This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sanitary sewer 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 ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class because it uses a sub-category of [[Category:Environment]] on the article page.
Hi All! I am planning to add to this page. Is there anyone who is currently updating this page? Cheers, Zhantair — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhantair ( talk • contribs) 03:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
So if the main article about the history of sewers is the one called "combined sewers", should we then take the history section from sewage collection and disposal and merge it to the history section of combined sewer? (probably a lot of the content is the same anyhow) Would that be a good way forward? - I really don't think having the same, or very similar, history description on two pages makes sense because then if we want to improve it, we'd have to improve the same content on two pages... (see also talk page of sewage collection and disposal) EvMsmile ( talk) 03:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't like the background section very much. It is actually a mixture of "history" and background. To improve it, I think we should be inserted more references to dates and also make it clear that we're talking here about cities in industrialised countries of the West. The situation of cities in developing countries (to this day!) is totally different - so we're not giving a global view here. Another option would be to split it into a true background sectio and a true history section (the history section should then be at the end of the article and not be a repeat of the history section of combined sewer or history of water supply and sanitation. EvMsmile ( talk) 06:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I am not convinced that the excreta from the draft animals was the starting point for the development of combined sewers in all or many of the cities. You can also wash that away with open gutters (or manually by sweepers). There were other drivers that gave the push to put all this infrastructure underground... More likely it was more due to the indoor plumbing advent. Do we have more good references that we can quote in this section? EvMsmile ( talk) 13:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
And why did you delete this: "Maximising local rainwater infiltration, to reduce surface runoff is one approach taken by city planners to reduce the amount of stormwater entering combined sewer systems, therefore in some cases, negating the need for a separate sewer system." I thought that's an important aspect. I also don't understand this comment of yours "This neglects situations where sanitary waste is either buried in pit latrines or deposited directly into streams by urinating and defecating from bridges". We're talking about indoor plumbing; pit latrines are a completely different cattle of fish as they don't produce any wastewater, only a sludge which has to be deal with differently. EvMsmile ( talk) 13:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sanitary sewer 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 ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class because it uses a sub-category of [[Category:Environment]] on the article page.
Hi All! I am planning to add to this page. Is there anyone who is currently updating this page? Cheers, Zhantair — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhantair ( talk • contribs) 03:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
So if the main article about the history of sewers is the one called "combined sewers", should we then take the history section from sewage collection and disposal and merge it to the history section of combined sewer? (probably a lot of the content is the same anyhow) Would that be a good way forward? - I really don't think having the same, or very similar, history description on two pages makes sense because then if we want to improve it, we'd have to improve the same content on two pages... (see also talk page of sewage collection and disposal) EvMsmile ( talk) 03:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't like the background section very much. It is actually a mixture of "history" and background. To improve it, I think we should be inserted more references to dates and also make it clear that we're talking here about cities in industrialised countries of the West. The situation of cities in developing countries (to this day!) is totally different - so we're not giving a global view here. Another option would be to split it into a true background sectio and a true history section (the history section should then be at the end of the article and not be a repeat of the history section of combined sewer or history of water supply and sanitation. EvMsmile ( talk) 06:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I am not convinced that the excreta from the draft animals was the starting point for the development of combined sewers in all or many of the cities. You can also wash that away with open gutters (or manually by sweepers). There were other drivers that gave the push to put all this infrastructure underground... More likely it was more due to the indoor plumbing advent. Do we have more good references that we can quote in this section? EvMsmile ( talk) 13:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
And why did you delete this: "Maximising local rainwater infiltration, to reduce surface runoff is one approach taken by city planners to reduce the amount of stormwater entering combined sewer systems, therefore in some cases, negating the need for a separate sewer system." I thought that's an important aspect. I also don't understand this comment of yours "This neglects situations where sanitary waste is either buried in pit latrines or deposited directly into streams by urinating and defecating from bridges". We're talking about indoor plumbing; pit latrines are a completely different cattle of fish as they don't produce any wastewater, only a sludge which has to be deal with differently. EvMsmile ( talk) 13:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)