Talk:Candle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
WikiProject Echo has identified Candle as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Dutch language Wikipedia. |
Contents |
[edit] which period?
The article says that paraffin candles were especially used in the colonial period: which period? Whose colonies? which ones? this could do with some clarification.CharlusIngus 06:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fire hazard
IMO it's more effective to remind the reader that Leaving an open flame unattended is dangerous than to bury that in a long list of warnings. Note that none of the other situations cautioned about pose an actual threat unless unattended (by a human of responsible age and able body and mind.) Mkweise 16:16 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)
- Well, if clothes or a curtain catch fire that may be serious, even if you are there. - Patrick 22:40 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)
- I agree with parent. Is the lecture _really_ all that necessary. Any naked flame is dangerous; I fail to see what a list of possible occurences could bring to an article about candles. To be honest, the article could do without even mentioning the dangers of a naked flame - the average person should have enough common sense to realise them, with fire being one of mankinds' luxuries since before time immemorial.
maybe this could be served a little better by creating a section called candle safety or something of the like? --Jpittman 20:06, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The fire hazard should be emphasized, regardless of "obviousness". People who use candles daily are likely to be aware of the danger, or at least used to behaving in a fairly safe way. People who use them very occasionally might just think of them as "cute" rather then "deadly", and will not have proper habits. 69.87.204.77 14:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] dripping; lead in wicks
I came to the Candle item for info about dripless candles. I am suprised to see no mention at all of dripping, let alone what special circumstances cause it not to happen. // // // I see there is a discussion of hazards. It is certainly appropriate to note in some fashion that candles are the cause of many fires, esp when used by those not regular users, such as during power outages. *** But there are other hazards. I think lead in wicks is one. -kethd Nov 2004 Boston MA
[edit] Christmas Candle
I have added a shot of a candle which we use in Denmark to count the number of days left until Christmas.
If people feel that it makes the page too crowded, then of course just remove it. Martin Geisler 11:06, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Hazards
I removed the following sentence from the Hazards section because it's a bit vague:
Studies have indicated that the burning of paraffin wax releases a number of known toxins, including the carcinogen benzene.
"Studies have indicated" is very vague. What studies? Are they reliable studies? If there is benzene released, is the amount more than negligible? After doing a Google search, I couldn't find much on this except from soy wax advocates, which may not be the most impartial sources. As written, it seems to me that this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. eaolson 16:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Response: You're right, there needs to be a reference to something particular. The fact is, paraffin wax is a solid form of kerosene, and there is no doubt that burning it releases trace amounts of several accepted carcinogens into the air. In addition, the particulates released by any candle can pose a problem to people with respiratory allergies. Would it be acceptable to you if I changed the first paragraph to mention that most modern candles are made of paraffin wax, which is a petroleum product, and that candles can also be made from beeswax (common, traditional) and, in recent years, soy? Then if I can find some reliable source, add something to the hazards about both problems I mention above at a later time? --Trint 19:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I have added a note of blowing out larger candles. Unfortunately, this advice is only based on one incident and I have no knowledge of the frequency of this type of accident but as the result was quite serious for the individual, and very unexpected, I think it is worth including. All that is known for certain is that whilst Christine Haseler of Cheltenham was blowing out a "normal" 3-4" candle, which had been burning long enough to create a large cup, a fireball was created which caused 2nd degree burning all over her face. I don't want to imply blowing out all candles is dangerous (as I don't believe it is!) so I have added a likely mechanism to make it clear the danger is with large candles where the bowl can create a cup redirecting the air flow back out of the candle. Wax cannot create a fireball unless it is superheated to a gas (unlikely in this case) or finely divided as an aerosol (most likely). I don't know the exact mechanism by which the wax was forced into the aerosol so "vortex" seemed a vague enough term to imply the probable speeded up circular motion around the wick and the reflective motion of the hot wax aerosol back into the face! - MH 5th July 2006
- Frankly, I'm skeptical about this. It's completely unverified, and a Google search on "Christing Hasler" and "candle" came up with nothing. I don't think a single incident that happened to someone you know is particularly encyclopedic, especially as you yourself say you're not sure exactly what happened. I think it unlikely that blowing out a candle could create an aerosol of wax droplets sufficient enough to ignite and create a fireball, unless she was blowing as hard as she possibly could. eaolson 05:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, OK, I misspelled her name in the edit summary. I'm a poor typist. Your sarcasm aside, a Google search for "Christine Haseler" yields no relevant hits. As such, this single incident is does not meet requirements for verifiability. As no sources were cited, your proposed mechanism for this incident is original research. Listing the incident violates two Wikipedia policies. As for the physics of your mechanism: melted wax has a low enough vapor pressure that no appreciable amount of evaporation takes place, nor is melted wax aerosolized in any candle I've seen. Without any sort of support for your statements, it's just unsupported rumor, and inappropriate for listing here. eaolson 23:36, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
<The best way to avoid getting burned from Blowing on candles is to NOT blow on them. The best thing to do it get a Snuffer. Most places that sell candles will have them. It is a small metal cup on a long handle. You simply place the cup over the flame cutting off oxygen. Tada, flame out-no burn.MryStr 17:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] How do you get melted wax off of a carpet??
- Place a piece of thin white paper over the wax and apply a clothes iron: the wax will melt and be wicked into the paper. njh 04:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gravity?
This image from NASA that would, in my opinion, be a good inclusion: candle in microgravity. Candles require gravity to function efficiently: The air is heated causes a convection current, carrying away the hot (less dense) CO2 and water vapor, and bringing colder fresh oxygen. Although, many other things besides gravity are requred for a flame (that are taken for granted too), like the presence of oxygen and air pressure, and a lower ambient air temperature than the flame, but few (when lacking) result in such a beautifully illustrative photograph. Thoughts? Splarka (rant) 03:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- This is Wikipedia, so you know what to do: be bold! I think this would be a good addition to the article.
- Atlant 13:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC) (well, as soon as I log back in!)
[edit] Can't hold a candle to me
Anybody know when candles were first added to birthday cakes? (I've seen 13h century Germany mentioned somewhere...) Trekphiler 23:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sealing wax
Someone please add something about sealing wax and letters and candles, common a few centuries ago. 69.87.204.77 14:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
