Talk:Sanitary sewer

message: Hi All! I am planning to add to this page. Is there anyone who is currently updating this page?
Cheers, Zhantair  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhantair (talk • contribs) 03:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I have it on my watchlist. What are your plans? There is also a related article called Sewage collection and disposal which I think should be merged into this one and into the one on history (see my comment on talk page there).EvMsmile (talk) 11:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I transfered information from Sewage collection and disposal that seemed suitable to me to this article.--Mll mitch (talk) 10:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I disagree about merger of this article with Sewage collection and disposal. There is widespread confusion about the difference between combined sewers and separate sanitary sewers. Clarity will be enhanced by maintaining separately focused articles on storm sewers, combined sewers, and sanitary sewers separate from the overall history of sewage collection and treatment or disposal options.  The subject of sewage treatment is similarly covered by specific articles explaining the differences between primary and secondary treatment, and the various mechanisms to achieve such treatment. Subject overlap can best be covered with hatnotes and main article links. Thewellman (talk) 16:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

text:  To avoid confusion about the difference between combined sewers and separate sanitary sewers, I have distributed condensed versions of the unsourced information transferred from the sewage collection and disposal article into existing sections of this article. Links to focused information about combined sewers are available in the hatnote above the article lead, in the lead description of the distinction between separate and combined sewers, in the main article link above the History section, and at the evolution description within the History section. Thewellman (talk) 17:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

text: I'm unconvinced of the wisdom of merging the history sections -- especially since you prefer to put history at the end of each article. A more useful approach for laymen would be a separate chronologically sequenced article emphasizing the historical development of sewage collection and disposal from drainage ditches and sewage farms through combined sewers with the addition of sewage treatment facilities evolving into separate sanitary sewers to improve treatment efficiency for water recycling. Such an article would include links to focused articles of various types of sewers and treatment or reuse options for those interested in more detail. There would be very little information overlap in a condensed history for each focused article as either an introductory background section describing differences from preceding methods with the motivation for such differences, or (if you prefer) a section at the end of the focused article. Thewellman (talk) 19:29, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  What you're describing here sounds good (and a lot of work, because currently the history secton is not structured like that). However, I would argue that this should rather be on the article history of water supply and sanitation (have you checked out that article?) rather than in an article that has the arbitrary title of "sewage collection and disposal" (treatment not mentioned in the title!). How about we focus our energies with regards to history on the article history of water supply and sanitation, in which case the one one sewage collection and disposal will become obsolete?  I really do believe that it is much better to have one strong article that brings all the history together, rather than lots of articles that touch on it briefly and in an incomplete manner. Rather send people across to the main article. - And yes, according to the MOS Sanitation, History is always at the end of the article; we have modelled this on the MOS of Wikiproject Medicine and I think it make sense, because most lay people are probably looking for current stuff first, not for historical information (except of course for articles that deal specifcally with history). EvMsmile (talk) 02:29, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planned edits