Talk:Envelope

message: Any particular reason why the historical perspectives in 'Overview' are not broadly in date order? 86.151.1.36 19:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: why not chrono order?

message: "Most of the over 400 billion envelopes of all sizes made worldwide are machine-made. The envelope-machine making industry is dominated internationally by WINKLER+DÜNNEBIER."
Oh, really? Questionable and unsourced statistic, and an even more questionable unsourced statement bordering on advertising. Unless someone can back either or both of these statements up, they should go. TCHJ3K 21:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: request for verification

message: I removed the following from the article:
Since 2007 it is also possible to use a tin envelope, called tinLETTER, made out of metal for special mailings and repeated use.
It was added on 3-Jan-08 by an IP as that IP's only edit . There is no Wikpedia article on tinLETTER, googling gives a commercial website in German (http://www.tinletter.com/) which doesn't look like a very big company. More importantly saying "it is possible" doesn't address in which countries it is possible to, or if the tinLETTER is treated like a paper envelope in those jurisdictions. At any case, it's probably not a general enough feature to warrant commercial product placement in the lede. -- 128.104.112.19 (talk) 20:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  tinLETTER 

message: There are some additional "standard" sizes that seem to exist in Australia:
TECHNICAL INFO ABOUT ENVELOPES (archive)
shows them.
DLX = 120 x 235mm
DLE = 114 x 225mm
DLE seems to be common in NZ, as well as in Australia.
DLE is 4 mm shorter than the C5/C6 concept, and generally less of a tight fit with A4. The extra 4 mm even make it quite usable with US-letter, though presumably not to the point of being machinable. On the the other hand, in window envelope situations, there is less room for side-to-side movement than is the case with #10 envelopes and US-letter. #10 envelopes are surprisingly long, even for the width of US-letter.
DLX is nice when a return envelope needs to fit inside, or for additional pages.
I'm surprised that these formats haven't caught on elsewhere.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.25.34 (talk) 03:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian / NZ sizes 

message: What are differences between open end, open side and pocket envelopes? Newone (talk) 08:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Envelope shapes 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.articlesbase.com/writing-articles/learn-about-the-history-of-envelopes-575036.html
*:Triggered by \barticles(?:base|vana)\.com\b on the global blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:38, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: The "names" for odd sizes floating around the internet are a hoax inserted into the article 27 January 2011. They are not attested before then, and some of them are self-evidently ridiculous ("Business Nude"; "Tairy Greene" is a character from Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job!) If they really picked up among envelope manufacturers, then they might become the real names for these sizes even if they started as a hoax, but that hasn't happened. Please do not reinsert them. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please don't reinsert hoax names 

message: Was this drivel copy+pasted from a high school report?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.197.119 (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present and future state of envelopes 

message: ISO 269:1985 Correspondence envelopes -- Designation and sizes says the standard is "Withdrawn", with no indication of a new standard replacing it. Anyone know more about this? Is there currently a standard for envelope sizes at all? --Jmk (talk) 05:20, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not found any reason for its withdrawal yet either, but national standards like DIN 476 Part 2 remain in force (while DIN 476-1 for A and B series has been withdrawn in favor of DIN EN ISO 216). — Christoph Päper 18:41, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have found a source (this) that says it was not  replaced after the withdrawal, I've added it to the article. Alexcalamaro (talk) 04:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Err, that (noidue.de) doesn't look like a good reference. The front page is for an Italian restaurant in Potsdam, which does at least appear to be a real place, however I can't find any direct link to that page except for this wikipedia article and its copies. The text is very poor English, which you might say is just because the owner is German and it's badly translated, but the (de) link doesn't go to a German version of the article, but to another copy of the same English text. Internally the text is self-contradictory and jumps constantly between unrelated subjects. Following the previous/next article links show more of the same from a mish-mash of subjects, the main constant seems to be they all include the word "legal" at some point, regardless of context. Googling random phrases from the article shows a small number of hits in random other pages around the net where they also appear to be part of a semi-coherent mess - the overriding impression is of a very poor SEO hacking attempt. So though we can say for sure that 216:1985 was definitely withdrawn, and there doesn't appear to be any replacement I can find, there also doesn't appear to be any reliable third party source confirming that there is in fact no replacement. 86.26.33.25 (talk) 01:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISO standard 

message: "Types of envelopes" is the name of two different sections in the page. I think one of the two should be changed to eliminate reference issues. It also could deceive people that the second one of the two might not be existing as an information on Wikipedia. It was about to deceive me...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThoAppelsin (talk • contribs) 17:27, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two sections with the same name! 

message: I came here to see if there was info re pronunciation. Where I live in Canada it is common to say 'om-ve-lope'  (as opposed to 'en-ve-lope') and I'm wondering if any other places have that pronunciation, if it's related to French, or to a British pronunciation, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.246.146.105 (talk) 02:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: pronunciation