Talk:Windmill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Energy
Energy Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of high importance within energy.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Environment
Portal		 This environment-related article is part of the Environment WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment.
The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Good article Windmill was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of the Technology WikiProject, a group related to the the study of Technology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Previous discussion without headers

Maybe if there was more information about it, it would be great. For example, how it works and how much power it generates.

The article is now very much focusing on US, Chinese windmills are not treated at all, European mills very much underrepresented. The history and development to replace watermills should be added (windmills are one of the main technological breakthrough of the middle ages) Arnoutf 22:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Three sheets to the wind

The term “Three sheets to the wind” originated with the windmill and not the sailing world. A windmill typically has four arms or frames in which a sheet of canvas or sail could be attached by the miller to harness the wind. When the wind was light a sheet of canvas was attached to each of the four frames. If the wind was heavy only one canvas was used. If the wind was moderate two opposing sheets of canvas was used to keep the torque in balance. The millers never used just three sheets of canvas. They discovered that using three sheets would cause the building to gyrate uncontrollable and topple over, like a drunken sailor.(This unsigned post was added 20:11, 8 February 2006 192.223.243.6 (Talk) )

The discussion on the linked page suggests this is not the case: a cite would be helpful194.176.105.39 16:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't cite a positive refutation but an extensive search through both mill websites and the paper literature fails to come up with a single example of this, and my own experience with working mills suggests that the alleged effect of only spreading three out of four sailcloths (collapse of mill) simply would not occur. Similarly, I know of no case where only one cloth of four is spread. Either two opposite cloths, or all four, are spread. The area of cloth on each sail frame can be varied, simply by rolling or twisting the cloth, from full sail to a small triangle near the inner end of the sail. Ghughesarch 21:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] When invented?

I don't know anything myself on the topic, but were windmills really first invented in the 7th century AD? Some other sources state that they were first invented in Babylon 2000 B.C. http://www.energy.iastate.edu/renewable/wind/wem/wem-04_history.html and http://www.newton.mec.edu/Brown/TE/HOT/STUDENTS/BIALECKI/timeline.html

also, while one of the sources cited (http://web.utk.edu/~persian/windmill.htm) has the windmill invented in 7th century A.D. Persia, the other source cited(http://www.catpress.com/bplanet9/eeolica.htm) has it in 17th century B.C. Persian Babylon. I wasn't able to view the third source because it doesn't seem to link to the appropriate page...

RubyDragon 19:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ireland

I read that windmills always spin counter-clockwise, except for in Ireland. Can anyone verify this?

No, that's not true. The majority turn anti-clockwise, but clockwise mills are not uncommon, for a variety of reasons ranging from the ease or difficulty of re-sharpening millstones dressed to turn in one or other direction, to local preference (many windmills in Cambridgeshire, UK, turn clockwise, for example).Ghughesarch 17:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Windmill

As much as I know, and i'm pretty sure the wind mill was created in Persia.


--Who was that, and what basis do you have for your statement? Since I still haven't found any resolution to the invention of windmills, I've re-added the dubious tag. For some reason somebody took it out. RubyDragon 16:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


I think there is a passage in the Koran where one Persian comes up to the Caliph and offers to build a such a wind-mill. This is, as far as I know, viewed as the first textual evidence that windmills exist.

Any proof on the single-manufacturer in the US, Aermotor? A web check reveals what looks like a LOT of windmill producers...

[edit] Image overdose

As much as I like many pictures on a page, I think this page is a bit over the top heavy on pictures. I would suggest to remove some. (Or add more text). I think the Hessenpark mill (as I see nothing special) may be the first to remove. The UK mill is interesting because of its age. The siberian because of their shape.

The other three are more important (imho) La Mancha because the link to Don Quichotte, The Kinderdijk mills as the Netherlands are most often related to mills; and the Kinderdijk complex is a Unesco world heritage site. The american mill is essential because it illustrates the whole Mills in US section.Arnoutf 19:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I rearranged the images, removed the German one but added a modern example. How's that. Rmhermen 19:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mergefrom Windpump

I think the windpump article could make a nice contribution to this page, while on its own it seems just a bit too small for a full article, therefore I nominated the articles to be merged. Arnoutf 18:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

  • oppose merge. both articles are huge in scope. let them develope. or you could bring whatever material you like into windmill from windpump and let windpump be a subarticle of windmill. cheers. Anlace 19:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • oppose merge As Anlace says, there's too much material for one article. Pollinator 03:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
    • 'Comment Their scope is large, and that may lead to large articles in the future, but currently Windmill is a short, and Windpump a very short article; and both do not seem to expand. Arnoutf 10:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • oppose merge for the reasons statedOxyman42 00:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
  • CommentI see that despite three opposes and no support, the article has been merged anyway. Why? (I can see that in the US the term "windmill" is applied to windpumps, but that is not necessarily the case elsewhere and both topics have the potential to be stand-alone articles Ghughesarch 03:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
The (single) support is of course in the nomination. But I agree there is no consensus. The merge was not conducted by me, but by another editor, so I am not sure about the motivation. What I am sure about though is that since this merge (end februari ie over six weeks ago) no protest has been issued., and that the article including windpumps has received GoodArticle status since. So although I agree the standard procedure is not followed, the end results seems to be a good one.
Al three opposition votes state that there is too much material for a single article; to which I commented and the opposition has been silent after. Have a look at the current combined article and consider whether you agree whether the current article contains that much information the division is necessary at this moment (if the article grows we can always reconsider). Arnoutf 07:50, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, congratulations. Having merged the articles, someone on 10 December 2007 deleted most of the windpump material as "irrelevant". I've only just noticed the change and it would be nice if someone with the skill to do so could either reinstate it here (without destroying the subsequent edits), or reinstate the "windpump" article as it was before the merge. Thanks Ghughesarch (talk) 15:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

The Early History section of this page appears to have been vandalized. If there is someone who can remove the silly stuff and put back in whatever was likely there before it would be much appreciated. --Black Orpheus 21:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I see nothing strange but a very short section. Expansion ok, but to my eyes it looks ok. What do you exactly mean? Arnoutf 21:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. looking through the page history it seems someone has a history of removing various word and substituting "banana" or "chinaman" or whatever. Will keep an eye on it. Ghughesarch 13:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course we should they both are still the same topic!

[edit] Mechanics

I think a section on the inner working of the mills should be added. There are some relevant images on Commons; just showing a few. I think that would improve the article.

Arnoutf 16:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

That would certainly be a good addition. --Grimhelm 08:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone provide a schematic diagram of how a windmill works; especially how the rotation of the blades gets converted into energy that drives the water pump. Much appreciated.—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

As far as I know some kind of bevel gear is used, however rather than using conical gears they use some kind of peg and hole type of gear that are place perpendicular similar to these in the images above. No schematscih though, sorry Arnoutf 13:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
the metal (so-called American) type generally use a crank either on the windshaft or on a secondary shaft geared to the windshaft and driving a vertical pump-rod running down the tower. Here's an Australian one with the cranked windshaft fairly clearly visible [1] and there are numberous detailed photographs linking from here: [2]. I can't find a decent diagram anywhere though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ghughesarch (talk • contribs) 16:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC).
It's covered under Mill machinery. Mjroots (talk) 16:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article

I have passed this article. It is well resourced, broad, well written and showcases some excellent pictures. It conforms with attribution, manual of style and NPOV. Although it's a minor point, there are some citations needed which need looking into if possible. Great work; JameiLei 00:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Lattice windmills in western Canada

I can't speak for anywhere else, but in the western Canadian prairies, lattice-style windmills remain a common sight on farms. AFAIK, they mainly are used these days for water aeration in sloughs. --Hiddekel 17:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent addition to modern windmill section

I removed the following line by an anon user IP because it was unsourced and badly written:

There are many contreversies about the windmill, including the noise level which can reach a maximum of 78.7decibals! Some complain that it kills many birds a year, which is true but even automoblie crashes cause 98times as many bird deaths.

The maybe something in developing this idea as the IP has a point. But it has to be completely redone, have no time now, but wanted it out of article for now. Arnoutf (talk) 09:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The introduction to the article says it excludes wind turbines. On that basis, should this section be here at all? --Northernhenge (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Humorous overwriting removed

I am fixing the phrase "...where due to great amounts of wind and air, turbines have become very useful" under the Modern Windmills section to read "...where due to great amounts of wind turbines have become very useful" since air is found in most locales on Earth.130.13.28.255 (talk) 19:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Delisting GA

This article is listed as a GA, but is not of GA standard, because it has three maintenance tags. If someone is able to fix the specified problems in the next few days, fine. Otherwise I will assign a B class to the article. Johnfos (talk) 03:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Give me a few days but I'll do my best to address all three of the tags. →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • No go. This should never have been listed as a GA. At the time of its listing much of what is unreferenced now was unreferenced then too. →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Appreciate your efforts, Wordbuilder, but I will need to delist the article now, with the hope that it can be re-submitted at WP:GAN when further improvements are made... Johnfos (talk) 01:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Savonius, Panemone and other windmills as Archimedes screw, ...

The Savonius wind turbine, Panemone and certain others have not been described as Water-pumping windmills. These windmills can by the way be build diy. See This article (page 21) for the first 2 andThis article for the others. Also, its best to put the waterpumping windmills on a seperate, new article.

Include in article. Thanks.

KVDP (talk) 10:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

What is their notability?, we cannot include every mill type ever designed. Arnoutf (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
See the documents, certain windmills can be easily build diy, ... As such, they can help people in the developing world or hobbyists. They will also thus also allow environmental advantage. Don't have time to do the article myself, busy on other articles. Please include, as I already done the research now.

KVDP (talk) 08:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Does not answer my question, why would hobbyist use of windmills be notable at all? If we want to say something about use in developing world we need refs for that, which are not in the links in detail. I think the research is incomplete; so will not include (busy on other articles as well, aren't we all). Arnoutf (talk) 14:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this would fit better on the Intermediate technology page, but KVDP should be bold and make the edit him/her self. --Northernhenge (talk) 07:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject

Anybody interested in a Wikiproject on mills? Proposal to form one is here. Mjroots (talk) 16:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

To cover windmills, watermills, etc. Count me in, signed up. New quick link to sign-up is here. doncram (talk) 16:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Films

Moulin Rouge has been added. I've left it in for now, but would like to discuss whether it should remain. The general public would identify the Moulin Rouge as a windmill, but it was never a real working windmill, unlike the other eight that exist in Paris today. So, should it stay, or should it go? Mjroots (talk) 04:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It is imperative that it stay! :) doncram (talk) 16:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I would let it stay. It symbolizes a windmill. Windmills in stories aren't real, working windmills in the tangible sense either (much like Ceci n'est pas une pipe). →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wind pump info

This source provides some specifics that could be used in the wind pump section. Here's a quote:

"Large numbers of wind pumps are also used in Africa, including in South Africa (300,000), Namibia (30,000), Cape Verde (800), Zimbabwe (650), and several other countries (another 2,000)."

Renewable Energy 2007 Status Report Mrshaba (talk) 18:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)