Talk:Window blind
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Mini blind
I added Mini blind to see also. I spent quite some time working on it. According to my research ‘window blind’ refers to all kinds of window blinds and ‘mini blind’ refers only to mini blinds. There’s plenty of room on Wikipedia for Mini blind to be worked on. I put see also 'Window blind' on that article to direct people to this article, since I had never heard the term 'Window blind' before I started researching 'mini blind'. --Chuck Marean 03:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- These should be MERGED. Most of what you write at MINI BLIND is TRIVIAL, REDUNDANT, and more appropriate HERE.
- They shouldn't be. They are two different words with two different meanings. To give enough about Mini blind it should have a separate article. --Chuck Marean 15:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- A mini blind is merley a SUBSET of the larger and more meaningful category fo WINDOW BLINDS. 71.234.194.80 04:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- They shouldn't be. They are two different words with two different meanings. To give enough about Mini blind it should have a separate article. --Chuck Marean 15:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
REALLY, folks, there's NO NEED for a entirely SEPARATE article on mini blind. SILLY.71.234.194.80 11:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The key question is how much of the historical & background content now at mini blind is truly unique and specific to that particular form, versus window blinds in general. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- Window blind is a category of things including mini blind. Separate articles inspire people work on those articles and find info for them, and they show up in Google. Chuck Marean 17:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Origin of Venetian blinds
I've heard, probably in at least two places, that Venetian blinds (despite the name) are actually of Japanese origin. Does anybody know of a source to support or oppose this claim? -- Smjg 17:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Infobox window covering
I made Infobox window covering for this page and others.
|
|||
|
|||
They all shade the room from the sun. |
Chuck Marean 02:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- IMO, this is not an Infobox, but merely a decorated framing & caption of an image, and as such, seems quite superfluous. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
- It aligns to the right. The info it gives is: name of object, picture of object, caption and whatever references are appended to the caption. It has a resemblance to a window with curtains and a shade because it’s for articles about on such things. It’s really no more superfluous than the main page, and other portals, etc. What hues it should be, I’m not sure. It was Halloween. Here’s another setting:
{{Infobox window covering|name= Window Blinds |image= 197292 2587catblindsVertigone.jpg |image size= 181px|caption= Cat tangled in miniblinds |drapecolor= #ccccff|shadecolor= #ccccff}} |
-
- --Chuck Marean 21:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Please familiarize yourself with Help:Infobox, especially the introductory description: "An infobox on Wikipedia is a consistently-formatted table which is present in articles with a common subject to provide summary information consistently between articles or improve navigation to closely related articles in that subject." Your "infobox" does none of this - it merely is a colorful framing of an image that is apparently supposed to resemble a window with curtains (which is clever, but not encyclopedic). I kept the image and caption you included, but the Halloween-themed fluff is superfluous. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- I already read it. This is an infobox. You just claimed it "does none of this." Yet, it's consistent. It's a table. It's for articles with a common subject. It's to provide summary information consistently in those articles. It can be navigation to it's reference. I've read about infoboxes extensively. The above color is for the technology boxes, but keeping box colors the same is a minor opinion on Wikipedia. The fact is, the thum image is also an infobox. It's a box and it contains information. I admit I like this infobox because I helped design it. It has color parameters so a consensus can form about what color it should be in what articles. The halloween colors on this talk page were not ment to be the colors used in articles. Again, the picture frame is ment for articles about shades and curtains. It's somewhat adaptable. The caption could have the toc for example, or it could eventually be made into a nav box. It could be like a taxobox, if someone knows how to classify the various things. Actually, I think the subject of the picture's caption should be window blinds Chuck Marean 04:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Please familiarize yourself with Help:Infobox, especially the introductory description: "An infobox on Wikipedia is a consistently-formatted table which is present in articles with a common subject to provide summary information consistently between articles or improve navigation to closely related articles in that subject." Your "infobox" does none of this - it merely is a colorful framing of an image that is apparently supposed to resemble a window with curtains (which is clever, but not encyclopedic). I kept the image and caption you included, but the Halloween-themed fluff is superfluous. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- --Chuck Marean 21:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, this is not an Infobox. It neither provides summary information consistently between articles nor improves navigation to closely related articles on this subject. Furthermore, because of this, and because of the original design, it is not consistent with Infoboxes on other articles or Wikipedia in general. Plus, the design is too informal. Common sense says that tables in encyclopedias should strive to be formal. --216.165.32.47 (talk) 00:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Recent edits
While I appreciate User:Chuck Marean's enthusiasm, I fear many of his edits are either oversimplifications (this isn't Simple English Wikipedia), redundant (much of the introductory text he added was already stated), or simply unencyclopedic. I've restored the intro section, and moved the (cute) cat image to the gallery, as it is not very illustrative to be a lead image. --ZimZalaBim talk 05:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Again, Chuck, much of your contributions are redundant to the existing text. I'm sure you're proud of your research, but sometimes the article already states what you've added. Please take greater care. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Chuck, explain to me how this edit doesn't merely introduce redundant material. Just 'cause you looked it up in a dictionary doesn't mean it should be added here. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
- Again, Chuck, just because what you added might be "clear and accurate" doesn't mean it is appropriate to include. The article seemed quite sufficiently clear and accurate before you started adding simple and redundant dictionary definitions. I have not reverted these since I don't want to get into a 3RR situation, but please engage in discussion. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- Chuck, explain to me how this edit doesn't merely introduce redundant material. Just 'cause you looked it up in a dictionary doesn't mean it should be added here. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Third Opinion
The dictionary definitions should really be integrated into the main body of the article. Instead of adding content which is repeated with slight variations of phrasing consider rephrasing the existing content and adding the sources - this might be more beneficial, as would adding sources for unsourced statements (I'll flag some up). Consider listing at [Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_copy_edit] by adding {{Copyedit}} to the top of the page. Finally, an illustration for each of the types of blinds would be a great addition. --Davémon 19:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fact & Who
Three comments:
- I think " . . . old technology." and "Drawings in ancient Egyptian tombs of reed blinds have been reported . . ." are from Tweeddale, David, Blinds and Roller Shades, 2007, U.S.A.
- "An awning is considered a blind" is obviously from Gove, Philip, Ph.D., Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, 1961, G. & C. Merriam Company, Springfield, Massachusetts, U.S.A. and/or Pearsall, Judy, Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 2002, Oxford University Press, Inc., New York.
- "Venetian blinds were introduced around 1770, possibly in Venice, Italy" is probably from the Unabridged OED which gives dates and points out that the word Venetian means Venice, Italy. Yet, in my opinion Venetian sounds similar to Phoenician, a person from coastal lands in Syria during pre-Christian times. Why wouldn't they have been invented in some year BCE? Even today, they are sometimes made of wood.
Chuck Marean 18:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] gallery
Bigger version of the gallery, but I suppose it’s alright the way it is:
Chuck Marean 18:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Types and sagging
I put the Types section contributed by Paleologo & Tra before the Automobile blinds section. Also, I paraphrased the paragraph on sagging horizontal blinds somebody wrote. I put it right before the first vertical blinds paragraph. Chuck Marean 21:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History mystery
Just saw a TV movie from 1984 about George Washington which showed venetian blinds. Is that yet another goof by set designers, or could colonial America have had venetian blinds? Shenme (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)