This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Steamroller 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
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
I note the proposal to merge STEAM ROLLER with TRACTION ENGINE
In my view, that would be a mistake.
I'd rather see each with a link to the other subject.
The two machines were designed for quite separate purposes; as were ploughing engines.
23 Aug 2006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.182.46 ( talk) 05:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
No further discussion has taken place since my previous postings, so this is obviously not a hot topic for discussion! I have been steadily adding to the three articles, as time permits, and I have nearly three film-rolls worth of photos taken at the recent Great Dorset Steam Fair still to incorporate in the articles (when I have learned how).
As described in the other talk pages ( Talk:Traction engine#Articles NOT to be Merged - Reasoning and Talk:Road roller#Suggested merge of Steamroller to Road roller), these three articles should remain separate, and the merge banners have therefore now been removed.
EdJogg 23:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
To the editing nazis who jump down your throat in 1/2 a nanosecond as you attempt to clean up pages: back off.
Also: this page visually is garbage, thanks to all the superfluous banners. Remove, ten foot high banners, and put in talk page, centre and enlarge photo. In future, I will take my exceptional editing skills elsewhere, and not be subject to the Meta data meter maids that seem to clog up wiki now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.81.77.33 ( talk) 15:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Flatulence (noun) --- the emergency vehicle that picks you up after you are run over by a steamroller.
These two comments were a reply to a query on the talk page for Rochester, Kent, after I had added a paragraph about Aveling & Porter in the history section. Copied here for convenient reference...
EdJogg 00:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The two biggest makers of traction engines & variants were Aveling & Porter and Fowlers. In the case of A & P somewhere around a third or more of their production was rollers which fits with the figures given. I'm excluding portables from the calculation since other companies such as Garrett and Clayton & Shuttleworth produced masses of those in comparison to their production of over engines.
The 6000 machines cited in the reference would fit with Aveling & Porter's production alone with probably around another 4-5000 from the other makers with Fowler probably being in second place with Marshall third. Marshall is a little strange in that they were still going after most of the others and picked up government related orders in the late 30s and early 40s. Chenab ( talk) 15:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Warning klaxons should go off when an article's "in popular culture" section is as long as the rest of the article. I've a good mind to delete most of this. Chris Cunningham 08:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
EdJogg 12:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Having bumped into roll, which is a disambiguation page, I tried to establish formally whether the 'wheels' on a steam roller (or motor roller) were known as 'rolls' rather than / as well as 'rollers'. (Yes, I wanted to add an entry on that page...)
In the half-hour of googling I had available today, I found no suitable references on-line, but I am convinced that this is the case.
Can anyone please confirm my suspicions, preferably with some appropriate references?
EdJogg 12:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I spent some time looking at contemporary materials last night (Engineer, Engineering and books on Road making). It would appear that initially the wheels were known as rollers but the use changed, probably to avoid using the same term for the machine and also part of it. I would therefore suggest using rolls as the best term, certainly that is the common one in use now to refer to that part of preserved machines.
On the subject the section on wheels is wrong, the front roll is not a single wide cylinder, it is two cylinders side by side with a small gap between the two. This probably seems illogical since it means there is potentially a ridge in the tarmac between the two rolls - in practice this doesn't happen. More importantly having two rolls means there is a chance of steering the beast rather than trying to skid a large single roll in the direction you want to go. Any maker who claimed their roller had fast & responsive steering was almost certainly lying, some early Avelings almost need psychic abilities on behalf of the steersman to know when a turn is coming up. Chenab ( talk) 16:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to avoid any claims of copyvio, the information found on the Anyang Gemco pages: "Services" and "Steam Rolling - An Historical Background" were based on the en:Wikipedia articles ( road roller, steam roller), not the other way round. (I recognised text, phrases and structure that was originally added to both articles by me.) -- EdJogg ( talk) 10:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
"A few steam rollers were still being used for road maintenance in the early 1970s, and this may go some way to explaining why diesel-powered rollers are still colloquially known as steam rollers to this day."
Having just watched a diesel road roller in operation it seems perfectly obvious why they are still colloquially called steam rollers. The lubricating water sprayed on the rolls evaporates very quickly on the hot asphalt, so they tend to leave a cloud of steam behind them. Had I not looked it up I would have continued to assume that was the basis of the name. (I hadn't even considered the idea of steam *powered* rollers) 58.6.229.220 ( talk) 00:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Steamroller 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
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
I note the proposal to merge STEAM ROLLER with TRACTION ENGINE
In my view, that would be a mistake.
I'd rather see each with a link to the other subject.
The two machines were designed for quite separate purposes; as were ploughing engines.
23 Aug 2006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.182.46 ( talk) 05:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
No further discussion has taken place since my previous postings, so this is obviously not a hot topic for discussion! I have been steadily adding to the three articles, as time permits, and I have nearly three film-rolls worth of photos taken at the recent Great Dorset Steam Fair still to incorporate in the articles (when I have learned how).
As described in the other talk pages ( Talk:Traction engine#Articles NOT to be Merged - Reasoning and Talk:Road roller#Suggested merge of Steamroller to Road roller), these three articles should remain separate, and the merge banners have therefore now been removed.
EdJogg 23:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
To the editing nazis who jump down your throat in 1/2 a nanosecond as you attempt to clean up pages: back off.
Also: this page visually is garbage, thanks to all the superfluous banners. Remove, ten foot high banners, and put in talk page, centre and enlarge photo. In future, I will take my exceptional editing skills elsewhere, and not be subject to the Meta data meter maids that seem to clog up wiki now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.81.77.33 ( talk) 15:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Flatulence (noun) --- the emergency vehicle that picks you up after you are run over by a steamroller.
These two comments were a reply to a query on the talk page for Rochester, Kent, after I had added a paragraph about Aveling & Porter in the history section. Copied here for convenient reference...
EdJogg 00:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The two biggest makers of traction engines & variants were Aveling & Porter and Fowlers. In the case of A & P somewhere around a third or more of their production was rollers which fits with the figures given. I'm excluding portables from the calculation since other companies such as Garrett and Clayton & Shuttleworth produced masses of those in comparison to their production of over engines.
The 6000 machines cited in the reference would fit with Aveling & Porter's production alone with probably around another 4-5000 from the other makers with Fowler probably being in second place with Marshall third. Marshall is a little strange in that they were still going after most of the others and picked up government related orders in the late 30s and early 40s. Chenab ( talk) 15:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Warning klaxons should go off when an article's "in popular culture" section is as long as the rest of the article. I've a good mind to delete most of this. Chris Cunningham 08:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
EdJogg 12:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Having bumped into roll, which is a disambiguation page, I tried to establish formally whether the 'wheels' on a steam roller (or motor roller) were known as 'rolls' rather than / as well as 'rollers'. (Yes, I wanted to add an entry on that page...)
In the half-hour of googling I had available today, I found no suitable references on-line, but I am convinced that this is the case.
Can anyone please confirm my suspicions, preferably with some appropriate references?
EdJogg 12:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I spent some time looking at contemporary materials last night (Engineer, Engineering and books on Road making). It would appear that initially the wheels were known as rollers but the use changed, probably to avoid using the same term for the machine and also part of it. I would therefore suggest using rolls as the best term, certainly that is the common one in use now to refer to that part of preserved machines.
On the subject the section on wheels is wrong, the front roll is not a single wide cylinder, it is two cylinders side by side with a small gap between the two. This probably seems illogical since it means there is potentially a ridge in the tarmac between the two rolls - in practice this doesn't happen. More importantly having two rolls means there is a chance of steering the beast rather than trying to skid a large single roll in the direction you want to go. Any maker who claimed their roller had fast & responsive steering was almost certainly lying, some early Avelings almost need psychic abilities on behalf of the steersman to know when a turn is coming up. Chenab ( talk) 16:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to avoid any claims of copyvio, the information found on the Anyang Gemco pages: "Services" and "Steam Rolling - An Historical Background" were based on the en:Wikipedia articles ( road roller, steam roller), not the other way round. (I recognised text, phrases and structure that was originally added to both articles by me.) -- EdJogg ( talk) 10:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
"A few steam rollers were still being used for road maintenance in the early 1970s, and this may go some way to explaining why diesel-powered rollers are still colloquially known as steam rollers to this day."
Having just watched a diesel road roller in operation it seems perfectly obvious why they are still colloquially called steam rollers. The lubricating water sprayed on the rolls evaporates very quickly on the hot asphalt, so they tend to leave a cloud of steam behind them. Had I not looked it up I would have continued to assume that was the basis of the name. (I hadn't even considered the idea of steam *powered* rollers) 58.6.229.220 ( talk) 00:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)