Talk:Tap water

message: There are a lot of problems with this article, mainly to do with poor referencing, but to start with...
Tap water (running water, city water, municipal water, etc.) is potable water supplied to a tap (valve) inside the household or workplace.
Does someone have a reference to suggest that the term "tap water" refers specifically to potable water? Tap water is used very widely to mean water that comes out of a tap from the city water supply, regardless of whether or not it is potable. Water from the tap is often called "tap water" in Hong Kong, and it is not potable, for instance.
Ordinary Person (talk) 15:12, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately my concise OED lacks a reference to tap water, but some online sources mention the definition as being water from a tap or water from pipes extracted through a tap (paraphrased due to differences in phrasing of the sources). I looked at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tap%20water, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/tap+water, and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tap+water. So yes, I agree, there is no indication that tap water needs to be potable. I added a citation needed tag to the phrase because there seems to be a lack of reaction to your comment and should probably remove the "potable" part if no dissenting opinion is expressed. PinkShinyRose (talk) 00:21, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I see someone added a source to the potable water part, unfortunately the source doesn't support the statement. The source mentions potable water can come from a tap but does not state that tap water must by definition be potable. I'm going to add a tag again after looking if the source is relevant to other parts of the article. PinkShinyRose (talk) 17:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that tap water and potable water are not synonymous.  The distinction is worth explaining early in the article, preferably with examples (such as the Hong Kong water system).  Reify-tech (talk) 18:31, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Tap water: not necessarily potable

message: Is there really any Western country where it is not safe drink tap water?
2015-01-03 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.158.174 (talk) 20:27, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer depends on the odds ratio threshold value at which one defines "safe". How much risk do you consider acceptable? For most of us with reasonable mindsets about risks in daily life, the answer is no—i.e., it is safe. Which does not mean the risk is zero (for example, 1993 Milwaukee Cryptosporidiosis outbreak), but it means the average person can drink tap water without worry. Those wanting an added layer of protection can buy consumer-friendly water filters (pitchers, faucet attachments). And if you're going to travel thousands of miles (e.g., Europe to U.S.), you're wise not to drink the tap water, simply because the local biome may not agree well with your gut microbiome. The article on drinking water has more info about water quality and water treatment. — ¾-10 22:31, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real-world safety 

message: A "quality" issue with water supply is the pressure with which it is available. The pressure is a question of the head, the length and diameter of pipe, and the amount of competing local demand, eg. from fire-fighting equipment. Could this be discussed at least briefly in this article? DCDuring (talk) 13:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pressure 

message: I found that the "lead pipes" section does not include any citation, so I added a book, "The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster,"The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster as a source. I think it is good, but if someone has a more appropriate source, please feel free to replace it. NamePen (talk) 23:53, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Materials section 

message: I'm currently working on improving the background section, but I'm not sure what is the purpose of this current background section, its relationship with other sections, and how it helps the readers understand the entire article. What do you think we should include in there? Is that section even necessary? Pokithecat (talk) 13:08, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the background section should probably be deleted or shrunk right down. If needed, we could use excerpts from water supply and drinking water rather, in order to avoid excessive overlap with those articles. EMsmile (talk) 13:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've culled this section now. EMsmile (talk) 21:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background section revision 

message: I think we should add a hatnote to make it clear what the scope is of this article versus what's in the articles on drinking water and water supply. This would help us reduce unnecessary overlap between the three articles. So what sets this article apart from drinking water? EMsmile (talk) 13:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed some of that overlap now. I wonder if tap water could be merged into drinking water but am guessing that two separate articles might be OK, provided that the tap water article is short and focused (a bit like a sub-article to drinking water). EMsmile (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you keep the two separate articles, a hatnote is definitely needed here. Otherwise, some well-meaning editors may start adding back all the redundant text that you just edited/deleted. (And thanks for your edits!) Moreau1 (talk) 00:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, I am glad you like my restructuring work. My first attempt at a new hatnote is "This article is about fixtures and appliances needed for tap water. For a wider description of issues around water for human consumption, see drinking water.. Thoughts? EMsmile (talk) 07:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  That looks fine. Moreau1 (talk) 15:40, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think we need a hatnote