![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Why on earth as I redirected from "Canalization"? The term has nothing to do with sewage, unless about canals, which aren't even mentioned in the article. -- 128.176.122.224
Could be used to expand the article: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=treating-sewage
-- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a lot of overlap with the article on sanitary sewer, I think the two should be combined. The better title is sanitary sewer as people are less likely to search in "sewage collection and disposal". EvM-Susana ( talk) 07:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I propose to redirect from this page to the article on sanitary sewer or to sewer after moving its content to the other existing pages. The article page is "sewage collection and disposal" but it only talks about collection of sewage, and in a less comprehensive way than the article on sanitary sewers (why the current emphasis on vacuum sewers?). The history section could nicely be moved to either history of water supply and sanitation or to the history section of combined sewers (I need to double check but I assume the history part mainly deals with combined sewers as they are the older system). EvMsmile ( talk) 11:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with longer articles, as long as they are good and comprehensive. What I really don't like is to have identical long chunks of text on two or more pages, as it means having to make the same edits on two or more pages if we want to improve the content. So did I understand you right that you agree with my suggestion for changing the article title to "History of sewage collection, treatment and disposal"? Actually maybe just "History of sewage collection" would be sufficient, as the history of treatment is probably covered in the treatment article. Or "history of sewage management"? We could perhaps simply create a new page and then redirect from the old page to the new page? What's the best method? EvMsmile ( talk) 04:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
As per the discussion above, the content of this article has now been moved to other pages and a redirect set. Most of it went to history of water supply and sanitation. See history page if interested, as it's all detailed there. EvMsmile ( talk) 11:53, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Why on earth as I redirected from "Canalization"? The term has nothing to do with sewage, unless about canals, which aren't even mentioned in the article. -- 128.176.122.224
Could be used to expand the article: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=treating-sewage
-- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a lot of overlap with the article on sanitary sewer, I think the two should be combined. The better title is sanitary sewer as people are less likely to search in "sewage collection and disposal". EvM-Susana ( talk) 07:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
I propose to redirect from this page to the article on sanitary sewer or to sewer after moving its content to the other existing pages. The article page is "sewage collection and disposal" but it only talks about collection of sewage, and in a less comprehensive way than the article on sanitary sewers (why the current emphasis on vacuum sewers?). The history section could nicely be moved to either history of water supply and sanitation or to the history section of combined sewers (I need to double check but I assume the history part mainly deals with combined sewers as they are the older system). EvMsmile ( talk) 11:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with longer articles, as long as they are good and comprehensive. What I really don't like is to have identical long chunks of text on two or more pages, as it means having to make the same edits on two or more pages if we want to improve the content. So did I understand you right that you agree with my suggestion for changing the article title to "History of sewage collection, treatment and disposal"? Actually maybe just "History of sewage collection" would be sufficient, as the history of treatment is probably covered in the treatment article. Or "history of sewage management"? We could perhaps simply create a new page and then redirect from the old page to the new page? What's the best method? EvMsmile ( talk) 04:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
As per the discussion above, the content of this article has now been moved to other pages and a redirect set. Most of it went to history of water supply and sanitation. See history page if interested, as it's all detailed there. EvMsmile ( talk) 11:53, 15 April 2016 (UTC)