This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Urine deflector 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 |
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 |
A fact from Urine deflector appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 14 July 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
Vaticidalprophet (
talk)
17:06, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Created by Andrew Davidson ( talk) and Johnbod ( talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson ( talk) at 13:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC).
Hi all, especially @ Andrew Davidson:, this is a great page and a good way out of the Norwich-anti-urination-AfD. I'm just wondering whether it would better be titled "Measures to control urban urination" or something like that, so that it would be opened up to containing Amsterdam's pee-in-a-planter? This is a move away from the design of potties, but it's in keeping with the motivation for those strange architectural features in the original Norwich article. I have no strong feelings though. This is just a suggestion? Elemimele ( talk) 14:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
The spread of anti-urination measures across the internet appears to me to be proportional to their somewhat tacky shock appeal and a heretofore unappreciated lack of awareness of some aspects of historic architectural design. The widely cited article from the 1809 Farmers magazine has given rise to a largely spurious suggestion that any corner of a building built from solid masonary that has an a small feature with a sloping top must be to stop someone from urinating in that spot. How and why this theory that urination can only take place in a corner began entirely eludes me, but I would suggest a far greater and much more prevalent danger to such noble structures was rain. Damp proofing is now a basic foundation of modern building design, but it is historically recent. bits of sloping wall come under a variety of terms Set-off (architecture), Water table (architecture) and Batter (walls) to name but three. I am unaware of a common name for additional bits stuck into corners to try and prevent damp forming, but it would benefit this project enormously if we could remove items that are clearly misidentified. I would suggest, but cannot wholly substantiate, that of all those illustrated in the gallery currently, only the Coach and Horses Passage feature is what it claims to be whilst those in Clifford's Inn Passage are only shown in the background beyond a misidentified hood mould. Mighty Antar ( talk) 12:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Urine deflector 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 |
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 |
A fact from Urine deflector appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 14 July 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
Vaticidalprophet (
talk)
17:06, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Created by Andrew Davidson ( talk) and Johnbod ( talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson ( talk) at 13:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC).
Hi all, especially @ Andrew Davidson:, this is a great page and a good way out of the Norwich-anti-urination-AfD. I'm just wondering whether it would better be titled "Measures to control urban urination" or something like that, so that it would be opened up to containing Amsterdam's pee-in-a-planter? This is a move away from the design of potties, but it's in keeping with the motivation for those strange architectural features in the original Norwich article. I have no strong feelings though. This is just a suggestion? Elemimele ( talk) 14:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
The spread of anti-urination measures across the internet appears to me to be proportional to their somewhat tacky shock appeal and a heretofore unappreciated lack of awareness of some aspects of historic architectural design. The widely cited article from the 1809 Farmers magazine has given rise to a largely spurious suggestion that any corner of a building built from solid masonary that has an a small feature with a sloping top must be to stop someone from urinating in that spot. How and why this theory that urination can only take place in a corner began entirely eludes me, but I would suggest a far greater and much more prevalent danger to such noble structures was rain. Damp proofing is now a basic foundation of modern building design, but it is historically recent. bits of sloping wall come under a variety of terms Set-off (architecture), Water table (architecture) and Batter (walls) to name but three. I am unaware of a common name for additional bits stuck into corners to try and prevent damp forming, but it would benefit this project enormously if we could remove items that are clearly misidentified. I would suggest, but cannot wholly substantiate, that of all those illustrated in the gallery currently, only the Coach and Horses Passage feature is what it claims to be whilst those in Clifford's Inn Passage are only shown in the background beyond a misidentified hood mould. Mighty Antar ( talk) 12:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)