a history of Child Safety Seats.
Mind you, I'm fond of the place, but the main article's awfully, er, Canadacentric--laws regarding child safety seats in different regions should be linked externally. Pity I'm not the man for it. Nhrenton 18:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree! I can write the Australian section, but I don't know where/how to put it in...
Lizzie.gordon (
talk)
03:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
It makes a change from being USA-centred, as most articles are - so much so that they are written as if all readers are Americans. Sickeningly insular and parochial!
The description surely is wrong. A "car seat" is just that. It is not ambiguous, it is incorrect if used to mean a child's car seat. The same goes for "restraint car seat" - odd that the editor didn't see that as ambiguous. And "infant safety seat" and "child safety seat" are not the same, as babies, infants, toddlers and children imply different age groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 ( talk) 06:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
We didn't have any of this when I was a kid. back then rear seats didn't have those uncomfortable shoulder straps, windows rolled down all the way, and you could pull the belt out enough to fit an adult without it 'catching' and constricting you if you try to use it. Let's just admit it, cars are deathtraps. No amount of inconvenience is going to fix that.. and anyway if you get in an accident you might as well be dead because you can't afford car repairs -and- food.
Interesting attitude! I guess it's a personal thing but I'd never allow anyone - child or adult - in my car unless they had an appropriate and properly fitting restraint (seat belt or child seat). Lizzie.gordon ( talk) 03:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Edited my prior comments in response to balls. Mommy0406 05:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Mommy0406 05:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
The 'groups' of car seats listed here are not internationally applicable. I'm new to WIkipedia but I do know about Child Car Seats and Restraints. Can I reorganise these 'groups' into more general guides, or at least fix up the Australia section so that people can have some idea of what the Australian guidelines are?
Lizzie.gordon (
talk)
03:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Seats may have an "expiry date", but they do not "expire in 6 years"! That is a something ridiculously literal rendering of common guidelines. And on the topic of poor English, owners are not "strongly suggested" to replace the seats, they are "strongly advised" to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 ( talk) 06:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the New Zealand section, which was a blatant copyright violation, copied verbatim from here and here. Copyright in that site is reserved, except for personal use. -- Chewy m ( talk) 09:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone else see the consumerism ends of this product? New seats bought as the child grows; not usuable after an accident; don't buy a used product; expiration dates; recalls; this is not a product of a sustainable economy. Is the limited percentages of reduced injury in a crash worth sacrificing the planet to landfills and polution that nothing can live in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.72.58.68 ( talk) 18:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
66.81.199.98 ( talk) 10:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
danielmyles1 ( talk) 03:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
RESPONSE 1.Plastic degrades over time, that is why there are expiry dates....laws, not manufacturers choice 2.If a car seat has been in an accident or dropped there can be microscopic cracks in the plastic that can lead to car seat failure in an accident. 3. Appropriate child car restraints have overwhelmingly been found to save or minimise the risk of injury or death in most situations. 4. car seats have to be upgraded to larger sizes as they grow so they retain the safety relevant to age hieght weight... just the same as life jackets when out in boats...its not rocket science 5. as a parent child safety is paramount... anything that is likey to minimise risk of harm to my child is what I go for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.55.104.20 ( talk) 23:58, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The tone of this article is entirely unencyclopedic. A rewrite is in order. Contributions/64.211.50.218 ( talk) 21:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)Tiktok
Is "small stature people" another ridiculous PC euphemism for children? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 ( talk) 06:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The History section of this article reads like a child safety advocate, or car seat manufacturer's ad. Please review this article for neutral POV.
67.188.231.163 ( talk) 04:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
This entire article does not seem neutral at all. There is no history of car seats and everything seems really biased. A rewrite is in order. 24.107.165.221 ( talk) 15:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
TTo me it seems a bit stupid to reccommend forward-facing sitting when you know that it is safer to have the children under 4 years old rear-facing
"the swede" —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
95.124.33.159 (
talk)
23:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is the exact same thing as its source, breaking federal law. It needs to be completely re-written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.233.223.112 ( talk) 01:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
While we are at it, let's run the whole damn thing through a spell check one time. If the contributor can't properly spell it, the rest of the offering is probably for crap too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.39.82 ( talk) 19:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The unfortunate reality is: car seats are law in most countries. Regardless of the propaganda, consumerism, US vs Canadian etc etc. And the information/ laws/ brands and finite differences between them change at an alarming rate!! I'll be honest and say I am being hypocritical here - but I neither have the time nor energy to completely re-work this topic, - and it DOES need a COMPLETE re-work!!! We need one person from each country to volunteer, and move on keeping this information updated. MOMS! Someone just do it! (because as we can see most people don't care enough to) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TracyLoeppky ( talk • contribs) 20:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I have redirected maxi cosi to their parent company's article rather than this page. 188.222.188.169 ( talk) 15:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The article switches back and forth between hyphenating the term. Hyphenated seems more correct to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaorndor ( talk • contribs) 01:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Is everyone in agreement that the two should be merged? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zujua ( talk • contribs) 23:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I agree they should be merged and located at Child safety seat. A parent will need this information through the life of their child from birth to age 13. Having it all in one spot makes more sense to me. Notsonativetexan ( talk) 16:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)NotSoNativeTexan
In the "Europe" section, the article states, "Children may not be transported using a rearward-facing child restraint system in a passenger seat protected by a front air bag, unless the air bag has been deactivated." Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't make sense to me; a front-facing system would be dangerous in an air-bag deployment, but it seems to me a rear-facing system would be safer.-- Miniapolis ( talk) 20:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
There's no discussion about the revised guidelines that were released March 2011 by the US organization American Academy of Pediatrics. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/public_information/AAPPolicyStatement.pdf
"In a new policy published in the April 2011 issue of Pediatrics (published online March 21), the AAP advises parents to keep their toddlers in rear-facing car seats until age 2, or until they reach the maximum height and weight for their seat. It also advises that most children will need to ride in a belt-positioning booster seat until they have reached 4 feet 9 inches tall and are between 8 and 12 years of age."
Most parents turn the seats around far earlier than age 2 because the child gets extremely uncomfortable with their legs jammed against the back of the seat in the rear facing position and it's harder to keep an eye on them.
The booster seat recommendation has more to do with height at weight 4'9" and 100 lbs than the age of the child. Notsonativetexan ( talk) 16:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)NotSoNativeTexan