Talk:Waterproofing

message: I'm not an editor, but the section " a new technology enabled the release of diverse water-resistant smartphones and tablets in 2013. [4] The method is based on a special nano-technology coded to be a thousand times thinner than a human hair, that prevents water damage in electronics. [5] " and the footnote seem somewhat out of character for wikipedia. "a special nano-technology coded..." does not sound factual to me ('coded'?!), sounds like marketing-speak.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.166.168 (talk) 21:33, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising? 

message: The basement waterproofing section removed was found at http://www.regionalwaterproofing.com/content.php?page=basement_waterproofing_nc 
ChemGardener 23:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio section removed 

message: Explaining a number of changes, mostly minor.
Generally, this article could use more information outside the situation in the current Western construction industry. The attempts to work in waterproofing boats, clothing and paper are well-intentioned, but somewhat confuse the text (as it stands) and need more in-depth treatment. Additional text should be added to explain the important situations when water-proofing or resistance does work one direction, but not the other (Gore Tex, etc.) A short section, at least, on waterproofing in history would also be useful (The dampness coming through stones of castle walls, the use of oils to seal clothing, etc.)
::I like the historical context idea too. Risssa (talk) 01:55, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't "ingress" mean "leaking"?  I still had trouble reading that first paragraph. Risssa (talk) 01:55, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing changes 

message: The terminology is suspect.   water-proof is an absolute term that technically does not exist.  There are degrees of water resistance but nothing is absolutely waterproof. Perhaps we should change the title. Pkgx (talk) 15:59, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The article (thought it needs references) explains this. "Waterproof" is a term that is used, even if it is not truly accurate. VQuakr (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Waterproof 

message: Someone hyperlinked a bunch of words to some company selling basement waterproofing products.  I believed this was inappropriate and removed them.  Was this incorrect?  I am under the impression that Wikipedia generally does not advertise or endorse companies on articles.  Some feedback on this would be appreciated.  --67.84.8.225 (talk) 07:19, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, thanks for reverting! VQuakr (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Koster Waterproofing Hyperlinks - Company Advertising

message: Hello all,
I just came across this article and I think both references on it are irrelevant. Not only are they in Portuguese, but they simply talk about a lost camera that crossed the Pacific and was found 6 years later. I believe the references should be more technical, about either how the technology works, or which types of products are waterproof nowadays. What do you think? Should I remove them? Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  References