Talk:Cordwood construction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In general, what do building inspectors think of cordwood construction and what about codes?

Contents

[edit] Totally depends on the area

Mostly, inspectors know little to nothing about it. Usually what ends up happening them it convincing the inspector that the structure is sound by incorporating timber-frame or post-and-beam support for the roof, and then just considering the cordwood to be wall infill.

FWIW, in my case, I am still planning to build and am lucky enough to have purchased land outside the city limits and the reach of the inspectors.


[edit] Two meanings

Should this page now be disambiguated for the building and electronics meanings? --Light current 03:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I believe so. They are very different and likely both worth individual pages. That's just my opinion though. --Kickstart70 03:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I disagree, at least given the amount of content on the page right now. The two meanings are exactly parallel and having them on the same page highlights that fact.
Atlant 12:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Agree with Light current's proposal. The page should be disambiguated. I note that there is a section on the electronics application of the term in the article on Printed circuit boards. Sunray 02:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The merge notice was posted months ago. Four people have commented. Three spoke in favor and one opposed the merge. Seventy-five percent constitutes a supermajority, which is usually considered consensus on talk pages. I will complete the merge to the Printed circuit board article. Sunray 07:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation link added. Sunray 15:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link for Natural Building Network

Someone added this link for the Natural Building Network. It got reverted as link spam, so I checked it out. In my view (and I am into natural building) it is an excellent resource. By this, I mean that anyone seeking to learn more about natural building would find this link informative. For example the site has a "Comparison of Natural Building Techniques" by Michael Smith that is one of the best compendiums I've seen. Given the state of the natural building field (new and rapidly growing), there is a need for good information about it. This link is a valuable addition, IMO and I would like to keep it unless there are compelling reasons for its removal. Comments? Sunray 00:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm seeing this post quite belatedly, but here's why I deleted the link: if you look at the edit history of the guy who added it, you'll see that it was indeed a spam link, even if it did have good content. Besides, under WP:EL, good, relevant content should be rewritten and added to the article, not added as a link, except in the (rare) case of good content that somehow doesn't belong in the article. I know, this isn't always practical, but it is the ideal (and it's policy). Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 00:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sounds pretty cool

It seem like the sustainability of cord wood doesn't have much going for it. I wonder if it's worth the time and effort besides aesthetics reasons? QueenMonarch 01:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It does have a lot going for it in terms of expense, and it's actually a better use of wood than log homes, in my opinion. Of course, that is just an opinion. :) --Kickstart70-T-C 19:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page and references cleanup

I just spent (too much) time doing a decent references and notes cleanup, but I see that a number of the references at the end of the article are not cited from the article content. Does anyone know where these could be connected? Otherwise, they should probably be removed, even if they are good resources, as per WP policy of references used as cites whenever possible.

I also removed the reference to the 'cordwoodguy' website. This was a difficult choice, but there have been so many factual errors discussed regarding his information over at other internet discussion forums, I think it's prudent. --Kickstart70-T-C 19:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)