This is a
WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
This is the
talk page for discussing
WikiProject Sanitation and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
Article policies
|
Sanitation NA‑class | |||||||
|
James Doc_James|talk: You had once written this to me, how would we go about this now? "One could also collect articles within this subject area and then have automated lists formed of the most read articles to help direct peoples efforts." EvM-Susana ( talk) 20:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Is it worth mentioning here that 'high quality' sources in sanitation might not be regarded by other wikipedians as being 'high quality', particularly if they overlap significantly with health/medicine? We would usually count much that is in the SuSanA library as high quality, but this might not be the case in discussions of health impacts - where I have learned today that good quality sources are review articles in high quality journals. This could confuse a stupid person. JMWt ( talk) 22:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
One source that I consider high quality and of a very general nature is Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies. 2nd Revised Edition by TILLEY, E.; ULRICH, L.; LUETHI, C.; REYMOND, P.; ZURBRUEGG, C. [1]. The online version is updated frequently, as recently as august 2016 as of this writing. It is available in English and French.
Abstract: A second, revised edition of the Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies has been recently published by Eawag, WSSCC and the International Water Association. It features updated content, a number of new additions, and will also be available in French.
One important thing it does is to attempt to include and define all possible sanitation systems. It could save us a lot of trouble trying to define various sanitation systems.˜˜˜˜
Nirmal_Bharat_Abhiyan and the Indian Total Sanitation campaign is one to add to the list (I've not yet worked out the system for assessment of quality..
I'm not sure it is based on CLTS, is it? JMWt ( talk) 09:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Doc, do you know how this works: if one clicks on 'what links here' on the CLTS page you get this list: Special:WhatLinksHere/Community-led_total_sanitation, some of which seem unrelated. But I can't see the page link on some of those pages.. is this inaccurate and/or taking a long time to update? JMWt ( talk) 09:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I proposing that we start a 'sanitation term and acronyms' glossary as per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Glossaries. Anyone object and/or have a preference as to how it looks? JMWt ( talk) 07:40, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Just to say that I am going to populate a list with a few more terms in my namespace before moving it to the main. It'd look a bit sad without many terms and it might be easier to see if it has any value if it has quite a few terms in it already. JMWt ( talk) 14:35, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
--> but these things are not straight forward, e.g. I would not agree with your definition of helminths nor humanure. For helminths, if anything, use the first sentence of the helminth page. Humanure - I disagree with (see page on compost). We will have similar debates if you start to include the term ecosan... The only solution I would see is to strictly use the first sentence of the Wikipedia page (and then debate on the talk page of that article if needed). But why even take a sentence at all. If the term has a Wikipedia page then simply linking to that page is sufficient. - I still think it is going to end up in a big mess if you mix up a list of abbreviations with a list of "interesting terms" from the area of sanitation... EvM-Susana ( talk) 15:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'm done. Make a list or glossary or don't. I'm too busy to argue about whether or not worm parasites are the same as parastic worms. JMWt ( talk) 16:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
We are making good progress on the list of abbreviations. I would like to either move it to a separate page now or to hide the alphabetical letters of the list from the table of contents (but I haven't been able to work out how to do this). EvM-Susana ( talk) 12:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Sanitation to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Sanitation/Popular pages.
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the Tool Labs tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr. Z-man 07:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, I recently declined the draft Draft:Human excreta over at AfC. Would it be possible to have a discussion as to whether this material could stand alone or whether it might be better suited for inclusion in an existing article, perhaps in sustainable sanitation? Thank you, /wia /talk 18:13, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestions regarding my proposed "human excreta" article. For some background, until my proposal, the term "human excreta" was included under the "human waste" article and as a redirect to same. It is crucial to realize, however, that given the reasons I lay out in the article, while they may refer to the same material, their use (as terms) couldn't be more different. IOW one describes a "waste" material while the other describes a "resource". Since "human waste" has its own article I felt it was only right that "human excreta" has its own article as well. Please note that I modestly reworked the article and have added an additional reference (a TedX presentation), the latter of which may assist you in understanding the basis from which I am proposing the article. Now, as far as neutrality goes, I'm unclear how to improve the neutrality of an article that is in effect describing a political (and thus opinionated) concept or, said another way, a politicized term. Therefore, what ever additional assistance you can provide will be most appreciated. Thanks again. Gruster ( talk) 17:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).-- Lucas559 ( talk) 16:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Venting is under discussion, see talk:Venting (disambiguation) -- 67.70.32.190 ( talk) 05:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Garbage is under discussion, see talk:garbage (disambiguation) -- 70.51.202.113 ( talk) 04:22, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
List here any sanitation pages we don't yet have, or which should be expanded as sections of pages that we do have.
These terms might need better definitions (not necessarily a page to themselves):
These terms need new pages:
Please add to the above with any other suggestions! Thanks JMWt ( talk) 08:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sanitation#Lists_by_content EvM-Susana ( talk) 13:02, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Honey bucket to be moved to bucket toilet. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 16:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Although 2 years older, the lead of honeywagon appears to be a WP:CONTENTFORK of vacuum truck. The reason I say the lead is because the section on film and television use discusses a different, but related, concept; portable toilet blocks. Whilst these toilet blocks could be a section at the portable toilet article, I'm mindful that they might not be a familiar sight outside of the UK. So to clarify, there are essentially two types; the one mentioned in the honeywagon article are the towed or trailer mounted style, which are designed to be used on a temporary basis. The other is a portable building that has been outfitted as a public toilet, these arrive on a flatbed truck and are craned into place. As such they are semi-permanent structures. (Searching Google for toilet trailer and prefabricated toilet block may give you a better idea if needed.) Also, because the section on film and television use is unreferenced, it's not possible to ascertain if the industry refers to all production trailers as honeywagons, or if this claim is based on a misconception. i.e. there is a "large" company called Hollywood Honeywagon and Production Vehicles (emphasis mine). Little pob ( talk) 22:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
There is an interesting discussion on the talkpage of Effective microorganism which highlights something I've been a bit worried about for a while.
When we were thinking about and improving the content of that page, I think we tended to think of EM and latrine/sanitation additives as being essentially interchangeable ideas. As a reader now states on the talkpage, this tend to make the page lean rather heavily in the direction of sanitation when EM is more generally known in agriculture. I am also now not sure whether we should in fact include references on that page which do not specifically mention EM, but which are talking about additives. On the one hand, I still think they are likely talking about the same thing, on the other I think it is a legitimate complaint that EM is being criticised with references which do not actually mention it, and which might not be being used as the company behind it intend. So the issue is whether "Effective microorganism" is specifically a brand name, a general idea/concept or something else.
I think we should think and talk about this a bit more. I think I'm now in favour of having a separate page for latrine additives, where most of the references can reside, and a short section on the EM page pointing to it. It seems to me that it is inarguable that some are using EM as a latrine additive, but I'm now now sure that all latrine additives are by definition EM. JMWt ( talk) 14:36, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Odor to be moved to smells. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 20:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Template:Public health needs some TLC and general improvement. Please help. Bazj ( talk) 20:41, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello
Just a quick note to mention that the article Water pollution had been reviewed by an external expert Access to review notes here, as part of Wikipedia Primary School Research Project. Feedback welcome ! Anthere ( talk)
Hello, I've been improving various articles in the toilet template and there are some curious gaps. I'm not sure what the best names for them are, but I'm thinking (to start with) of two types of modern, not historic, toilet. One is a small, simple, cheap, portable chemical toilet; two brand names I associate with them are Portapotti (NOT the American Portapotty, which are small buildings) and Elsan. The second type I've only seen on documentaries. It (or they - I assume the model has been constructed more than once) is an ambitious and relatively high-tech public toilet in an "informal settlement" (=slum) in a poor country. Users pay, which funds the salary of an attendant to keep the place safe and clean. The tech part is that the excreta is processed on-site, generating something of value, perhaps methane, I can't remember. (This article should link to the modern pigsties or cowbyres that produce cooking gas in peasant villages - same principle.) Any ideas? Do we have articles on these two toilets, perhaps under another name, or as a section that needs expanding? Carbon Caryatid ( talk) 19:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
That's great, thanks. Are you mainly interested in the historical terms? The template for toilets should help to provide an overview, have you checked it?: /info/en/?search=Toilet Keep in mind that meny of the terms used are alternative terms for the same thing, just slightly different with a lot of overlap or they are historical terms that were used in certain countries and not used in others. E.g. dunny is very much an Australian word and is basically the same as pit latrine. Outhouse is a historical term and has a lot of overlap with pit latrine as well. Outhouse is meant to be for the house/structure of the toilet outdoors but the way it is written, there is a lot of overlap. - My own emphasis is on the terms that are used in the current discourse on sanitation, and that's e.g. pit latrine, bucket toilet, fecal sludge (the other terms are also important but more from a historian's perspective only, like slopping out). If you want to know what the currently used terms are, then I recommend this glossary: http://www.sswm.info/glossary/2/lettera or this one: http://ecompendium.sswm.info/glossary EvMsmile ( talk) 07:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
You said above that a dunny is not a pit latrine. Well from a technical viewpoint in most cases, it is. As far as I can see, dunny is just the Australian slang for a toilet that is outdoors (same as outhouse) and in most cases this would equate to a pit latrine, or it could also be a bucket toilet (or a composting toilet, I guess). I guess the more interesting part about the article "dunny" is how this term has been used in Australian language and perhaps some of the humor attached to it. EvMsmile ( talk) 02:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello All,
I have recently done some major changes to the page toilet. I am doing some major changes to the page, and have posted on the talk page requesting feedback. Since that page rarely gets a view, I am putting this here as well.
Cheers - JoshMuirWikipedia ( talk) 03:44, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello all, just wanted to let you know that I am going to be starting to edit the article Neglected tropical diseases soon. I am currently working as a part of the Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities class at Rice University. My question is this: Do you have any suggestions for how to reorganize the order? In my opinion, the flow of the article is not great. I am going to be posting my plan soon on my own pages. Thanks! Akweaver32 ( talk) 19:08, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Update: This is the link to the full proposal. https://docs.google.com/a/rice.edu/document/d/1GjMAVcSkGDW2rM1ECM6BoeU8jK46i2HuCsJ60-ZxPjk/edit?usp=sharing Akweaver32 ( talk) 18:42, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
I'd like to invite anyone who has this page on their watchlist to take part in a webinar that will take place on 24 November 2016. In this webinar we invite people to learn and discuss about this WikiProject and also the Kiwix offline version of Wikipedia. Further information is available here: http://forum.susana.org/component/kunena/146-webinars-and-online-meetings/19556-susana-monthly-webinar-6-improving-wikipedias-sanitation-content-for-online-or-offline-use-thursday-24-november-900-am-cet-stockholm-time
Hope to see some of you there! EvMsmile ( talk) 12:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Please excuse if this is not the best place to ask: I am not familiar with this project's structure, so feel free to point me to a better place.
Reviewing new articles, I came across Witch's kiss and Poseidon's kiss. My first inclination was to propose them for deletion as poorly-sourced neologisms. But before I do, I thought I should check here in case you prefer to rescue these articles or merge them into some existing article. If I don't hear otherwise in a couple of days, I will nominate for deletion. -- Gronk Oz ( talk) 12:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Can some of you please take a look at these two pages: vermifiltration and vermifilter. I think they should be merged, see talk page: /info/en/?search=Talk:Vermifilter#Proposed_merge_with_Vermifiltration . The page vermifiltration does not have a very good structure and would need a lot of additional work. References should have URLs etc. EvMsmile ( talk) 15:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Editors with an interest in this subject are invited to comment on this discussion of recent and proposed changes to Wikipedia coverage and nomenclature. Thewellman ( talk) 20:09, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
The suggestion has been raised to hold an edit-a-thon on or just before World Water Day (22 March) with the aim to push for improved articles on WASH topics. This page looks quite useful for preparation: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:How_to_run_an_edit-a-thon
What do the members of this WikiProject Sanitation think about this suggestion? Could it work? Would you like to be involved? Have you been in any other successful Edit-a-thons? If your are interested to get involved, please reply here and watch this space or contact me. EvMsmile ( talk) 22:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Doc James, User:mll_mitch, User:David Allen Still, User:Gruster, User:Jknappe, User:RobynWaite13, User:Kevintayler, User:FloNight, User:CFCF, User:Mregelsberger, User:IRSDPakistan, User:JoshMuirWikipedia, User:Akweaver32, User:Dmrobbins10, User:Efuhrm, User:lividlili, User:Meshuwa, User:NightLyrical, User:exobarbiche EMsmile ( talk) 12:03, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Anyone with an interest in sanitation, or in gravity sewer in particular, please head over to the talk page of gravity sewer and provide your opinion regarding the structure of that article. I am proposing to move the history section to later and to used a different style of referencing. I think the article fits fair and square into WikiProject Sanitation and it would be nice if it followed the same structure as the others. Just trying to collect more opinions on this. EMsmile ( talk) 19:52, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
We are planning an editing event head of World Toilet Day in October 2017. If you want to get involved, leave a note here or add yourself as a member to the WikiProject Sanitation here. EMsmile ( talk) 10:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I have started to write a List of sanitation technologies in French, largely inspired by the Compendium. THis way I can gradually follow the links to add a blurb about each. I was thinking of adding an infobox to the beginning of such articles, and I was wondering 1) if it is a good idea, and 2) what should go into such an infobox. So far I was thinking of:
Anything else? It's relatively easy to add fields anyway. Thanks! le Korrigan →bla 20:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure about the use of infoboxes. They have them for medical articles, and for the country profiles on water and sanitation. But for technologies, I am not sure if it is worth the effort? Would people really look and read there and gain much from them? Do you have perhaps an example? EMsmile ( talk) 22:56, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
WikiProject Sanitation | |
---|---|
A septic tank being installed in the ground | |
Position in sanitation chain | Collection and storage/treatment (on-site) [1] |
Application level | Household or neighborhood level (schools, hotels etc.) [1] |
Management level | Household, public, shared (most common is household level) [1] |
Inputs | blackwater (waste), greywater, brownwater [1] |
Outputs | Fecal sludge, effluent [1] |
Types | Single tank or multi-chamber septic tanks (potentially with baffles) [1] |
Environmental concerns | Groundwater pollution, water pollution e.g. during floods [1] |
EMsmile ( talk) 02:30, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Shall we make a separate Menstruation navbox? There are a wide variety of topics to incorporate in relations to menstruation.
And if this WikiProject isn't the right place to discuss about proposing a separate Menstruation navbox, where shall I discuss with? Qwertyxp2000 ( talk | contribs) 04:34, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
EMsmile ( talk) 02:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Please see this thread for discussions on a possible merger of the below three projects:
Thanks, Reh man 12:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
India: Water and Sanitation | ||
---|---|---|
Data | ||
Access to at least basic water | 88% (2019) [2] | |
Access to at least basic sanitation | 98.9% (2019) [3] | |
Average urban water use (liter/capita/day) | 126 (2006) [4] | |
Average urban water and sewer bill for 20m3 | US$2 (2007) [5] | |
Share of household metering | 55 percent in urban areas (1999) [6] | |
Share of collected wastewater treated | 27% (2003) [7] | |
Annual investment in water supply and sanitation | US$5 / capita [8] | |
(content cut for shorter table in demo) |
In 2007 Mschiffler established Wikipedia:WikiProject Water supply and sanitation by country. That project produced articles for nearly every country.
For 2019, here are the most popular articles in the category:
Many of these articles use an infobox. It is possible to make custom infoboxes in Wikipedia, but for this collection, there is no custom infobox.
I ran a count and found 57 of these national articles which could have a box. Possibly a box could work on state or city government articles. I think at least one for each country is useful, so 300 instances, and possibly boxes for other kinds of places.
code
|
---|
{| style="width: 25em; font-size: 90%; text-align: left;" class="infobox" |- ! style="text-align:center; background:lightblue;" colspan="2"|<big>India: Water and Sanitation</big> |- | colspan="2" style="text-align:center" | [[Image:Flag of India.svg|100px]] |- ! style="text-align:center; background:lightblue;" colspan="3"|Data |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Access to at least basic water |valign="top"| 88% (2019)<ref name="JMP2017">WHO and UNICEF (2017) [https://washdata.org/reports Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines]. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2017</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Access to at least basic sanitation |valign="top"| 98.9% (2019)<ref>https://data.unicef.org/resources/data_explorer/unicef_f/?ag=UNICEF&df=GLOBAL_DATAFLOW&ver=1.0&dq=.WS_PPL_S-ALB..&startPeriod=2014&endPeriod=2019</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Average urban water use (liter/capita/day) |valign="top"| 126 (2006)<ref name="WSP Kuwasip">{{cite web|last=World Bank Water and Sanitation Program (WSP):|title=The Karnataka Urban Water Sector Improvement Project: 24x7 Water Supply is Achievable|url=http://www.wsp.org/wsp/sites/wsp.org/files/publications/WSP_Karnataka-water-supply.pdf|accessdate=20 August 2012|date=September 2010}}</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Average urban water and sewer bill for 20m3 |valign="top"| {{USD}}2 (2007)<ref name="ADB 2007, p. 3">[[Asian Development Bank]]:[http://www.adb.org/publications/2007-benchmarking-and-data-book-water-utilities-india 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India], 2007, p. 3</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Share of household [[water metering|metering]] |valign="top"| 55 percent in urban areas (1999)<ref name="NIUA">National Institute of Urban Affairs: [https://www.scribd.com/doc/23362613/Status-of-Water-Supply-Sanitation-and-Solid-Waste-Management-in-Urban-Areas-Part-1 Status of Water Supply, Sanitation and Solid Waste Management], 2005, p. xix–xxvi. The evaluation is based on a survey of all 23 metropolitan cities in India (cities with more than 1 million inhabitants) and a representative sample of 277 smaller cities with an aggregate population of 140 million. The survey was carried out in 1999.</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Share of collected [[sewage treatment|wastewater treated]] |valign="top"| 27% (2003)<ref name="GTZ"/> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Annual investment in water supply and sanitation |valign="top"| {{USD}}5 / capita<ref name="11th 5-year plan">[[Planning Commission (India)]]:[http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/strgrp11/str11_hud1.pdf DRAFT REPORT OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE ON URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR ELEVENTH FIVE YEAR PLAN (2007–2012)], 2007. Retrieved 15 April 2010.</ref> |- ! style="text-align:center; background:lightblue;" colspan="3"|Institutions |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Decentralization to municipalities |valign="top"| Partial |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|National water and sanitation company |valign="top"| No |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Water and sanitation regulator |valign="top"| No |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Responsibility for policy setting |valign="top"| State Governments; Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Ministry of Urban Development and Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation at the Federal Level |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Sector law |valign="top"| No |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Number of urban service providers |valign="top"| 3,255 (1991) |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Number of rural service providers |valign="top"| about 100,000 |} |
citations
|
---|
References
|
I think instead of having a custom infobox for each place we should have a standard infobox. Advantages would include easier readability of the code as compared to the code text I pasted above, and more certainty about including fields for comparison, and it would be a step toward integration with Wikidata.
About the Wikidata - Wikipedia does not currently publish infobox content from Wikidata, but it will someday, and Wikidata is especially useful for content like this. In the case of India people update these fields regularly and fail to use citations. We could update all countries at once from the base dataset, which would give the boxes to all countries (~300) and all languages (~10, for now) at once. This is not technically feasible right now but there are a lot of international policymakers watch progress in sanitation, so I think we could get good attention on Wikipedia if we got progress on our publishing over the next few years.
This is just a slow idea for now. Thoughts from others?
Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, there is a new RfC here on whether the scope of the article wet market should include those outside of Southeast/East Asia. Any participation is welcome! — MarkH21 talk 21:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
There is a requested move at Talk:Rubicon Global that would benefit from your opinion. Please come and help! P.I. Ellsworth ed. put'r there 17:18, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
There is a WP:featured article review underway for menstrual cycle. Considering information about this topic is vital for many girls and women around the world, it would be worth saving the star or at least updating it partially. Any volunteers here? FemkeMilene ( talk) 09:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, |
I have discussed with a couple of users about the possibility of promoting Sewage treatment to Good article status and have received support for the idea.
To do so is likely to have repercussions for other articles to avoid duplication and excessive overlap. We would need to agree whether Sewage is merged into the article, how we represent Wastewater treatment and whether we partition of some topics as has happened for Secondary treatment. There have already been some very helpful suggestions here. Does this seem sensible and worthwhile project to be doing and, because it impacts a number of articles, is this the best place to coordinate it? I will post a note on Talk:Sewage treatment about the discussion here. Velella Velella Talk 15:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is underway about changing the name of reuse of excreta. Please take part in the discussion on the talk page here. EMsmile ( talk) 01:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Myself and User:Thewellman have recently been working on the articles on sewage, sewage treatment, wastewater and wastewater treatment. I would appreciated if a few more editors could cast their eyes on these articles (including their talk pages) and help us improve them further. I think those topics are important enough to warrant more than just two editors. Thanks in advance. (you don't have to be an expert in sewage treatment to contribute in a meaningful way) EMsmile ( talk) 02:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Interesting draft, I think he meets WP:GNG, but there are WP:BLP and maybe WP:COI issues. For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 13:45, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
A discussion is underway about changing the name of reclaimed water to "wastewater reuse". Please take part in the discussion on the talk page here. EMsmile ( talk) 09:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
I seek feedback about a new article I am considering writing. The proposed article would cover the history and development of drainage and sewerage in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, up to the present day.
Drainage has been a significant issue for the development of the city because parts of what is now urban Christchurch were swamp land, prior to European settlement. Sewage collection, treatment and disposal has also been a significant issue for the city over the years (and is also a current issue because of a recent fire that caused major damage to the sewage treatment works). Drainage and sewage infrastrucutre sustained major damage and was a significant issue following the large 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and there are also drainage issues associated with sea level rise.
I have found some good sources, and there are lots of mentions of drainage and sewage topics in digitised Christchurch newspapers from prior to 1900 up to 1970. Here is one source: Christchurch - Swamp to City - A Short History of the Christchurch Drainage Board 1875-1989, by John Wilson 1989 [1]. There are sufficient sources to allow a new article to be created, but perhaps this is not the best solution, because it might receive very few page views.
I seek feedback about whether it is best to create a new article, or add content on this topic to existing articles. Here are some existing article options and my comments:
Article name | Size | Pageviews | Comment |
---|---|---|---|
Christchurch | 42kB | 29,651 | There is a "Utilities" section but it only covers electricity. A new sub-topic on drainage and sewage could be added. |
Christchurch#History | 42kB | 29,651 | Content about history of drainage and sewage could be added into the history section of the Christchurch article, but it would need to be limited to avoid unbalancing the section |
Bromley, New Zealand | 5kB | 297 | The suburb of Bromley includes the city sewage treatment plant and oxidation ponds. However, the issues of drainage and sewage extend across the entire city, the rivers and the estuary near Bromley. Content about the development of the city drainage networks could be added to the Bromley article, but is likely to unbalance the article, which is intended to be about the suburb. |
History of Canterbury, New Zealand | 59kB | 145 | A problematic article at present. It probably needs splitting. Few page views. Canterbury is a large region, but the topic of drainage in Christchurch city has a relatively narrow focus. |
History of water supply and sanitation | 46kB | 8,388 | This article has world-wide coverage, so content about an individual city is too narrowly focussed |
Water supply and sanitation in New Zealand | 19kB | 314 | This article has a national focus, so content about an individual city may be too narrowly focussed. The existing Sanitation section needs major work (but with a national, rather than local focus). |
I look forward to some feedback before I get underway. Marshelec ( talk) 21:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at
Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent
Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{
WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{
WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present.
Aymatth2 (
talk) 13:50, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Water supply and sanitation in Colombia has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 20:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I've created a topic-exclusive barnstar for this WikiProject, happy editing and cheers!
The Sanitation Barnstar | ||
message ~~~~ |
- Jerium ( talk) 21:10, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Water supply and sanitation in the United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 02:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
This is a
WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
This is the
talk page for discussing
WikiProject Sanitation and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
Article policies
|
Sanitation NA‑class | |||||||
|
James Doc_James|talk: You had once written this to me, how would we go about this now? "One could also collect articles within this subject area and then have automated lists formed of the most read articles to help direct peoples efforts." EvM-Susana ( talk) 20:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Is it worth mentioning here that 'high quality' sources in sanitation might not be regarded by other wikipedians as being 'high quality', particularly if they overlap significantly with health/medicine? We would usually count much that is in the SuSanA library as high quality, but this might not be the case in discussions of health impacts - where I have learned today that good quality sources are review articles in high quality journals. This could confuse a stupid person. JMWt ( talk) 22:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
One source that I consider high quality and of a very general nature is Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies. 2nd Revised Edition by TILLEY, E.; ULRICH, L.; LUETHI, C.; REYMOND, P.; ZURBRUEGG, C. [1]. The online version is updated frequently, as recently as august 2016 as of this writing. It is available in English and French.
Abstract: A second, revised edition of the Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies has been recently published by Eawag, WSSCC and the International Water Association. It features updated content, a number of new additions, and will also be available in French.
One important thing it does is to attempt to include and define all possible sanitation systems. It could save us a lot of trouble trying to define various sanitation systems.˜˜˜˜
Nirmal_Bharat_Abhiyan and the Indian Total Sanitation campaign is one to add to the list (I've not yet worked out the system for assessment of quality..
I'm not sure it is based on CLTS, is it? JMWt ( talk) 09:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Doc, do you know how this works: if one clicks on 'what links here' on the CLTS page you get this list: Special:WhatLinksHere/Community-led_total_sanitation, some of which seem unrelated. But I can't see the page link on some of those pages.. is this inaccurate and/or taking a long time to update? JMWt ( talk) 09:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
I proposing that we start a 'sanitation term and acronyms' glossary as per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Glossaries. Anyone object and/or have a preference as to how it looks? JMWt ( talk) 07:40, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Just to say that I am going to populate a list with a few more terms in my namespace before moving it to the main. It'd look a bit sad without many terms and it might be easier to see if it has any value if it has quite a few terms in it already. JMWt ( talk) 14:35, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
--> but these things are not straight forward, e.g. I would not agree with your definition of helminths nor humanure. For helminths, if anything, use the first sentence of the helminth page. Humanure - I disagree with (see page on compost). We will have similar debates if you start to include the term ecosan... The only solution I would see is to strictly use the first sentence of the Wikipedia page (and then debate on the talk page of that article if needed). But why even take a sentence at all. If the term has a Wikipedia page then simply linking to that page is sufficient. - I still think it is going to end up in a big mess if you mix up a list of abbreviations with a list of "interesting terms" from the area of sanitation... EvM-Susana ( talk) 15:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'm done. Make a list or glossary or don't. I'm too busy to argue about whether or not worm parasites are the same as parastic worms. JMWt ( talk) 16:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
We are making good progress on the list of abbreviations. I would like to either move it to a separate page now or to hide the alphabetical letters of the list from the table of contents (but I haven't been able to work out how to do this). EvM-Susana ( talk) 12:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Sanitation to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Sanitation/Popular pages.
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the Tool Labs tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr. Z-man 07:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, I recently declined the draft Draft:Human excreta over at AfC. Would it be possible to have a discussion as to whether this material could stand alone or whether it might be better suited for inclusion in an existing article, perhaps in sustainable sanitation? Thank you, /wia /talk 18:13, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestions regarding my proposed "human excreta" article. For some background, until my proposal, the term "human excreta" was included under the "human waste" article and as a redirect to same. It is crucial to realize, however, that given the reasons I lay out in the article, while they may refer to the same material, their use (as terms) couldn't be more different. IOW one describes a "waste" material while the other describes a "resource". Since "human waste" has its own article I felt it was only right that "human excreta" has its own article as well. Please note that I modestly reworked the article and have added an additional reference (a TedX presentation), the latter of which may assist you in understanding the basis from which I am proposing the article. Now, as far as neutrality goes, I'm unclear how to improve the neutrality of an article that is in effect describing a political (and thus opinionated) concept or, said another way, a politicized term. Therefore, what ever additional assistance you can provide will be most appreciated. Thanks again. Gruster ( talk) 17:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).-- Lucas559 ( talk) 16:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Venting is under discussion, see talk:Venting (disambiguation) -- 67.70.32.190 ( talk) 05:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Garbage is under discussion, see talk:garbage (disambiguation) -- 70.51.202.113 ( talk) 04:22, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
List here any sanitation pages we don't yet have, or which should be expanded as sections of pages that we do have.
These terms might need better definitions (not necessarily a page to themselves):
These terms need new pages:
Please add to the above with any other suggestions! Thanks JMWt ( talk) 08:38, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sanitation#Lists_by_content EvM-Susana ( talk) 13:02, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Honey bucket to be moved to bucket toilet. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 16:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Although 2 years older, the lead of honeywagon appears to be a WP:CONTENTFORK of vacuum truck. The reason I say the lead is because the section on film and television use discusses a different, but related, concept; portable toilet blocks. Whilst these toilet blocks could be a section at the portable toilet article, I'm mindful that they might not be a familiar sight outside of the UK. So to clarify, there are essentially two types; the one mentioned in the honeywagon article are the towed or trailer mounted style, which are designed to be used on a temporary basis. The other is a portable building that has been outfitted as a public toilet, these arrive on a flatbed truck and are craned into place. As such they are semi-permanent structures. (Searching Google for toilet trailer and prefabricated toilet block may give you a better idea if needed.) Also, because the section on film and television use is unreferenced, it's not possible to ascertain if the industry refers to all production trailers as honeywagons, or if this claim is based on a misconception. i.e. there is a "large" company called Hollywood Honeywagon and Production Vehicles (emphasis mine). Little pob ( talk) 22:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
There is an interesting discussion on the talkpage of Effective microorganism which highlights something I've been a bit worried about for a while.
When we were thinking about and improving the content of that page, I think we tended to think of EM and latrine/sanitation additives as being essentially interchangeable ideas. As a reader now states on the talkpage, this tend to make the page lean rather heavily in the direction of sanitation when EM is more generally known in agriculture. I am also now not sure whether we should in fact include references on that page which do not specifically mention EM, but which are talking about additives. On the one hand, I still think they are likely talking about the same thing, on the other I think it is a legitimate complaint that EM is being criticised with references which do not actually mention it, and which might not be being used as the company behind it intend. So the issue is whether "Effective microorganism" is specifically a brand name, a general idea/concept or something else.
I think we should think and talk about this a bit more. I think I'm now in favour of having a separate page for latrine additives, where most of the references can reside, and a short section on the EM page pointing to it. It seems to me that it is inarguable that some are using EM as a latrine additive, but I'm now now sure that all latrine additives are by definition EM. JMWt ( talk) 14:36, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Odor to be moved to smells. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 20:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Template:Public health needs some TLC and general improvement. Please help. Bazj ( talk) 20:41, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello
Just a quick note to mention that the article Water pollution had been reviewed by an external expert Access to review notes here, as part of Wikipedia Primary School Research Project. Feedback welcome ! Anthere ( talk)
Hello, I've been improving various articles in the toilet template and there are some curious gaps. I'm not sure what the best names for them are, but I'm thinking (to start with) of two types of modern, not historic, toilet. One is a small, simple, cheap, portable chemical toilet; two brand names I associate with them are Portapotti (NOT the American Portapotty, which are small buildings) and Elsan. The second type I've only seen on documentaries. It (or they - I assume the model has been constructed more than once) is an ambitious and relatively high-tech public toilet in an "informal settlement" (=slum) in a poor country. Users pay, which funds the salary of an attendant to keep the place safe and clean. The tech part is that the excreta is processed on-site, generating something of value, perhaps methane, I can't remember. (This article should link to the modern pigsties or cowbyres that produce cooking gas in peasant villages - same principle.) Any ideas? Do we have articles on these two toilets, perhaps under another name, or as a section that needs expanding? Carbon Caryatid ( talk) 19:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
That's great, thanks. Are you mainly interested in the historical terms? The template for toilets should help to provide an overview, have you checked it?: /info/en/?search=Toilet Keep in mind that meny of the terms used are alternative terms for the same thing, just slightly different with a lot of overlap or they are historical terms that were used in certain countries and not used in others. E.g. dunny is very much an Australian word and is basically the same as pit latrine. Outhouse is a historical term and has a lot of overlap with pit latrine as well. Outhouse is meant to be for the house/structure of the toilet outdoors but the way it is written, there is a lot of overlap. - My own emphasis is on the terms that are used in the current discourse on sanitation, and that's e.g. pit latrine, bucket toilet, fecal sludge (the other terms are also important but more from a historian's perspective only, like slopping out). If you want to know what the currently used terms are, then I recommend this glossary: http://www.sswm.info/glossary/2/lettera or this one: http://ecompendium.sswm.info/glossary EvMsmile ( talk) 07:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
You said above that a dunny is not a pit latrine. Well from a technical viewpoint in most cases, it is. As far as I can see, dunny is just the Australian slang for a toilet that is outdoors (same as outhouse) and in most cases this would equate to a pit latrine, or it could also be a bucket toilet (or a composting toilet, I guess). I guess the more interesting part about the article "dunny" is how this term has been used in Australian language and perhaps some of the humor attached to it. EvMsmile ( talk) 02:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello All,
I have recently done some major changes to the page toilet. I am doing some major changes to the page, and have posted on the talk page requesting feedback. Since that page rarely gets a view, I am putting this here as well.
Cheers - JoshMuirWikipedia ( talk) 03:44, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello all, just wanted to let you know that I am going to be starting to edit the article Neglected tropical diseases soon. I am currently working as a part of the Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities class at Rice University. My question is this: Do you have any suggestions for how to reorganize the order? In my opinion, the flow of the article is not great. I am going to be posting my plan soon on my own pages. Thanks! Akweaver32 ( talk) 19:08, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Update: This is the link to the full proposal. https://docs.google.com/a/rice.edu/document/d/1GjMAVcSkGDW2rM1ECM6BoeU8jK46i2HuCsJ60-ZxPjk/edit?usp=sharing Akweaver32 ( talk) 18:42, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
I'd like to invite anyone who has this page on their watchlist to take part in a webinar that will take place on 24 November 2016. In this webinar we invite people to learn and discuss about this WikiProject and also the Kiwix offline version of Wikipedia. Further information is available here: http://forum.susana.org/component/kunena/146-webinars-and-online-meetings/19556-susana-monthly-webinar-6-improving-wikipedias-sanitation-content-for-online-or-offline-use-thursday-24-november-900-am-cet-stockholm-time
Hope to see some of you there! EvMsmile ( talk) 12:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Please excuse if this is not the best place to ask: I am not familiar with this project's structure, so feel free to point me to a better place.
Reviewing new articles, I came across Witch's kiss and Poseidon's kiss. My first inclination was to propose them for deletion as poorly-sourced neologisms. But before I do, I thought I should check here in case you prefer to rescue these articles or merge them into some existing article. If I don't hear otherwise in a couple of days, I will nominate for deletion. -- Gronk Oz ( talk) 12:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Can some of you please take a look at these two pages: vermifiltration and vermifilter. I think they should be merged, see talk page: /info/en/?search=Talk:Vermifilter#Proposed_merge_with_Vermifiltration . The page vermifiltration does not have a very good structure and would need a lot of additional work. References should have URLs etc. EvMsmile ( talk) 15:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Editors with an interest in this subject are invited to comment on this discussion of recent and proposed changes to Wikipedia coverage and nomenclature. Thewellman ( talk) 20:09, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
The suggestion has been raised to hold an edit-a-thon on or just before World Water Day (22 March) with the aim to push for improved articles on WASH topics. This page looks quite useful for preparation: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:How_to_run_an_edit-a-thon
What do the members of this WikiProject Sanitation think about this suggestion? Could it work? Would you like to be involved? Have you been in any other successful Edit-a-thons? If your are interested to get involved, please reply here and watch this space or contact me. EvMsmile ( talk) 22:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Doc James, User:mll_mitch, User:David Allen Still, User:Gruster, User:Jknappe, User:RobynWaite13, User:Kevintayler, User:FloNight, User:CFCF, User:Mregelsberger, User:IRSDPakistan, User:JoshMuirWikipedia, User:Akweaver32, User:Dmrobbins10, User:Efuhrm, User:lividlili, User:Meshuwa, User:NightLyrical, User:exobarbiche EMsmile ( talk) 12:03, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Anyone with an interest in sanitation, or in gravity sewer in particular, please head over to the talk page of gravity sewer and provide your opinion regarding the structure of that article. I am proposing to move the history section to later and to used a different style of referencing. I think the article fits fair and square into WikiProject Sanitation and it would be nice if it followed the same structure as the others. Just trying to collect more opinions on this. EMsmile ( talk) 19:52, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
We are planning an editing event head of World Toilet Day in October 2017. If you want to get involved, leave a note here or add yourself as a member to the WikiProject Sanitation here. EMsmile ( talk) 10:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I have started to write a List of sanitation technologies in French, largely inspired by the Compendium. THis way I can gradually follow the links to add a blurb about each. I was thinking of adding an infobox to the beginning of such articles, and I was wondering 1) if it is a good idea, and 2) what should go into such an infobox. So far I was thinking of:
Anything else? It's relatively easy to add fields anyway. Thanks! le Korrigan →bla 20:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure about the use of infoboxes. They have them for medical articles, and for the country profiles on water and sanitation. But for technologies, I am not sure if it is worth the effort? Would people really look and read there and gain much from them? Do you have perhaps an example? EMsmile ( talk) 22:56, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
WikiProject Sanitation | |
---|---|
A septic tank being installed in the ground | |
Position in sanitation chain | Collection and storage/treatment (on-site) [1] |
Application level | Household or neighborhood level (schools, hotels etc.) [1] |
Management level | Household, public, shared (most common is household level) [1] |
Inputs | blackwater (waste), greywater, brownwater [1] |
Outputs | Fecal sludge, effluent [1] |
Types | Single tank or multi-chamber septic tanks (potentially with baffles) [1] |
Environmental concerns | Groundwater pollution, water pollution e.g. during floods [1] |
EMsmile ( talk) 02:30, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Shall we make a separate Menstruation navbox? There are a wide variety of topics to incorporate in relations to menstruation.
And if this WikiProject isn't the right place to discuss about proposing a separate Menstruation navbox, where shall I discuss with? Qwertyxp2000 ( talk | contribs) 04:34, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
EMsmile ( talk) 02:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Please see this thread for discussions on a possible merger of the below three projects:
Thanks, Reh man 12:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
India: Water and Sanitation | ||
---|---|---|
Data | ||
Access to at least basic water | 88% (2019) [2] | |
Access to at least basic sanitation | 98.9% (2019) [3] | |
Average urban water use (liter/capita/day) | 126 (2006) [4] | |
Average urban water and sewer bill for 20m3 | US$2 (2007) [5] | |
Share of household metering | 55 percent in urban areas (1999) [6] | |
Share of collected wastewater treated | 27% (2003) [7] | |
Annual investment in water supply and sanitation | US$5 / capita [8] | |
(content cut for shorter table in demo) |
In 2007 Mschiffler established Wikipedia:WikiProject Water supply and sanitation by country. That project produced articles for nearly every country.
For 2019, here are the most popular articles in the category:
Many of these articles use an infobox. It is possible to make custom infoboxes in Wikipedia, but for this collection, there is no custom infobox.
I ran a count and found 57 of these national articles which could have a box. Possibly a box could work on state or city government articles. I think at least one for each country is useful, so 300 instances, and possibly boxes for other kinds of places.
code
|
---|
{| style="width: 25em; font-size: 90%; text-align: left;" class="infobox" |- ! style="text-align:center; background:lightblue;" colspan="2"|<big>India: Water and Sanitation</big> |- | colspan="2" style="text-align:center" | [[Image:Flag of India.svg|100px]] |- ! style="text-align:center; background:lightblue;" colspan="3"|Data |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Access to at least basic water |valign="top"| 88% (2019)<ref name="JMP2017">WHO and UNICEF (2017) [https://washdata.org/reports Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines]. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2017</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Access to at least basic sanitation |valign="top"| 98.9% (2019)<ref>https://data.unicef.org/resources/data_explorer/unicef_f/?ag=UNICEF&df=GLOBAL_DATAFLOW&ver=1.0&dq=.WS_PPL_S-ALB..&startPeriod=2014&endPeriod=2019</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Average urban water use (liter/capita/day) |valign="top"| 126 (2006)<ref name="WSP Kuwasip">{{cite web|last=World Bank Water and Sanitation Program (WSP):|title=The Karnataka Urban Water Sector Improvement Project: 24x7 Water Supply is Achievable|url=http://www.wsp.org/wsp/sites/wsp.org/files/publications/WSP_Karnataka-water-supply.pdf|accessdate=20 August 2012|date=September 2010}}</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Average urban water and sewer bill for 20m3 |valign="top"| {{USD}}2 (2007)<ref name="ADB 2007, p. 3">[[Asian Development Bank]]:[http://www.adb.org/publications/2007-benchmarking-and-data-book-water-utilities-india 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India], 2007, p. 3</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Share of household [[water metering|metering]] |valign="top"| 55 percent in urban areas (1999)<ref name="NIUA">National Institute of Urban Affairs: [https://www.scribd.com/doc/23362613/Status-of-Water-Supply-Sanitation-and-Solid-Waste-Management-in-Urban-Areas-Part-1 Status of Water Supply, Sanitation and Solid Waste Management], 2005, p. xix–xxvi. The evaluation is based on a survey of all 23 metropolitan cities in India (cities with more than 1 million inhabitants) and a representative sample of 277 smaller cities with an aggregate population of 140 million. The survey was carried out in 1999.</ref> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Share of collected [[sewage treatment|wastewater treated]] |valign="top"| 27% (2003)<ref name="GTZ"/> |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Annual investment in water supply and sanitation |valign="top"| {{USD}}5 / capita<ref name="11th 5-year plan">[[Planning Commission (India)]]:[http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/strgrp11/str11_hud1.pdf DRAFT REPORT OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE ON URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR ELEVENTH FIVE YEAR PLAN (2007–2012)], 2007. Retrieved 15 April 2010.</ref> |- ! style="text-align:center; background:lightblue;" colspan="3"|Institutions |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Decentralization to municipalities |valign="top"| Partial |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|National water and sanitation company |valign="top"| No |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Water and sanitation regulator |valign="top"| No |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Responsibility for policy setting |valign="top"| State Governments; Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Ministry of Urban Development and Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation at the Federal Level |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Sector law |valign="top"| No |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Number of urban service providers |valign="top"| 3,255 (1991) |- ! style="text-align:left; vertical-align:top;"|Number of rural service providers |valign="top"| about 100,000 |} |
citations
|
---|
References
|
I think instead of having a custom infobox for each place we should have a standard infobox. Advantages would include easier readability of the code as compared to the code text I pasted above, and more certainty about including fields for comparison, and it would be a step toward integration with Wikidata.
About the Wikidata - Wikipedia does not currently publish infobox content from Wikidata, but it will someday, and Wikidata is especially useful for content like this. In the case of India people update these fields regularly and fail to use citations. We could update all countries at once from the base dataset, which would give the boxes to all countries (~300) and all languages (~10, for now) at once. This is not technically feasible right now but there are a lot of international policymakers watch progress in sanitation, so I think we could get good attention on Wikipedia if we got progress on our publishing over the next few years.
This is just a slow idea for now. Thoughts from others?
Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, there is a new RfC here on whether the scope of the article wet market should include those outside of Southeast/East Asia. Any participation is welcome! — MarkH21 talk 21:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
There is a requested move at Talk:Rubicon Global that would benefit from your opinion. Please come and help! P.I. Ellsworth ed. put'r there 17:18, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
There is a WP:featured article review underway for menstrual cycle. Considering information about this topic is vital for many girls and women around the world, it would be worth saving the star or at least updating it partially. Any volunteers here? FemkeMilene ( talk) 09:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, |
I have discussed with a couple of users about the possibility of promoting Sewage treatment to Good article status and have received support for the idea.
To do so is likely to have repercussions for other articles to avoid duplication and excessive overlap. We would need to agree whether Sewage is merged into the article, how we represent Wastewater treatment and whether we partition of some topics as has happened for Secondary treatment. There have already been some very helpful suggestions here. Does this seem sensible and worthwhile project to be doing and, because it impacts a number of articles, is this the best place to coordinate it? I will post a note on Talk:Sewage treatment about the discussion here. Velella Velella Talk 15:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is underway about changing the name of reuse of excreta. Please take part in the discussion on the talk page here. EMsmile ( talk) 01:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Myself and User:Thewellman have recently been working on the articles on sewage, sewage treatment, wastewater and wastewater treatment. I would appreciated if a few more editors could cast their eyes on these articles (including their talk pages) and help us improve them further. I think those topics are important enough to warrant more than just two editors. Thanks in advance. (you don't have to be an expert in sewage treatment to contribute in a meaningful way) EMsmile ( talk) 02:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Interesting draft, I think he meets WP:GNG, but there are WP:BLP and maybe WP:COI issues. For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 13:45, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
A discussion is underway about changing the name of reclaimed water to "wastewater reuse". Please take part in the discussion on the talk page here. EMsmile ( talk) 09:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
I seek feedback about a new article I am considering writing. The proposed article would cover the history and development of drainage and sewerage in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, up to the present day.
Drainage has been a significant issue for the development of the city because parts of what is now urban Christchurch were swamp land, prior to European settlement. Sewage collection, treatment and disposal has also been a significant issue for the city over the years (and is also a current issue because of a recent fire that caused major damage to the sewage treatment works). Drainage and sewage infrastrucutre sustained major damage and was a significant issue following the large 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and there are also drainage issues associated with sea level rise.
I have found some good sources, and there are lots of mentions of drainage and sewage topics in digitised Christchurch newspapers from prior to 1900 up to 1970. Here is one source: Christchurch - Swamp to City - A Short History of the Christchurch Drainage Board 1875-1989, by John Wilson 1989 [1]. There are sufficient sources to allow a new article to be created, but perhaps this is not the best solution, because it might receive very few page views.
I seek feedback about whether it is best to create a new article, or add content on this topic to existing articles. Here are some existing article options and my comments:
Article name | Size | Pageviews | Comment |
---|---|---|---|
Christchurch | 42kB | 29,651 | There is a "Utilities" section but it only covers electricity. A new sub-topic on drainage and sewage could be added. |
Christchurch#History | 42kB | 29,651 | Content about history of drainage and sewage could be added into the history section of the Christchurch article, but it would need to be limited to avoid unbalancing the section |
Bromley, New Zealand | 5kB | 297 | The suburb of Bromley includes the city sewage treatment plant and oxidation ponds. However, the issues of drainage and sewage extend across the entire city, the rivers and the estuary near Bromley. Content about the development of the city drainage networks could be added to the Bromley article, but is likely to unbalance the article, which is intended to be about the suburb. |
History of Canterbury, New Zealand | 59kB | 145 | A problematic article at present. It probably needs splitting. Few page views. Canterbury is a large region, but the topic of drainage in Christchurch city has a relatively narrow focus. |
History of water supply and sanitation | 46kB | 8,388 | This article has world-wide coverage, so content about an individual city is too narrowly focussed |
Water supply and sanitation in New Zealand | 19kB | 314 | This article has a national focus, so content about an individual city may be too narrowly focussed. The existing Sanitation section needs major work (but with a national, rather than local focus). |
I look forward to some feedback before I get underway. Marshelec ( talk) 21:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at
Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent
Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{
WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{
WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present.
Aymatth2 (
talk) 13:50, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Water supply and sanitation in Colombia has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 20:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I've created a topic-exclusive barnstar for this WikiProject, happy editing and cheers!
The Sanitation Barnstar | ||
message ~~~~ |
- Jerium ( talk) 21:10, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Water supply and sanitation in the United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 02:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)