Talk:Portable building

message: The assertion that Transportable buildings and Demountable buildings are the same thing is not accurate.
Transportable buildings are constructed off site , transported whole to the site and installed, for example temporary office or living accomodation on a mine or construction site. They are then uninstalled and transported whole off site.
'Demountable buildings, such as a "yurt" are transported to , then constructed 'on site and are de-contructed or "Demounted" on site prior to transport.
This is a common error as Transportables such as those used on a mine site or school are often referred to as "Demountables" as a generic term when in truth they are "Transportables".
This may seem to be a fine distinction but if Wiki is to hold any credibility then we should make sure distictions such as these are recognised  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.47.132.150 (talk) 23:48, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: * I live in England, and over here the name "Portakabin" is very well known, often as a genericized tradename; it is unlikely that a passing mention of the name here is "spamming" in the sense of making the name widely known from being not widely known before. Anthony Appleyard 16:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, Anthony Appleyard.  I don't doubt your personal knowledge.  I'll bet the usage of the word "portakabin" is exactly as you say in the UK.  However, there is a standard to be met here under Wikipedia guidelines.  Especially considering that this company is getting a bit of free publicity to its commercial links in your edits to this article, the edits are suspect.  I do not think that you have a conflict of interest personally, and I don't mean to accuse you at all.  But inclusion of commercial information like this needs some cold hard references from non-biased reliable sources.  Thanks. And challenged text that is not accompanied by an inline citation to a reliable source is due to be deleted, see WP:PROVEIT.OfficeGirl 17:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PS- the information about Portakabin in this article is not merely "passing."  There are assertions of prominence in the marketplace that are unsupported by any reference material other than the commercial website of the company being promoted (though promotion was probably not your intention, it was certainly the result-- I KNOW you had good faith), accompanied by external links to the commercial website.  Wikipedia policy dictates that these mentions and references should be deleted until the assertions of fact can be supported by RELIABLE sources.  But when and if the non-biased reliable sources are produced, I will welcome, welcome, welcome the appropriate information concerning the "Portakabin" name.  I am looking forward to the time those sources are provided so that the generic trademark issue can be included in the article.OfficeGirl 18:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Portakabin

message: Anthony Appleyard is one of the participants in the dispute that gave rise to the RfC.  He has reverted my rewrite of the page to a version similar to the one that was here when I came here by way of the RfC.  I would encourage those wishing to respond to the RfC to compare the two versions relative to the RfC and make their views known. Actually I think my rewrite was not WP:BOLD enough: there is still undue weight given to one company in one country, and the External Links section should be removed altogether, Dlabtot 23:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there is currently undue weight given to one company at the moment. As I stated earlier, which seems to have been ignored, as the article grows then the relative "weight" will decrease. Like it or not in UK the term "portacabin" is synonymous with this sort of building, but again as the article grows and additional regionalities are covered that weight will decrease. There is a lot to be written on portable buildings and the current article doesn't yet scratch the surface. I recommend that people put up with the current problems for the time being and see what happens when (if) the article grows. A start has to be made somewhere, and it doesn't necessarily reflect what the article will eventually look like. ---- WebHamster 23:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Two very different versions of this page

message: I'm really at a loss to understand this.  Why are yurts being singled out and emphasized?  Dlabtot 20:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What is with the insistence on mentioning yurts?

message: don't you think its time this article got a whole revamp.  so?
Is Portakain having its own article?
can we agree on a framework?  History, Applications, Design concepts, Images.
suggestions  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.232.77 (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-Vamp 

message: I'd just like to record that in the UK (population 60 million), temporary classrooms are called portacabins. Temporary offices on large building sites etc are also called portacabins. Nobody describes them in everyday speech as "portable buildings". Why so much fuss people? Its like forcing people to replace hoover by vacuum cleaner or sellotape by sticky tape.  80.2.199.66 (talk) 22:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portacabins in the UK 

message: Whether or not you can find sources on the etymology and pronunciation of Portkabin, at most it should be a minor point in the article...not fully 1/3.  More correctly, if one can source the information why not create a full article on Portkabin and move that information there?  You've been here long enough to know about sourcing statements, and what happens to unsourced statements. Syrthiss (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; it seems somewhat poor form to restore unsourced information that has been challenged and removed as such, especially since it has been unsourced for over six months.  As I'm sure all of us are aware from the copious discussions above, it is the duty of the editor wishing to retain the information to provide inline citations to reliable sources for it (see WP:BURDEN). Anthony, could you please provide your source for this?  Thanks very much. — Satori Son 14:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really?  A discussion on the etymology of Portkabin? 

message: Hi User:Shoaibazmiup, I’ve noticed that you’ve added what appears to be spam to this article after I had already removed some. Could you please clarify what the purpose of your latest edit was?
Friendly neighbourhood platypus (talk) 22:51, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional content