Talk:Urine deflector

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet (talk) 17:06, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Urine deflector at the Bank of England
Urine deflector at the Bank of England

Created by Andrew Davidson (talk) and Johnbod (talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk) at 13:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • Not a review, but at a glance FNSs 8, 9, 10, 11 all seem to be blogs with no indication they are reliable, the atlas obscura article seems to be entirely user-generated (rather than their editorial content), and the german hydrophobic paint would seem to have no connection to the stated scope of the article. In fact, it almost feels like there are a few entirely different concepts that have been separately called "urine deflectors" which have been combined into one article here-- I don't see the connection between the US military, babies, and the bank of England. Aside from using the same name, they seem to be different things... Is this independently notable outside of the broader concept of public urination? Eddie891 Talk Work 14:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The recent AfD demonstrated a consensus that the concept is ok and that we should have a more general article about it; and so here it is. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, "A urine deflector is a device for deflecting the stream of urine during urination." seems clear enough; that's one concept. Some at the Norwich Afd complained the article was too specific - you can't please all Wikipedians all the time, it seems. Johnbod (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @The C of E: I've not looked closely at the April Fool process before. I see that there's no time limit so that aspect is ok. Being run on that day may improve the chances of getting the picture slot as, on a more normal day, this hook will get put in the quirky slot (like many of my nominations). As I made a special trip to take the photograph, braving the virus on the Central Line, I'd quite like to give the picture the best chance of exposure. So, I suggest you proceed with the review with the possibility of April in mind and see how that goes. Thanks for the suggestion. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Date has the pressure off and the length is number one (behave!). I have whizzed over the book source and it has made a big splash by the fact the hook is cited in it and in the article. QPQ has been deposited. And any close paraphrasing has been flushed away. Good to go for relief on April fools Day with the fully licenced picture being indecently exposed in public as the lead image @Andrew Davidson:. It just goes to show that a wee trip to the facilities can go a long way, I hope the bank didn't let you p and see! The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:44, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't mind - it's up to Andrew. Johnbod (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amsterdam

Hi all, especially @Andrew Davidson:, this is a great page and a good way out of the Norwich-anti-urination-AfD. I'm just wondering whether it would better be titled "Measures to control urban urination" or something like that, so that it would be opened up to containing Amsterdam's pee-in-a-planter? This is a move away from the design of potties, but it's in keeping with the motivation for those strange architectural features in the original Norwich article. I have no strong feelings though. This is just a suggestion? Elemimele (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no, I'm in the Norwich area. It used to be a simple flight, but in these Covid times... Elemimele (talk) 20:36, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Architectural design vs amateur sleuths

The spread of anti-urination measures across the internet appears to me to be proportional to their somewhat tacky shock appeal and a heretofore unappreciated lack of awareness of some aspects of historic architectural design. The widely cited article from the 1809 Farmers magazine has given rise to a largely spurious suggestion that any corner of a building built from solid masonary that has an a small feature with a sloping top must be to stop someone from urinating in that spot. How and why this theory that urination can only take place in a corner began entirely eludes me, but I would suggest a far greater and much more prevalent danger to such noble structures was rain. Damp proofing is now a basic foundation of modern building design, but it is historically recent. bits of sloping wall come under a variety of terms Set-off (architecture), Water table (architecture) and Batter (walls) to name but three. I am unaware of a common name for additional bits stuck into corners to try and prevent damp forming, but it would benefit this project enormously if we could remove items that are clearly misidentified. I would suggest, but cannot wholly substantiate, that of all those illustrated in the gallery currently, only the Coach and Horses Passage feature is what it claims to be whilst those in Clifford's Inn Passage are only shown in the background beyond a misidentified hood mould. Mighty Antar (talk) 12:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Urine_deflector"