Talk:Clothes line

message: I say washing line, but my (Chambers) dictionary has the defn at clothes line. Anyone care? JackyR 18:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge: clothes line /washing line 

message: I am tempted to remove "Less revenue for those associated with the production and distribution of electricity/gas" even though it is cited as to be frank it seems a rather shaky excuse for a disadvantage, surely this article should focus on the advantages/disadvantages to the end user.  so if there are no objections i will remove it. --UltraMagnus (talk) 08:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The advantage or disadvantage depends of your point of view. Since there is an advantage for the cost savings, there should be a disadvantage listed for those with an interest in the revenues generated by the use of mechanical clothes dryers (utility stockholders, clothes dryer repair shops, etc.).  Perhaps it needs rewording.   69.131.91.170 (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't that like saying a disadvantage of stronger law enforcement means you will be cutting off revenue to thieves? --UltraMagnus (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Appliance repair and utilities are thieves? 69.131.91.170 (talk) 14:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I was merely giving an example of trying to take everyone's point of view into account by keeping it NPOV,  and given that the only contribution from your ip has been to this page, i would question if you work for such a utility --UltraMagnus (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I don't work for either. I've contributed for some time, however, the ISP I have now changes IP's a lot. 69.131.91.170 (talk) 23:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  costing less a disadvantage? 

message: Greentopia, as you can see, this issue has already been discussed and settled. Advantages/disadvantages to third-parties (wildlife, environment, businesses, etc.) need to be included to maintain a NPOV. 4.233.155.174 (talk) 13:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages/disadvantages to third parties 

message: I have removed a section that makes claims to the habitable land loss per kg of co2, as it cited a webpage that cited nothing. Also, a calculation shows that if their claims were to hold, we would quickly loose all biodiversity on earth in about four years. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28%2828431741000++metric+tons+%29in+kilograms%29%2F%28land+area+of+earth+in+meters+squared%29 is a Wolfram Alpha calculation of killograms of co2 emission per meter squared, with the co2 figure from wikipedia, as Mathematica is lacking a world co2 consumption value. This is the website: http://ecofx.org/wiki/index.php?title=Habitat%2C_Life%2C_Extinction_Formulas_v2 that claims to have formulas for calculating land loss, although they have no information about the authors or justification of the methods used to derive their formulas, much less a paper in any journal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob33322 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Environmental Impact

message: The controversy section, in particular, seems to assume an American point of view without explicitly acknowledging it.  For instance, it talks about national security (which nation?); contends that most people can afford a mechanical dryer (a contention startling in its inaccuracy -- unless one takes it to refer only to Americans); and even talks about reliance on 'foreign' oil.  This bias should be acknowledged.  Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.157.108.187 (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree. Although not explicitly stated, citing "foreign energy" and "national security" seems perculiarly American in its perspective, as do appallingly parochial claims such as, "now that most people can afford a mechanical dryer..." Nick Cooper (talk) 16:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I'd like to know what on earth national security has to do with it, US-centric or not (or am I missing something about USA culture here, not having visited in 25 years?) sheridan (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: American bias

message: When I bring clothes in from outside, especially if still slightly damp, I get the fresh clothes line smell perhaps for days in my house. It is unclear what causes the fresh clothes line smell, but is perhaps like the smell given off by a room ioniser if arcing. This suggests that when clothes are hanging outside, Ozone or maybe other oxidising agents attach themselves to the clothes. If this is the case, it would tend towards a temporary bleaching effect. Breaking down bacteria and perhaps some oils. Research on this topic and adding to the article may be useful Nick Hill (talk) 15:28, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Clothes line fresh

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . Community Tech bot (talk) 08:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: A clothes horse refers to a clothes line that is connected to a pulley system inside which can be used in the cold winter weather. 2601:646:201:57F0:A38B:FE07:1C1F:77ED (talk) 01:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  FALSE