Image talk:SI-metrication-world.png
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- This page has been moved from Image talk:SI-adoption-world.png
The different shades of purple representing 1860-1960 are virtually indistinguishable, at least on my laptop here. -- Beland 06:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree. Why not use the colors of the rainbow instead? --Lorenzarius 02:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Distinction
This really should not bear the qualifier of 'adoption', because the USA adopted the metric system over one hundred years ago. They just haven't fully converted yet. It should probably be 'conversion', or something like that. DarrenBaker 03:26, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- They didn't adopt the metric system, they simply removed a ban on its use, decriminalising it. Seabhcán 19:36, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- No, I'm afraid that's simply not true. It was NEVER illegal or banned, and what's more, they officially adopted it as the standard in 1893. [1] DarrenBaker 06:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- In every country laws exist which regulate trade of particular products and the units that they are traded in. This is to allow market transparency in comparing prices. US laws proscribe (or used to) that, for example, hay must be sold by the bushel and gas by the gallon. It would be illegal to sell gas by the cubic foot, or by fluid oz. However, at various times the US has permitted the use of metric units (decriminalising it). So, it may be illegal to sell cloth by the ell, but it is legal to sell it by the metre as well as the yard. Often individual laws must be passed for each product or industry. The UK thought it had legalised the metric system by a sweeping but simple law in 1863. However, lawyers and judges have tended to listen to older laws which ban it in specific cases. Thus there have been hundreds of laws passed since to permit metric in varous industries, the most recent in 1995. Seabhcán 09:14, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I understand what you're saying, but since the US was involved in the development and standardisation of SI itself, and then was one of the first 17 countries to adopt the length and weight measures as standard, I would consider the more detailed machinations that followed to be moot. They adopted the metric system, but did not use it, except to define their common measurements. Miles, feet, yards, pounds and inches are all defined in the NIST in terms of their metric equivalents, and have been since that date in 1863. Whether or not it's in common usage doesn't matter. DarrenBaker 16:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- If it's not in common usage then its the US is not a metricated country, and that is what this image and related articles are about. Some guys in Washington wrote some nice words about the metric system in 1863, but it didn't change the reality. It's like if Kennedy had made his wonderful speach about going to the moon in 1963, but nothing had been done. The US would have 'adopted' the plan of going to the moon. Nice words are only turned into reality by a lot of hard work. Seabhcán 16:38, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Well, if the image had to do with common acceptance and usage, then your point would be well made. Unfortunately, the image refers (referred? I don't see it here any more) to adoption, and therefore is incorrect. I don't think in any way that the US is a metricated country, just that it's in the slow laborious process of being metricated. My point was just that the image should have borne the qualifier of 'converted' or 'metric in common usage', and not 'adopted'. DarrenBaker 18:21, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- So you're argueing about the word 'adopted' If you would like to rename the image, be my guest. Seabhcán 18:29, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, I was. At the beginning. Then the image moved, so it's all been for naught, really. DarrenBaker 18:36, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Moved? From where. It is and always was at Image:SI-adoption-world.png Seabhcán 18:45, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Ah, I see the problem - I'm a berk, that's the problem. I neglected to notice that this is the discussion page. Pardon my noncery. DarrenBaker 18:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Changed. Thanks, Seabhcán! DarrenBaker 19:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Algeria
I personally like the colours (although it might be advisable to grade them as far as yellow), but Algeria wasn't invaded by France until 1830, so it shouldn't be blue.
[edit] East Timor
I'm not sure if East Timor is the correct colour. I assume the colour suggests it changed between 1940 and 1959. Portugal (its colonizer) adopted metric at home well before 1940, and East Timor changed sovereignty in 1975 (independence and then invasion by Indonesia) and 1999 (independence). If East Timor had decided to change to metric in between changes of governments, then you'd expect it to be listed in the table cited (it is not).
Please tell me that the author did give East Timor back to Indonesia! Andjam 10:31, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- I was missing a lot of information on some countries (hence the grey patches) and I'm sure I made mistakes on others. Please feel free to correct it if you have better data. Also, yes the colours didn't turn out fantastic - everything seems to look purple. But I don't have special software for creating these maps. Seabhcán 19:40, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] UK
I thought the UK was metric now, at least officially, even though it has not entered popular use completely maybe? -- and just checking the chart that the map is based on it said that Britain went metric in the 1960s Astrokey44 11:47, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- The UK took a decision to go metric in the 60's and made a legal commitment to do so in 1973 as part of it;s conditions of membership of the EEC (now EU), but then did almost nothing about it. Things have been gradually going metric since, but the country is certainly not metric (I live there now). All road signs are in Miles, however most packaged food is in either metric or dual measurements. The EU is still demanding that they change fully, and they (including the UK) agreed a date in 2010 when this will be completed. Seabhcán 19:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- I think it should be noted in the description on the map page then, because it says the data has come from that source Astrokey44 13:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The UK is to all intents and purposes metric. Everything, is defined in metric, the inch is now defined as 2.54 cm (since 1958). While some everyday things still have an imperial value as well, pretty much everything is given in metric, not just food, but petrol, weights and heights of people in medical records, medicines are in ml or mg, engine capacity is in cc, lumber is sold by metric mesurements, etc.. No one uses rods, poles or perches any more, and the last time I heard anyone metion a Firkin as a measurement was 1974. Rich Farmbrough 22:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
- My experience is that nearly everything to do with industry or business is in metric, while most things dealing with the public is in imperial. This is particularly true of distance measurement, weights and heights of people. Food is labeled in dual measurements, while it is always spoken about in imperial.Seabhcán 16:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
With the exception of road sign in miles and yards and draught beer in pints the United Kingdom is entirely metric, I am sitting in the UK now drinking 330ml of cola. This map is wrong.
- Agreed. The only non-metric usages in the UK are road distances, car speeds, draught alcohol and milk. It's very rare to see dual usage - almost everything is 100% metric. Bluap 14:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Milk? In my experience it's sold by the litre, though I mostly buy it from supermarkets (I presume there are still such things as milkmen since I seem to recall seeing a milk float a couple of years back; I'd imagine they still sell by the pint). Really though, nobody I know in my generation uses imperial predominantly unless they're talking about long distances (10+ miles) or beer. Even the old height-in-feet-and-inches has mostly died in favour of centimetres, and when my father mentions the ambient temperature in Fahrenheit we have to stop and perform some calculations. Anyway, my point is that this image is really not accurate. If I get 15 minutes spare in the next day or two (and the Gimp decides to go that long without crashing, so it's not that likely), I might re-colour it and see if anybody objects. Waywocket 00:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed Tancred 16:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. This is certainly my experience. Dual usage occurs mainly in greengrocers: the rulers they have in schools now have centimetres on one edge and millimetres on the other. rcrowdy
- Incorrect. Most rules have millimeters and centimeters on one side, and inches on the other. 86.21.71.222 23:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. There is the occasional situation in which some people informally use an imperial unit, but that's certainly no grounds to label the whole UK as "non-metric". 213.107.97.72 20:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Do you mean rulers? Rulers in the United States also have both metric and imperial measurements, but that doesn't mean that the metric units are used in most instances.
[edit] n.a.
What does n.a. mean on this diagram? Do people in those countries not measure anything? PRB 10:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Update
The Republic of Ireland completed metrication on January 20, 2005. This map needs to be updated to reflect this. 64.128.179.40 17:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- wouldnt that mean the map is up to date anyway - Ireland is currently colored as having gone metric 'after 1980' - thats what I read it as -- Astrokey44|talk 18:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hainan
How did Hainan Island end up being a different colour from the rest of China? -- ran (talk) 11:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Canada
Canada started the conversion to metric in the 1970s
[edit] Dates
Are the dates supposed to mean before this date, or after it? If the latter, then New Zealand should be coloured as 1960-1979. Either way, it should be clearer.
[edit] black
i like how the countries that dont use metric are coloured in black like theyre stuck in the dark ages.
[edit] South of South America... in red?
The island of Tierra del Fuego, in the extreme South of South America is part Chilean and part Argentinian... so it can't have a colour diferent to Argentina and Chile... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.59.196.66 (talk) 12:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
