This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Wastewater 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 article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Velela 08:02, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Re the UASB merge to Wastewater:
Sewage treatment does make more sense than
Wastewater. However, it's a great article now (thanks notably to Alex a.k.a. Vortexrealm). I think we can consider the discussion closed, with no merge. --
Chriswaterguy
talk
09:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC) (formerly Singkong2005)
A bit surprised that urine is presented as a contaminant at the same level as feces. Urine is sterile. ?? Thanks for explanation Basicdesign ( talk) 02:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The article containts two lists with a notice reading "This article is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. You can help by converting this section to prose, if appropriate. Editing help is available. (September 2007)"
Since then apparently nobody tried to convert the lists into prose for the good reason that the information would be lost.
I therefore suggest that the notices be removed and the content remain as lists. Is there anybody against this suggestion? Mregelsberger ( talk) 16:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Under the heading "Wastewater origin" one of the places waste water comes from is listed as:
Storm drains (almost anything, including cars, shopping trolleys, trees, cattle, etc.);
Cars... trees... cattle... in waste water? Doesn't sound right to me, but whatev's =] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.64.207 ( talk) 04:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I am interested in learning about the flowrates of wastewater from various sources, such as per person, per city, per country, or worldwide. One source for that information may be: http://www.eolss.net/EolssSampleChapters/C06/E6-13-04-05/E6-13-04-05-T14.htm but it is difficult to evaluate what this applies to. Can a general treatment of wastewater flowrates be added to this article? Thanks -- Lbeaumont ( talk) 13:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
In-line reference citations should be provided for each section, and preferably for each paragraph, to improve WikiProject Engineering quality classification. Thewellman ( talk) 23:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I've just added information about pathogens that can be in wastewater; however, I have now added the same textblock also to the article on sewage and am now undecided if I should shorten it here (I don't like seeing exactly the same content in two articles...). Perhaps I should shorten it by taking out the examples of the different viruses, bacteria etc.? EMsmile ( talk) 16:09, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
The lead paragraphs started out at 25. I edited just now to clarifying points and reduce sentence length. It's now 37, not significantly better. I'll come back to this after getting some distance. As of now, however, it's hard to see more ways of raising that readability number. Some of the terms are multi-syllabic, which raises that Flesch number. Sanitation is 4. Wasterwater is 3. Conveyance does seem replaceable, but it's such a good word: I kept it. PlanetCare ( talk) 19:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Note to self: good to look for a shot of a water treatment facility, or of a storm drain releasing directly into a body of water. PlanetCare ( talk) 04:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Wastewater. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I feel that the first paragraph of the lead (as per recent changes) is no longer a good summary of the content of the article. In my opinion, the lead should not contain content that is not also in the article itself. With these new additions about collection, this has now happened though. Again, I see content being added that could equally be added at wastewater treatment which will lead to overlapping articles. Proposal: how about we rename this article to "Wastewater management" and refashion it to become the "parent article", and the one on wastewater treatment would become the sub-article? Could that be a suitable solution to the problem of two overlapping articles? This sentence with a reference to a publication from 1910 is also odd to me "Innovative populations diverted flow through their communities to serve as sewers". There is no URL given either, so nobody can check whether the content of that publication is cited correctly. Do we have nothing more recent than a publication from 1910 for this kind of statement? I actually think it's not particularly "innovative" to pollute the drinking water of the people downstream with your own sewage... If anything, that kind of content should be at sewage, not at wastewater which we want to make broader than sewage. EMsmile ( talk) 01:26, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Wastewater is any water used to transport waste, and is most commonly a synonym for:
but the term is also used for:
Thewellman ( talk) 23:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Thewellman I am just wondering if we are currently adding too much detail to the disambiguation page now if we now are listing types of industrial wastewater? Aren't we almost repeating what is in the wastewater template, i.e. here?:
Or is it a matter of the more the merrier? I am unsure what is expected of a disambiguation page. EMsmile ( talk) 06:42, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
EMsmile ( talk) 00:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
I am currently working with several content experts on reviewing 150 Wikipedia articles related to 3 SDGs. This project is described further here. As part of this work, I received comments by Marcos Von Sperling for the articles on wastewater, wastewater treatment, sewage treatment. I received them by e-mail in a marked up Word document so I will copy them to here. I plan to incorporate them into the article and am happy to discuss them further here. EMsmile ( talk) 02:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Metcalf & Eddy / AECOM (2014): “Wastewater is essentially the water supply of a community after it has been used in a variety of applications and which now contains constituents that render it unsuitable for most uses without treatment” Metcalf & Eddy use little the expression ‘sewage’, and employ more ‘domestic wastewater’. But I think ‘sewage’ is well known in many parts of the world, and we should keep it. Metcalf & Eddy: “Common sources of wastewater may include: · Domestic wastewater. Wastewater discharged from residences and from commercial, institutional and public facilities. Domestic wastewater is also known as sanitary wastewater ”. · Industrial wastewater. Wastewater in which industrial wastes predominate. · Infiltration/inflow. Water that enters the collection system through direct and indirect means. · Stormwater. Runoff resulting from rainfall and snowmelt. In my books, that cover mainly municipal wastewater, I also use these concepts from Metcalf. EMsmile ( talk) 02:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
@
Thewellman I don't agree with the change you have made for urban runoff (effectively reverting a change that I had made earlier). You made it (again): *
Urban runoff, which is water used for outdoor cleaning activity and landscape irrigation in densely populated areas created by
urbanization
. It is not from "outdoor cleaning" it is from rainfall! See here:
Urban runoff. It says there Urban runoff is
surface runoff of rainwater created by
urbanization
. Therefore, that's the explanation that we should use. Or have even no explanation and let people click through to the article, might be even better.
EMsmile (
talk)
01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't agree with this either usually leaching, flushing, or washing away wastes from locations those wastes were generated or placed.
[1] If the only publication you can find as a source for this is from 1946 then doesn't that tell us something? If neither Metcalf and Eddy nor the book by Sperling nor the EAWAG compendium say anything about transport as a necessary part of the definition then I don't think we should pull in a source from nearly 80 years ago that does include that information about transport. You seem to emphasise old publications from the US over new & current ones with a global outlook, why is that?
EMsmile (
talk)
01:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
in any combination of domestic, industrial, commercial or agricultural activities, surface runoff/ stormwater, and any sewer inflow or sewer infiltrationdoes not mean it requires treatment (or another pass through the evaporation and precipitation cycle) to make it suitable for its next use. Thewellman ( talk) 19:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
References
I've changed the first sentence of the lead to this "Wastewater is water generated after the use of freshwater, raw water, drinking water or saline water in a variety of deliberate applications or processes." My reasoning: I think it helps to list the possible inputs (have included saline water because of production of brine from desalination). Have added applications and processes because runoff is not really a deliberate application but just happens. - I've also changed this article to a "list" type article (as shown on the talk page). As such, we can keep it really brief. It's just an overview to point people to all the other related articles that have more details. EMsmile ( talk) 10:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Wastewater 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 article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Velela 08:02, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Re the UASB merge to Wastewater:
Sewage treatment does make more sense than
Wastewater. However, it's a great article now (thanks notably to Alex a.k.a. Vortexrealm). I think we can consider the discussion closed, with no merge. --
Chriswaterguy
talk
09:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC) (formerly Singkong2005)
A bit surprised that urine is presented as a contaminant at the same level as feces. Urine is sterile. ?? Thanks for explanation Basicdesign ( talk) 02:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The article containts two lists with a notice reading "This article is in a list format that may be better presented using prose. You can help by converting this section to prose, if appropriate. Editing help is available. (September 2007)"
Since then apparently nobody tried to convert the lists into prose for the good reason that the information would be lost.
I therefore suggest that the notices be removed and the content remain as lists. Is there anybody against this suggestion? Mregelsberger ( talk) 16:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Under the heading "Wastewater origin" one of the places waste water comes from is listed as:
Storm drains (almost anything, including cars, shopping trolleys, trees, cattle, etc.);
Cars... trees... cattle... in waste water? Doesn't sound right to me, but whatev's =] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.64.207 ( talk) 04:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I am interested in learning about the flowrates of wastewater from various sources, such as per person, per city, per country, or worldwide. One source for that information may be: http://www.eolss.net/EolssSampleChapters/C06/E6-13-04-05/E6-13-04-05-T14.htm but it is difficult to evaluate what this applies to. Can a general treatment of wastewater flowrates be added to this article? Thanks -- Lbeaumont ( talk) 13:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
In-line reference citations should be provided for each section, and preferably for each paragraph, to improve WikiProject Engineering quality classification. Thewellman ( talk) 23:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I've just added information about pathogens that can be in wastewater; however, I have now added the same textblock also to the article on sewage and am now undecided if I should shorten it here (I don't like seeing exactly the same content in two articles...). Perhaps I should shorten it by taking out the examples of the different viruses, bacteria etc.? EMsmile ( talk) 16:09, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
The lead paragraphs started out at 25. I edited just now to clarifying points and reduce sentence length. It's now 37, not significantly better. I'll come back to this after getting some distance. As of now, however, it's hard to see more ways of raising that readability number. Some of the terms are multi-syllabic, which raises that Flesch number. Sanitation is 4. Wasterwater is 3. Conveyance does seem replaceable, but it's such a good word: I kept it. PlanetCare ( talk) 19:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Note to self: good to look for a shot of a water treatment facility, or of a storm drain releasing directly into a body of water. PlanetCare ( talk) 04:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Wastewater. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I feel that the first paragraph of the lead (as per recent changes) is no longer a good summary of the content of the article. In my opinion, the lead should not contain content that is not also in the article itself. With these new additions about collection, this has now happened though. Again, I see content being added that could equally be added at wastewater treatment which will lead to overlapping articles. Proposal: how about we rename this article to "Wastewater management" and refashion it to become the "parent article", and the one on wastewater treatment would become the sub-article? Could that be a suitable solution to the problem of two overlapping articles? This sentence with a reference to a publication from 1910 is also odd to me "Innovative populations diverted flow through their communities to serve as sewers". There is no URL given either, so nobody can check whether the content of that publication is cited correctly. Do we have nothing more recent than a publication from 1910 for this kind of statement? I actually think it's not particularly "innovative" to pollute the drinking water of the people downstream with your own sewage... If anything, that kind of content should be at sewage, not at wastewater which we want to make broader than sewage. EMsmile ( talk) 01:26, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Wastewater is any water used to transport waste, and is most commonly a synonym for:
but the term is also used for:
Thewellman ( talk) 23:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Thewellman I am just wondering if we are currently adding too much detail to the disambiguation page now if we now are listing types of industrial wastewater? Aren't we almost repeating what is in the wastewater template, i.e. here?:
Or is it a matter of the more the merrier? I am unsure what is expected of a disambiguation page. EMsmile ( talk) 06:42, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
EMsmile ( talk) 00:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
I am currently working with several content experts on reviewing 150 Wikipedia articles related to 3 SDGs. This project is described further here. As part of this work, I received comments by Marcos Von Sperling for the articles on wastewater, wastewater treatment, sewage treatment. I received them by e-mail in a marked up Word document so I will copy them to here. I plan to incorporate them into the article and am happy to discuss them further here. EMsmile ( talk) 02:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Metcalf & Eddy / AECOM (2014): “Wastewater is essentially the water supply of a community after it has been used in a variety of applications and which now contains constituents that render it unsuitable for most uses without treatment” Metcalf & Eddy use little the expression ‘sewage’, and employ more ‘domestic wastewater’. But I think ‘sewage’ is well known in many parts of the world, and we should keep it. Metcalf & Eddy: “Common sources of wastewater may include: · Domestic wastewater. Wastewater discharged from residences and from commercial, institutional and public facilities. Domestic wastewater is also known as sanitary wastewater ”. · Industrial wastewater. Wastewater in which industrial wastes predominate. · Infiltration/inflow. Water that enters the collection system through direct and indirect means. · Stormwater. Runoff resulting from rainfall and snowmelt. In my books, that cover mainly municipal wastewater, I also use these concepts from Metcalf. EMsmile ( talk) 02:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
@
Thewellman I don't agree with the change you have made for urban runoff (effectively reverting a change that I had made earlier). You made it (again): *
Urban runoff, which is water used for outdoor cleaning activity and landscape irrigation in densely populated areas created by
urbanization
. It is not from "outdoor cleaning" it is from rainfall! See here:
Urban runoff. It says there Urban runoff is
surface runoff of rainwater created by
urbanization
. Therefore, that's the explanation that we should use. Or have even no explanation and let people click through to the article, might be even better.
EMsmile (
talk)
01:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't agree with this either usually leaching, flushing, or washing away wastes from locations those wastes were generated or placed.
[1] If the only publication you can find as a source for this is from 1946 then doesn't that tell us something? If neither Metcalf and Eddy nor the book by Sperling nor the EAWAG compendium say anything about transport as a necessary part of the definition then I don't think we should pull in a source from nearly 80 years ago that does include that information about transport. You seem to emphasise old publications from the US over new & current ones with a global outlook, why is that?
EMsmile (
talk)
01:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
in any combination of domestic, industrial, commercial or agricultural activities, surface runoff/ stormwater, and any sewer inflow or sewer infiltrationdoes not mean it requires treatment (or another pass through the evaporation and precipitation cycle) to make it suitable for its next use. Thewellman ( talk) 19:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
References
I've changed the first sentence of the lead to this "Wastewater is water generated after the use of freshwater, raw water, drinking water or saline water in a variety of deliberate applications or processes." My reasoning: I think it helps to list the possible inputs (have included saline water because of production of brine from desalination). Have added applications and processes because runoff is not really a deliberate application but just happens. - I've also changed this article to a "list" type article (as shown on the talk page). As such, we can keep it really brief. It's just an overview to point people to all the other related articles that have more details. EMsmile ( talk) 10:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)