text:
Talk:Steamboat

Early comments
I listed Steamboat, Steamship, and Paddle steamer, as well as the redirect Steamer on the Duplicate articles page. I think that the first 2 terms are interchangeable based on the "What links here" lists, and although paddle steamer is ok as a separate article, there's some overlap with what's in the other 2 articles. I think there shd be only steamboat or steamship but not both. But I'm not a ship-boat expert, so I'm not going to decide or attempt to merge the text appropriately. Elf | Talk 05:25, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with you that Paddle steamer should definitely be retained as a separate article. -- Decumanus 05:29, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't really like that "steamship" redirects here - a 15,000 ton vessel is just not ever a "boat", and the content is so entirely focussed on small vessels that it kind of looks like a mistaken link. However, there's no point in tinkering without some kind of shared understanding about the division. Alternatively, both could redir to "steam-powered vessel" or something similarly unlovely. Stan 06:54, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I was the one who did the steamship/steamboat merge. I kept the steamboat page and redirected steamship as steamboat was then the more complete page. There's a fair bit about the big boats in the lower half of the page. Perhaps some heading would help... Zeimusu 01:35, 2004 Jul 7 (UTC)

nowhere here for seagoing steamers.. edit ocean steamship title? Also, how about lake and loch steamers - SS Sir Walter Scott still going, PS Maid of the Loch under restoration. I changed the SS Explorer to trawler, as the last of the clyde sludge boats is now operating cruises (out of southhamption?), but can't remeber her name (Gardyloo?). Also note that nuke subs are steam turbine boats, albeit with nuke heating ystems - dave souza 10:10, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I suggest that a distinction could be made between sea-going and ocean-going steamers. Sea-going would relate to European vessesls as a first stage and ocean-going for those in the next stage. The change-over would be when the first Cunarder began her operation on the Transatlantic service.OMINOREG (talk) 15:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC) It would be interesting to have an illustration of one of the last Atlantic steamers fitted with auxiliary sails.

Steamboat Austria disaster
I found this new article. I don't know if it should be merged with this one, or just linked. I don't really know, I'm new here. G Clark 01:14, 2005 August 14 (UTC)

Steamer classes
While I'm not uninterested in oceangoing types, shouldn't paddle steamer include river & lake types? For instance, Walk in the Water, on the Buffalo-Detroit route, first steamer on the Great Lakes. Trekphiler 12:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * As in Steamboat and Steamboat ? ...dave souza 00:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

No Merge
While it may initially seem like a good idea to merge the two topics together, I think that a person who has no knowledge of steamboats in the first place would probably want a general base of knowledge, which the "steamboat" article provides. The other one is a bit more specific, and I would only go there if I knew something about steamboats already. Besides, not all paddle steamers are steamboats. Instead, I would recommend a section on paddle steamers in this article, but then a link to the separate article for people seeking more details.

What about steam launches?
For Steam Yachts see C. Dawson (August 2006). "Thomas Assheton Smith's Steam Yachts". The Mariners Mirror 92 (3): p. 331. Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam yacht". —Preceding unsigned comment added by OMINOREG (talk • contribs) 15:21, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

There are hundreds of small steam-powered boats, mostly built by their owners, used for pleasure boating.... The Steam Boat Association of Great Britain in the External Links section deals with these... should this page mention this activity?

- Bart (who owns such a small steamboat)...

 * great idea, please add such a section. ...dave souza 00:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Unpopular merge
The proposed merger with paddle steamers looks pretty stale, with no consensus to merge, so I propose removing the tags.....dave souza 00:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I secound that. Also, a lot of images in this article features paddlers. Suggest some images is replaced by images of other types of steam boats. tsaetre
 * removed as discussed. ..dave souza, talk 00:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Who's on first?
While I don't want to reopen the Sirius/Savannah debate, I do question "Great Western was the first purpose-built steamship to initiate regularly scheduled trans-Atlantic crossings, starting in 1838." I've always heard Cunard's Britannia began this service 4 July 1840. Trekphiler🇨🇦 02:57 & 03:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC) (BTW, if anyone cares, Samson V was last sternwheeler built in Canada.)

Delphine
this diff seems a bit promotionaly to me. 's only two contributions are to link to this ship here and at steam engine. I would not go so far as to say linkspam but it does seem off. I think I will revert it from steam engine. ++Lar: t/c 01:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Steamships/steamboats under sail?
The article never talks about steamships/steamboats under sail. So I'd like to start out with the question "What is the right term for them?" (partly because I'd like to introduce their own category on the Commons)... and then ask anyone who may have more knowledge to include them in the article. Thanks, Ibn Battuta (talk) 18:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC) The first steamboats generally fitted sail, even if it was only a simple square sail, because the early steam engines were unreliable. There was no special term for them: the earliest were most often called steam packets, packet being the word previously used for the sailing packets. I have even seen the old term barge used for those plying on East Englian waters of England. Even the large transatlantic steamers fitted sail. It seemed odd that “Élise” appeared under North America, so I have erased that there and placed a new item where I think it should appear, with special care in quoting the correct dates. She was ex. "Marjorie" or "Margery" and had the distinction of being the first steamboat to cross the English Channel, in April 1816, having previously plied down from the East coast of Scotland. Probably the first sea-going steamboat was p.s. "Thames", ex "Argyle", which plied the route from Glasgow on 22 May 1815 to London via Lands End. (Fred Hawks, World Ship Society CD, Issue 2, 2010.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by OMINOREG (talk • contribs) 18:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I suggest that catamaran be removed and replaced in a separate article on the catamaran, since the catamaran is not necessarily a double-hulled vessel.85.230.205.134 (talk) 09:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Removed text
The following line was added in good faith to the lede; however, it does not belong there and I cannot easily fit it in elsewhere...
 * Steam boats provided faster water transpertation during the US period of expansion.

Ideas? -- EdJogg (talk) 23:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Text moved from article
The first steamboats generally fitted sail, even if it was only a simple square sail, because the early steam engines were unreliable. There was no special term for them: the earliest were most often called steam packets, packet being the word previously used for the sailing packets. I have even seen the old term barge used for those plying on East Englian waters of England. It seemed odd that “Élise” appeared under North America, so I have erased that there and placed a new item where I think it should appear, with special care in quoting the correct dates. She was ex. "Marjorie" or "Margery" and had the distinction of being the first steamboat to cross the English Channel, in April 1816, having previously plied down from the East coast of Scotland. Probably the first sea-going steamboat was p.s. "Thames", ex "Argyle", which plied the route from Glasgow on 22 May 1815 to London via Lands End. (Fred Hawks, World Ship Society CD, Issue 2, 2010.)OMINOREG (talk) 10:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC). NtheP (talk) 11:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Critique
This article gives a pretty comprehensive overview of steamboats, as well as the technology involved in their creation. Beginning with the invention of the first steam pump, it details the innovations and improvements that later lead to the commercialization of the steamboat, also mentioning the impact it had on American society in the 19th century. The article is fairly well written and full of relevant pictures and diagrams. The references could be a little better though; about half are from the last two decades, while the others date much further back. Some problems with the article have already been pointed out by other users, mainly the distinction between steamboats and steamships. This article merges both together, while separate articles, or a name change, would likely be more helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HIST406-10lwack (talk • contribs) 19:44, 4 October 2010 (UTC) I query "Accommodation". Where is the justification for this entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by OMINOREG (talk • contribs) 17:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC) A REFERENCE TO SUSTANTIATE THE CLAIM FOR P.S. "ACCOMMODATION" IS DIRELY NEEDED. OMINOREG (talk) 10:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC) I have now remedied the ommission on P.S. "Accommodation"'s engines. Why are references contained within the articles and not at the end? 85.230.200.58 (talk) 13:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC) Suggestion for illustration of "last" Atlantic liner with auxiliary sail.85.230.206.213 (talk) 09:37, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Too much on steamships?
I'm concerned that, particularly with some recent changes, the focus here is moving from steam boats to steam ships, when there's a better place for such to be covered. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 * This article is pretty random and has lots of questionable material; also, I very much agree we need a separate article on steamships. I've been thinking of writing one for a long time but haven't got around to it yet. But sooner or later it will have to be done. Gatoclass (talk) 08:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

 * I think it's extremely short-sighted to have steamships as a tag-a-long afterthought on the end of the steamboats article. The topic is so large and complex that I don't see why it doesn't have it's own article as inland waterways and oceans are two different spheres of operation. I'm surprised that steamship enthusiasts have allowed the situation to persist. You must realize that many millions of people have traveled across oceans on steamships, on adventures, as emigrants, and as crews. Trade would come to a halt even today without steamships. A little respect, please. B^)  Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 04:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

critique of critique
The objections to this article don't seem to be either new or very critical. Calling in on the objection to the sources are "half are from the last two decades, while the others date much further back" doesn't really point out a problem. I fail to see how that in itself makes the sources in need of improvement. The discussion over the separation between steamboats and steamships is a concern that was raised in the comments, but there was never any discussion on what the separation would look like and whether there would contributions to both, neither, or one and if you were going to do the separation yourself. There is also a lack of length and an apparent lack of effort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HIST406-10bbelsing (talk • contribs) 19:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC) I have some extra information I can impart on Patrick Miller's "sea-spook". She was 246' long; the scale model ship he sent to King Gustav of Sweden was 100' long.85.230.204.223 (talk) 16:59, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Steamships in War
I don't see much at all in this article devoted to military steamships. Sure, there are references to the Lusitania, and steam-powered civilian/merchant vessels being attacked by U-Boats, but there is just about nothing here on actual military ships powered by steam. I have added a note that the Battle of the Yalu River was the first naval battle between steamship fleets (despite the name of the battle, it was fought out on the sea, beyond the mouth of the river), but I'm no naval historian, nor a modern historian, and I don't really have the resources to do anything much more wit that.

A friendly request to please expand. Cheers. LordAmeth (talk) 01:49, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Tagged with globalize
This article is very much focused on North America. What about Europe? Rusland? Asia? I am sure there there is a lot to tell about steam boats on those continents as well. The Thames section is a wp:COATRACK and should probably be removed all together. Yoenit (talk) 19:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

 * Globalization isn't the worst problem, confusing steamships and steamboats is. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:58, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * So? If a steamship article is written this article still needs globalization. I fail to see how the two problems are related or why you would bring it up. Yoenit (talk) 21:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Your proposal to "globalize" an article with a US bias was to remove the UK content, so I thought I'd best start with the simple stuff. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No, that is not what I tried to say. The Thames section is not actually about Thames steamboats, it is about a specific ship called the SL Nuneham. As such it is a wp:COATRACK and the current content should be removed or split into a separate article. This is unrelated to the globalize issue, for which the obvious solution is to expand the article with sections on other continents. Unfortunately I do not have sources to do so myself, which I why I tagged it and left this message. Yoenit (talk)

Yes, but the main reason why this article focuses on Europe, and North America is, because they were the ones that invented the first one, and it was Europe, and North America that mainly focused on it especially for the immigrant trade. Asia, and many other places did have steamboats, but few of them used it for passenger trade. They mainly focused on the military use of the vessel. See the Japanese Imperial Navy for that information.--Trulystand700 (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Early Russian steamships.
I don't speak Russian. Evidently Charles Baird introduced steamships to Russia, and an early steam ship may be named after him the Берд Чарльз. This appears to be a link to the Elivestia "Елизавета". Maybe someone with minimal Russian language skills can add to the article. Charles Baird also has a Russian WP article under his name Берд Чарльз. Geo8rge (talk) 23:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

S.S. Humbolt engine room
Added image to lead, thinking a gallery would hold these two images, an Idea strikes me to incorporate a gallery of typical steam powered vessels, into a dissambiguation page or hatnote. The title steam boat makes me think of Mark Twain. If this article is a WikiProject of a maritime nature, then boats and ships or two entirely different beasts of purpose. Let's also add the global aspects of nomenclature, slang and other indiginous dialects, and utilize Meta-Babel language and interwiki linking to the Wiki Foundation Projects. Maritime is as old as Philosophy and other Ancient Histories, Sciences, et. al. and the classification and/or categorization of this article into the bigger scheme would be a boon to the project.

In conclusion, the reason for my edits and input stem from the Meta-Wiki article Create room O=MC4  21:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Steamships v steamboats
Steamboat → Steamship – 'Steamship', is the more common usage. Vessels that run under steam are typically designated with an 'SS' which stands for 'Steamship' not steamboat. Don't know of any steam powered vessel that has an 'SB' designation before its name. Most vessels that were powered by steam were large vessels, ships, not boats. 'Steamboat' should be a secondary theme to this page, esp since the various navies of the world had steamships overall, not boats, and as such there are far many more articles about the many different steamships than there are for 'boats'. Also, this page gives way too much weight and attention to 'riverboats' to which there is already a dedicated article for. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:53, 28 April 2013 (UTC) Gwillhickers (talk) 23:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Un-merge. This was originally two articles, Steamboat and Steamship. A ship is a boat, but not all boats are ships. The first steamboats were not called steamships, but I see that our concept of how big a boat has to be to be called a "ship" has grown over the years. Apteva (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Un-merge would be fine but presently this is not doable because 'Steamship' redirects to 'Steamboat'. As a general rule, seaworthy 'boats' are ships. As such any vessel made for seafaring duty and traveling about the high seas is a ship: A unique vessel -- and there is certainly enough material about steamships to warrant an article for them specifically. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 07:12, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The un-merge is trivial. Just cut and paste most of the article to with the edit summary "copied from Steamboat", then edit both articles to make them make sense. No move is needed. Apteva (talk) 07:59, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

 * Support separation into two articles as above. The two things have clearly defined differences. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * separate articles for steamboat, steamship, steam yacht and steam launch. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

 Moving forward  -- Okay, it seems most editors are and will be in agreement for separate pages for basically the same (good) reasons. The only thing standing in our way now is the redirect for Steamship which as we all know takes you to the Steamboat page. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:54, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The redirect is not standing in the way. A redirect is simply an edit to an article. Just edit it away. Just go to and click edit. But use an edit summary to show where the material copied came from. Apteva (talk) 21:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know, already done. I just was making the point that eliminating a redirect would be involved. I have already recreated the page and will begin a rewrite, adding a needed section about the initial development of steamship, etc. There are numerous uncited statements to be dealt with also. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:15, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

 * Oppose not all boats are ships, but not all ships are boats. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 20:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Correction: No boats are ships and no ships are boats! -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Sequel
The articles were un-merged. The problem is that steamship facts remain entangled in this steamboat article. On one hand steamboats die out nearly at the beginning of the 20th century, but seem to show some reincarnation in Liberty Ships? Steamships, of course, followed steamboats, and the history of the US as a dominant world power depends on Steamships, not steamboats! I'm not offering to write a superior article which includes both named (what?) Steam powered vessels? Then trying (once more) to rm steamships from here. The latter is mandatory but needs some article which shows the smooth transition. This is jerky because it contains some of both, but not enough for enlightenment. Student7 (talk) 22:38, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Steamboat
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Steamboat's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Thomson 2009": From Steam engine:  From Oliver Evans:

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I folded this information into the two references to Thomson 2009 in Steamboat SesquiZed (talk) 19:37, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Extremely vague citations
This page has too many citations that are just an author's last name and a publication year. They don't help you find the source. Hopefully when I look at similar articles, I can track down the missing information. Help! SesquiZed (talk) 19:38, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Why does "Steam ships" redirect here?
It seems that since there is an article on Steam ship, that the plural variation of the same term ought to direct to that page, not this one. Steam boats are not the same thing as steam ships. One is a large vessel, one is small..45Colt 10:25, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Good point. I agree but I can't see how to correct it. How does one edit an article that automatically redirects you? --Roly (talk) 10:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

 * It's been fixed now. If you search for "Steam ships" you now get redirected to Steamship but, because of the redirect it says "redirected from Steam Ships" underneath the page title. If you click on this, you get to the page "Steam ships" and can then look at the coding that makes the redirect - and the edit history to see who did it. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:36, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Confusing text
I read "a twin screw-driven steamboat in juxtaposition to the Clermont's Boulton and Watt engine" in the "19th century" section. I cannot make sense of this. "Juxtaposition" can't be the right word. Is "contrast" the right meaning? If so, what is the contrast between "twin screw-driven" and "Boulton and Watt"? None. This needs to be rewritten by someone who understands it. Zaslav (talk) 04:48, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Grammar
I reverted the restoration of a comma by Dhtwiki. Here is the text: "The boat was built by John Allan, and the engine by the Carron Company." (with comma), or "The boat was built by John Allan and the engine by the Carron Company." (without comma). There are two clauses in this sentence, one about the boat and one about the engine. The two clauses share the verb phrase "was built". Since there is not a sequence of three or more clauses, there should be no separating comma.

Dhtwiki says "not two items, two independent clauses, the second abridged". The clauses are not independent because they share the verb. If they were truly independent they would need two separate verbs (and a separating semicolon, not a comma) and they would be separable into two sentences. The "abridgment" here is clearly because of the shared verb; otherwise it is simply ungrammatical, as in "The boat was built by John Allan. The engine by the Carron Company."

There is a third grammatically correct alternative: ""The boat was built by John Allan, the engine by the Carron Company."  If Dhtwiki likes that I am happy with it.  Zaslav (talk) 04:34, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Не обижайтесь пожалуйста, но я вам одну вещ скажу ..
Если бы вы закрывали колёса не только сбоку, но и внизу - вы бы пароходы называли бы не колёсными - а реактивными. "На реактивном ходу". А не паровом.

"Што в лоб - што об лоб. Всё едино лбом .." - говорил Высоцкий. Без дна они што центробежные компрессоры все стороны...

А надо штобы вода захватывалась впереди, а вышвыривалась - за корму. Спереди - нет никто. А позади - цунами! По нужному курсу!

Лбы вы .. ;)

176.59.201.211 (talk) 04:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 * Google translates this as:

Please do not be offended, but I will tell you one thing [section heading]

If you closed the wheels not only from the side, but also below - you would call steamboats not wheeled - but reactive. "On the fly." Not steam.

"One on the other - one on the forehead. Everything is one forehead .." - said Vysotsky. Without a bottom, they are centrifugal compressors on all sides ...

And it is necessary that water is captured in front, and thrown out - by the stern. In front - no one. And behind - the tsunami! At the right rate!

You foreheads ..;)

 * It's about steamboats and seems interesting, although a lot must have been lost in translation or it's very allegorical. Is it Vladimir Vysotsky who's being quoted? It's too bad but Russian Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an equivalent article to this. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Why isn't James Rumsey mentioned?
I know he beat Fulton by at least a decade, while yes his design was not feasible for mass production it was still before Fulton and was a successful attempt. Xeracross (talk) 21:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

still vast confusion between steamboats and steamships
Unfortunately this article still fails to seperate between "steamboat" (from about 1850 onwards a vessel intended for service on a lake or river, generally in sight of land) and a "steamship" (a vessel intended to be sea-going, out of sight of land (and any source of supplies) for extended distances). While in the earliest days any vessel with a steam engine might be called a steamboat, the use of that term became more narrow quite quickly, and the article does not clearly reflect that. Much of the information in the article is clearly only applicable to steamships. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:589:300:CA70:8D61:3256:D09C:782A (talk) 16:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

 * I just reverted your plausible but apparently unsourced contentions at the article. Please provide sources or explain how the current sources support your arguments, especially as the text you seek to modify seems sourced. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:22, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

 * I restored the clarification of "high pressure", because a) it's useful context for someone unfamiliar with the subject, and b) it's easy to cite since virtually any history on the development of steam engines says it.

 * The other two are harder, partly because you're effectively asking to prove a negative, and partly because it comes back to the difference between steamboats and steam ships. For instance, the turbine steamer Queen Mary is illustrated in this article, yet that vessel seems to have routinely served off-shore routes to the Scottish islands, making her argueably a steam ship, not a steam boat.  If we look at steamboats on the Mississippi or the Yukon, vessels invariably called steamboats, turbines are totally unknown.  This becomes very hard to cite, because I could look at various books I have on those subjects, but all they describe is what was used, not what wasn't (and, indeed, what was used was almost exclusively single expansion engines, altho a few boats were built with compound engines on the Mississippi).  It should also be noted that while the statements on compounding and turbines are true, and are cited, that doesn't automatically make them relevant; both seem to refer to "ocean transport", not river/lake steamboats.

 * Either way, I would have preferred if you had put "citation needed" tags in the article, rather than removing the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:589:300:CA70:0:0:0:5486 (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

 * I just reverted your edit to the article, because you apparently made it before making this talk page post, which appeared after on my watch list. If your edits are contested, you should discuss proposed changes here before making edits, per WP:BRD. That way, we don't have edit warring at the article, which is disruptive. As I said in my reverting edit summary, I remember "high pressure" referring to *especially* high pressure engines, not just those above atmospheric pressure. I don't have any sources at hand to confirm that point. What do your sources say? Dhtwiki (talk) 05:27, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

1763
I removed the date as it is obviously wrong. James Watt himself did not produce a working steam engine with his improvements until 1765. Further Watt's first engine barely worked. It was not until 1773 that Watt was producing practical engines. The reference given for 1763 is from 1910, and much historical research has been completed in the 112 years since then. Nick Beeson (talk) 14:30, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Steamboat


text:
Talk:Paddle steamer

History of Paddle Wheel Boat
I took the following paragraph out, because its reference clearly lacks solid proof: The use of paddle wheels to power boats goes back to ancient times, with the Roman army under Claudius Codex reportedly being transported to Sicily in boats propelled by wheels moved by oxen, and wheels in paddles later being used to propel galleys.

John Macgregor, Esq., barrister at law, London, in 'Notes on the Progress of the Paddle and Screw', Scientific American Volume 14, Issue 11, Nov 20, 1858: ''Pancirollus, who wrote in 1587, says he saw an old bas-relief representing an Illyrian galley propelled by three wheels on each side turned by oxen. The same author, and several others, refer to Vitruvius for a notice of the paddle-wheel, but I find, in five editions of Vitruvius, the drawings represent merely a wheel turned by the water, and used as a log to measure the speed.''

''Again, Claudius Codex is said to have employed paddle-wheels in the invasion of Sicily in the third century before Christ, and some MSS. in the King of France's library (which I have not been able as yet to inspect), are referred to for this statement, but 'after diligent inquiry, I can find no confirmation of it in any accredited authority.

Miscellaneous
I listed Steamboat, Steamship, and Paddle steamer, as well as the redirect Steamer on the Duplicate articles page. I think that the first 2 terms are interchangeable based on the "What links here" lists, and although paddle steamer is ok as a separate article, there's some overlap with what's in the other 2 articles. I think there shd be only steamboat or steamship but not both. But I'm not a ship-boat expert, so I'm not going to decide or attempt to merge the text appropriately. Elf | Talk 05:26, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Merge tag removed as discussion at steamboat. ...dave souza, talk 00:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Steamer classes
While I'm not uninterested in oceangoing types, shouldn't paddle steamer include river & lake types? For instance, Walk in the Water, on the Buffalo-Detroit route, first steamer on the Great Lakes. Trekphiler 12:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. While some of the steamboat and steamships were paddlwheelers. I still think that the subject is broad enough of its own right to be a seprarate subject. iranon1661 16:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

 * The above comments are a bit puzzling: Trekphiler, the article clearly includes river and lake paddle steamers – there's not much ocean in Switzerland. Seagoing paddle steamers are unusual enough now to have their own section: it could be possible to reorganise things to provide a non-seagoing section. iranon1661, presumably you're commenting on the suggestion of a merger: this looks pretty old with no consensus to merge, and I propose that the merge tags be removed. ...dave souza 00:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

How is a sternwheeler steered?
I looked up this reference because I wanteed to know how a sternwheeler is steered, but there is no information here.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.18.6.107 (talk • contribs).

 * Now you come to mention it, I'd like to know too!
 * EdJogg 13:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

They're steered by rudders - see information at http://users.wirefire.com/gemort/rudders%20and%20steering.htm Pinot 17.45, 6 December 2007 (NZ)  —Preceding comment was added at 04:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Just as an FYI, the wirefire site above is very interesting about sternwheelers. Karanne (talk) 17:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Types of Paddle Steamer
This entry states: "a side-wheeler has extra maneuverability since the power may be directed to one wheel at a time." I believe this is misleading as I can find no refference to any of the Steamers on the Murray Darling River System having this ability. Certainly none of ones I have photographed are capable of having the wheels driven independently. Perhaps this ability was limited to larger boats. (I am very new at this Wikipedia Stuff) RDUNC 10:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Re differential paddle rotation, I don't absolutely know for sure if all side-wheelers could do this but some certainly could. The old Woowich Free Ferry boats (in London) could do this, and it was also a feature of the Admiralty tugs. For these ships it was a normal operational procedure for manoeuvuring in tight places, similar to but more effective than the similar ability in twin-screw boats where you can reverse one propellor while going ahead on the other. I expect it was pretty much a standard capability for side-wheelers. Pinot 22:33, 19 July 2007 (NZ)

Advantages and disadvantages
It would be good if the article could say something definitive about the advantages and disadvantages of paddle wheels versus screw propellers, and why the former have fallen out of use. I assume efficiency must be a key factor, but there may be practical reasons as well? Wwheaton (talk) 01:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

 * I had the same thought. I don't remember where I got my information, but I remember hearing/reading that since paddles can run very near the surface, they're good for shallow water, or water with high snags. It looks like a paddle wheel could put up with a fair amount of damage that a propeller could not. The paddle technology goes back 1500 years; it's hard to tell from the Wiki article on propellers but it appears as propeller technology was primitive in the 1850s. The technology is much more complicated. The disadvantages? Paddle boats with side wheels become inefficient in rough water, in extreme situations, to the point of being useless. They all loft a fair amount of water quite a distance, and all of that energy is lost to propulsion. The ones with variable blades to improve angle of attack and release are a lot more technically complicated (as in: can't be built all out of wood planks). Take all that for what it's worth. We need references. Leptus Froggi (talk) 08:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Another thought. If a ship leans side to side (yaw?) it would follow that one wheel would go deeper, the other shallower, maybe even out of the water. Wouldn't the extra force on one side turn the vessel in the opposite direction, similar to a Caterpillar tractor? Even if it happens too quickly to actually turn the ship, how about stresses to the ship along the axle line of the wheels? No ref, just reasoning. Sammy D III (talk) 17:41, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Roll. Paddlesteamers are so broad in the beam that they roll much less than screw-driven ships. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Arcynic Steamwheeler
There is a reference to a "Arcynic Steamwheeler", but a google search comes up with references back to this page. Has anyone heard of this, or is there a link somewhere? Should this sentence be deleted? Karanne (talk) 18:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move
This might be the dominant form of paddlewheeler used in the United States (in Mark Twain's heyday), but shouldn't the general article include paddlewheel-driven ships using other forms of propulsion? Let's give this article a more general title. --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:04, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Section template
As for this action, here is the permanent link: Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 72 Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Information
The statement "Consequently no recent (since 1947) paddle wheel steamers have been laid down and there are only a few original paddle steamers remaining in existence, and those that do are mainly preserved for tourists or as museums." is incorrect, and interesting as the accompanying photo is of the str. NATCHEZ, a boat which was designed in the early 1970s and launched in 1975. There are a handful of other modern examples, namely the Julia Bell Swain built in 1971, the Missisppi Queen built in 1975, and the American Queen completed in 1994. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.1.134.173 (talk) 06:16, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. That paragraph also made unwarranted, uncited OR statements about there being no good reason to use steam technology now. I removed it. 98.210.208.107 (talk) 15:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Paddle Steamer - Link to Website
I would like the website http://www.heritagesteamers.co.uk to be considered as a link to the paddle steamers page. This website is that of a leading maritime heritage registred charity with a specific interest in paddle steamers

90.210.128.249 (talk) 07:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The Sura
A new river cruise ship was built in 2010 in Russia named the Sura (after the Sura River). She is propelled by two stern mounted paddle wheels which is said to have the advantage of a very low draft. The same wheels are used for steering. The shipyard that built it also states several more paddle wheelers are to be built.

I think that must be noted in the article.

DL24 (talk) 12:17, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

two Mississippi paragraphs
two paragraphs about the Mississippi have been added to History/Western world. This could be expanded, but would seem out of proportion to rest of section.Sammy D III (talk) 03:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Ship types
I removed this article from Category:Ship types, on the grounds that Category:Ship types is a supercategory of Category:Paddle steamers (via categories Steamships and Ships by type), of which the article is a member. The relevant policy is WP:SUBCAT, which says that "A page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category". Andy Dingley reverted "as the lead article of an eponymous cat".

I still think my edit is correct:
 * WP:SUBCAT says the article ought not be in a supercategory - none of the categories appear to be non-diffusing.
 * Category:Ship types is not the eponymous category for Paddle steamer - Category:Paddle steamers is.
 * The main article for Category:Ship types is Ship.

could you please explain why you think Paddle steamer should be in both Category:Paddle steamers and Category:Ship types. And/or could other editors comment on the matter. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:01, 15 November 2014 (UTC) What you are saying appears to directly contradict WP:SUBCAT's "A page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category". I don't disagree with that statement, but I don't believe OVERCAT applies here. I'm assuming that the current categories are correct and reasonable (both in terms of their existence and the tree structure). The problem here is the inclusion of the article in the multiple categories. If you think the cat structure is wrong, that's a separate problem - which would need to be addressed before we resolve the issue of which cat(s) the article should be in. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:31, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * This is the lead article of an eponymous cat. That cat is Paddle steamers.
 * Categorization confuses readers. When navigating category pages (which they manage quite well) they fail to see the distinction between the links to article pages and the links to others categories. There are some ways to fix this by skinning MediaWiki, but these aren't in use on WP. So the best compromise is that for eponymous cats, the main categorization should be applied primarily to the page, not necessarily the category.  We do also categorize the category, but not as extensively: we categorize pages in general when there's a useful functional link to express, but category pages only when it helps to build a navigation tree.
 * In this case, Paddle steamers is in Ship types. We agree on that much. Because it's an eponymous category though, the lead article page and the category page could both be in the relevant categories. In general, lead articles will be in nearly all of their associated category page's parent cats (with a few exceptions that are just about navigation, mostly the " by " metacats).
 * WP:OVERCAT is very often damaging, when applied in a simplistic blanket fashion. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * In general, lead articles will be in nearly all of their associated category page's parent cats...
 * Is there a guideline that matches what you say?
 * Do think WP:SUBCAT needs changing?
 * Should Category:Paddle steamers be a non-diffusing category - thus explicitly "allowing" (according to WP:SUBCAT) the article to appear in both Category:Paddle steamers and its parent?
 * WP:OVERCAT is very often damaging, when applied in a simplistic blanket fashion.
 * I've posted a request on WT:CAT for other editors' input. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I've also posted a request on WT:SHIP for other editors' input. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:36, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

 * In the absence of any response, I've again removed the supercategory, in accordance with the clear guidelines of WP:SUBCAT. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:33, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Andy Dingley has restored the category "In the absence of any supporting for deleting categories".
 * I assert (again) that WP:SUBCAT clearly indicates that the article should not be the parent category - there is nothing in the categories to indicate that Category:Paddle steamers is non-diffusing. Andy Dingley, again I ask you:
 * Is there a guideline that matches your claim that lead articles will be in nearly all of their associated category page's parent cats?
 * Do think WP:SUBCAT needs changing?
 * Should Category:Paddle steamers be a non-diffusing category - thus explicitly "allowing" (according to WP:SUBCAT) the article to appear in both Category:Paddle steamers and its parent?
 * Is there something wrong with the category hierarchy - does it need changing (thus rendering my appeal to WP:SUBCAT moot)?
 * Your only citation of guidelins was to WP:OVERCAT, which I don't believe is relevant here - if you think it is, please point me to a more specific section of it that applies.
 * Mitch Ames (talk) 12:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You seem to be taking "No one has bothered to disagree with me" as "I'm right"
 * Please see WP:EPONYMOUS. In particular, "Articles with an eponymous category may also be categorized in the broader categories that would be present if there were no eponymous category (e.g. the article France appears in both Category:France and Category:Western Europe, even though the latter is the parent category of the former). "
 * If there were no category here, I assume you would agree that "paddle steamer" (article) would be categorised under "ship types". Adding the eponymous category does not withdraw this valuable primary categorisation. It remains.
 * Andy Dingley (talk) 13:14, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * OK - now I see. (It would have been helpful if you'd cited WP:EPONYMOUS explicitly the first time.)
 * You might be interested in this proposed clarification to WP:SUBCAT to mention the WP:EPONYMOUS exception. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Feathering mechanism
I think there should be an explanation of how the feathering mechanism works, ideally with a picture (animated?). I don't know enough about how it works to add this myself. --Roly (talk) 06:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Commons has some images under that might make it clearer. There have been several designs, but all broadly similar.  Each paddle blade is hinged and controlled by a rod from the centre. These rods are linked to an eccentric. As the wheel rotates and the eccentric doesn't, the rods are pushed and pulled, in phase around the wheel. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Andy. I've added a short description and your diagram to the article. --Roly (talk) 11:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Paddle steamer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060822154948/http://flotte.by.ru:80/russian/types/big/737.shtml to http://flotte.by.ru/russian/types/big/737.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Speed?
How fast were early paddle steamers compared to the sailships they replaced? Presumably a combination of sail and steam was faster still? Crawiki (talk) 16:41, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

The France section is written like an advertisement and needs some work
. 2A02:8440:B149:7B8C:0:4D:815E:C701 (talk) 13:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Paddle steamer


text:
North Haven, Connecticut

North Haven is a town in New Haven County, Connecticut on the outskirts of New Haven, Connecticut. The town is part of the South Central Connecticut Planning Region. As of the 2020 census, it had a population of 24,253.

North Haven is home of the Quinnipiac University School of Health Sciences, the School of Nursing, School of Law, School of Education, and School of Medicine on Bassett Road. North Haven has easy access to Interstate 91 and the Wilbur Cross Parkway (Route 15). It is near Sleeping Giant State Park and less than 10 mi from downtown New Haven and Yale University.

History

In his will of 1714, the Reverend James Pierpont (1659–1714) of New Haven gave 8 acre to his neighbors in the Northeast Parish, as North Haven was called, "provided those neighbors will set their meeting house there and do their training and burying there."

The first meeting house, completed in 1722, stood on the Green, west of what is now known as the Old Center Cemetery. About half of the original Pierpont gift remains today as the North Haven Green.

Ezra Stiles enumerated about forty families living in North Haven in the early part of the eighteenth century. All of these people were multipurpose farmers, producing what they needed for themselves and their families. In 1786, the General Assembly permitted North Haven to incorporate as a town, separate from New Haven. New roads were built to facilitate communication, namely the Hartford Turnpike in 1798 and the Middletown Turnpike in 1813.

The first United States census counted 1,236 people in the agricultural community of North Haven in 1790. However, the 1789 Grand List had found 1,620 sheep in North Haven, with the sheep outnumbering the residents.

By the middle of the nineteenth century, signs of the Industrial Revolution were apparent. In 1838, the New Haven and Hartford Railroad had laid its tracks along the level sand plains by the Quinnipiac River. In addition, small industries such as the manufacture of agricultural implements in Clintonville began in 1830. In the 1850 census, 62% of the population was listed as farmers. One-third of the residents worked in various nonagricultural occupations such as mechanics, brickmakers, and shoemakers.

After the Civil War, the expanding production of bricks, especially by the I.L. Stiles Co., brought immigrants to North Haven from Ireland, Germany, Italy, and Poland. By 1880, 11 out of 100 people had been born outside of the United States.

In the 1880s, Solomon Linsley, a North Haven architect, built the Memorial Town Hall and the new District 4 School. Linsley designed and built 32 Victorian style houses and public buildings in North Haven.

By 1900, public transportation was important to North Haven residents. Eighteen passenger trains stopped at the Broadway station every day. The Airline Railroad ran through Montowese and Clintonville to Middletown. Trolleys ran from Montowese to New Haven. After 1900, the line was extended north to Wallingford.

After World War I, the automobile changed life in this country town. The brickyards along the river were the major industry. However, residents who owned a car could live in North Haven and commute to New Haven for their jobs. Small real estate development began to grow up along the southern edge of town.

Significant population growth occurred at the end of World War II. North Haven's population increased rapidly, quadrupling between 1945 and 1970. The establishment of two factories, Pratt & Whitney and Marlin Firearms, spurred the subsequent population increase. This population shift necessitated the building of a new police station, firehouse, library, and five schools in the 1950s and 1960s to accommodate the needs of the growing community. The town continues to grow and expand until this day.

In spite of its rapid growth throughout the past few decades, however, this New England town still retains its town meeting form of government.

Those interested in an in-depth look at the history of North Haven should refer to Amidst Cultivated and Pleasant Fields: A Bicentennial History of North Haven, Connecticut by Lucy McTeer Brusic. Several copies are available to borrow at the North Haven Memorial Library.

Geography
According to the United States Census Bureau, the town has a total area of 21.1 square miles (54.6 km$2$), of which 20.8 square miles (53.8 km$2$) is land and 0.3 square miles (0.8 km$2$), or 1.52%, is water. North Haven is located less than 10 mi from Long Island Sound.

North Haven is 27 mi south of Hartford, 76 mi northeast of New York City, 80 mi west of Providence and 115 mi southwest of Boston. The center of town is an area stretching along U.S. Route 5, from approximately its interchange with I-91 in the north to Bailey Road in the south.

North Haven borders the City of New Haven and the towns of East Haven, Hamden, North Branford, and Wallingford.

Principal communities

 * North Haven Center
 * Clintonville
 * Montowese
 * Green Acres
 * Ridge Road

Demographics
In the 2010 decennial census, information on North Haven was organized according to the North Haven Census Designated Place (CDP), having an area of 20.8 sqmi. As of the census of 2010, there were 24,093 people, 9,491 households,  and 6,632 families residing in the town. The racial makeup of the town was White,  Black or African American,  Native American,  Asian,  Pacific Islander,  from other races, and  from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were of the population.

Of the 9,491 households in the North Haven CDP, had children under the age of 18 living with them,   were married couples living together,  had a female householder with no husband present, and  were non-families. Of all households were made up of individuals,  and  had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.61, and the average family size was 3.09.

As of the 2010 census, there were people under the age of 18;  from 18 to 24;  from 25 to 44;  from 45 to 64; and  who were 65 years of age or older, 5 of these being more than 100 years old. The median age was 45.5 years. Among the 24,093 people in the CDP, were male and  female.

The 2019 median income for a household in the town was US$96,598, and the median income for a family was US$119,371; this compares to median values in 2010 of US$83,588 and US$94,916 (US$98,002 and US$111,283, respectively, in 2019 dollars). The per capita income for the town was $47,106 in 2019, as compared to $38,286 in 2010 ($44,888 in 2019 dollars). In 2019, men had a median income of US$63,030 versus US$44,826 for women; this can be compared to 2010 values of US$53,365 and US$33,075, respectively (US$114,901 and US$52,556, respectively, in 2019 dollars). The percent difference between the earnings of men and women narrowed between 2010 and 2019, going from 47% to 34%.

In 2010, about 2.0% of families lived below the poverty line; this had increased to about 3.5% by 2019, as compared to the state rate of about 6.8%. In 2010, about individuals living below the poverty line; this had increased to about  in 2019, as compared to the state rate of about. For 2019, those people living below the poverty line included 281 (6.8%) people below 18 years of age and 239 (4.5%) people 65 years or older.

Political registration
The table below shows both party registration and activity. The increase  decrease  indicators refer to percentage changes in excess of 1%; where change has been <1%, the no change  indicator was used.

Minor parties represented in all three years 2000, 2010 and 2020 were the Green and Libertarian Parties. The Reform Party was represented in 2000, but was replaced by the Independent Party in 2010 and 2020.

Economy
North Haven has a growing commercial, retailing and manufacturing base which employs approximately 12,640 people. There are more than 75 manufacturing and commercial firms in North Haven, 40 of which are assessed at over $1,000,000. North Haven has five industrial parks containing 490 acre, and hosts such corporate tenants as Connecticut Container Corp. and O.F. Mossberg & Sons. In 2013, Sustainable Building Systems, an international construction and tech firm, will consolidate its headquarters in North Haven, creating over 400 jobs. North Haven is a division headquarters for surgical device-maker Medtronic. In summer 2019, Amazon began operating an 855,000 square-foot fulfillment center in North Haven, providing over 1,500 jobs. The facility is capable of shipping over 1,000,000 items per day.

The economy of North Haven is also based on education. North Haven is home to several of Quinnipiac University's graduate schools. It is also the home to a branch of Gateway Community College and The University of Connecticut New Haven County Extension Center. North Haven is near Yale University and other New-Haven based schools, making it a popular place to live for university faculty and staff.

Top employers
Top employers in North Haven according to the town's 2022 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report

Education
There are four public elementary schools in North Haven:

 * Clintonville
 * Green Acres
 * Montowese
 * Ridge Road

There is also one public middle school and one public high school:

 * North Haven Middle School
 * North Haven High School

Gateway Community College used to have a North Haven campus located on Bassett Road. The main campus building was originally part of the North Haven public school system until its sale to the college.

Quinnipiac University operates a 104 acre graduate education campus in town. The university purchased the campus from Wellpoint, Inc. in September 2007. The university renovated an existing 180000 sqft building on the campus, which now serves as home to the Frank H. Netter M.D. School of Medicine at Quinnipiac University, the School of Health Sciences, the School of Nursing, the School of Law, and the School of Education.

The University of Connecticut New Haven County Extension Center is also located in North Haven.

Notable people

 * David Apter, American political scientist and sociologist
 * Michael Barbaro, American journalist and host of The New York Times news podcast, The Daily
 * Charles H. Eglee, television and film screenwriter and producer
 * Dan Fegan, NBA agent, North Haven High School and Yale Law School alumni
 * Kevin Gilbride (born 1951), former offensive coordinator, New York Giants
 * Donald Kagan, American historian and classicist at Yale University
 * Paul Marcarelli (born 1970), actor and screenwriter
 * John M. Merriman (born 1946), Yale professor, French historian, and writer
 * Tim O'Brien (born 1964), illustrator and President of the Society of Illustrators
 * Barbara Ostfeld (born 1952), first female cantor to be ordained in Reform Judaism
 * John Aristotle Phillips (born 1955), entrepreneur
 * Ezra Stiles (1727–1795), president of Yale University
 * David Vanacore, composer
 * Tiffany Weimer (born 1983), American professional soccer player

In popular culture
The 2017 Hallmark Channel Christmas movie "Romance at Reindeer Lodge" was primarily filmed on location at a North Haven home.

Notable sites

 * Peter's Rock
 * Quinnipiac River State Park
 * Wharton Brook State Park

title: North Haven, Connecticut


text:
Talk:Steamer

Untitled
I listed Steamboat, Steamship, and Paddle steamer, as well as the redirect Steamer on the Duplicate articles page. I think that the first 2 terms are interchangeable based on the "What links here" lists, and although paddle steamer is ok as a separate article, there's some overlap with what's in the other 2 articles. I think there shd be only steamboat or steamship but not both. But I'm not a ship-boat expert, so I'm not going to decide or attempt to merge the text appropriately. (And I just went thru and changed all unclarified "steamer" links to "steamboat" but now not sure whether that's right...) Elf | Talk 05:29, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Steamboat is a more specific term: not merely a boat propelled by steam, but specifically a shallow-draft vessel used on inland waterways. One might take a steamship from England to America, but one would be ill-advised to take a steamboat. "Steamer" also means "soft-shell clam". - Nunh-huh 05:35, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I added Stan Smyl to the list. He was nicknamed "the Steamer" Eomund (talk) 20:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Steamer


text:
Personal grooming

Grooming (also called preening) is the art and practice of cleaning and maintaining parts of the body. It is a species-typical behavior.

In animals
Individual animals regularly clean themselves and put their fur, feathers or other skin coverings in good order. This activity is known as personal grooming, a form of hygiene. Extracting foreign objects such as insects, leaves, dirt, twigs and parasites is a form of grooming. Among animals, birds spend considerable time preening their feathers. This is done to remove ectoparasites, keep the feathers in good aerodynamic condition, and waterproof them. To do that, they use the preen oil secreted by the uropygial gland, the dust of down feathers, or other means such as dust-bathing or anting. During oil spills, animal conservationists that rescue penguins sometimes dress them in knitted sweaters to stop them from preening and thereby ingesting the mineral oil, which is poisonous. Monkeys may also pick out nits from their fur or scratch their rears to keep themselves clean. Cats are well known for their extensive grooming. Cats groom so often that they often produce hairballs from the fur they ingest. Many mammal species also groom their genitals after copulation.

Grooming as a social activity
Many social animals adapt preening and grooming behaviors for other social purposes such as bonding and the strengthening of social structures. Grooming plays a particularly important role in forming social bonds in many primate species, such as chacma baboons and wedge-capped capuchins.

Mutual grooming in human relationships
In humankind, mutual grooming relates closely to social grooming, which is defined as the process by which human beings fulfill one of their basic instincts, such as socializing, cooperating and learning from each other. In research conducted by Holly Nelson (from the University of New Hampshire), individuals who chose their romantic partner reported more mutual grooming than others who focused in other types of relationships. Hence, this study hypothesized that mutual grooming related to relationship satisfaction, trust and previous experience of affection within the family. They claim that even though humans do not groom each other with the same fervor that other species do, they are groomers par excellence. Therefore, human mutual grooming plays an important role in pair bonding. In the same investigation, researchers found that individuals with more promiscuous attitudes and those who scored high on the anxiety sub-scale on an adult attachment style measure tend to groom their partners more frequently. These findings were also consistent with some of the functions of grooming: potential parental indicator, developing trust and courtship or flirtation.

A recent empirical study by Seinenu Thein-Lemelson (University of California, Berkeley) utilized an ethological approach to examine cross-cultural differences in human grooming as it pertains to caregiving behaviors. Naturalistic data was collected through video focal follows with children during routine activities and then coded for grooming behaviors. This cross-cultural comparison of urban families in Burma and the United States indicates that there are significant cross-cultural differences in rates of caregiver-to-child grooming. Burmese caregivers in the sample groomed children more often than caregivers in the United States. Additionally, children in the United States have short instances of concentrated grooming predominantly during daily activities that are structured explicitly around hygiene goals (bath time), in contrast to the Burmese child, whose grooming is distributed more evenly within and across daily activities. The Burmese parents maintained a constant vigilance with regard to risk of infection. The study is significant because it is the only study of human grooming to utilize naturalistic data.

title: Personal grooming


text:
Timer

A timer or countdown timer is a type of clock that starts from a specified time duration and stops when reaching 00:00. A simple timer is an hourglass. Commonly, a timer triggers an alarm when it ends. A timer can be implemented through hardware or software. Stopwatches operate in the opposite direction, upwards from 00:00, measuring elapsed time since a given time instant. Time switches are timers that control an electric switch.

Mechanical
Mechanical timers use clockwork to measure time. Manual timers are typically set by turning a dial to the time interval desired, turning the dial stores energy in a mainspring to run the mechanism. They function similarly to a mechanical alarm clock, the energy in the mainspring causes a balance wheel to rotate back and forth. Each swing of the wheel releases the gear train to move forward by a small fixed amount, causing the dial to move steadily backward until it reaches zero when a lever arm strikes a bell. The mechanical kitchen timer was invented in 1926.

The simplest and oldest type of mechanical timer is the hourglass - which is also known as "the glass of the hour" - in which a fixed amount of sand drains through a narrow opening from one chamber to another to measure a time interval.

Electromechanical
Short-period bimetallic electromechanical timers use a thermal mechanism, with a metal finger made of strips of two metals with different rates of thermal expansion sandwiched together, steel and bronze are common. An electric current flowing through this finger causes heating of the metals, one side expands less than the other, and an electrical contact on the end of the finger moves away from or towards an electrical switch contact. The most common use of this type is in the "flasher" units that flash turn signals in automobiles, and sometimes in Christmas lights. This is a non-electronic type of multivibrator.

An electromechanical cam timer uses a small synchronous AC motor turning a cam against a comb of switch contacts. The AC motor is turned at an accurate rate by the alternating current, which power companies carefully regulate. Gears drive a shaft at the desired rate, and turn the cam. The most common application of this timer now is in washers, driers and dishwashers. This type of timer often has a friction clutch between the gear train and the cam, so that the cam can be turned to reset the time.

Electromechanical timers survive in these applications because mechanical switch contacts may still be less expensive than the semiconductor devices needed to control powerful lights, motors and heaters.

In the past, these electromechanical timers were often combined with electrical relays to create electro-mechanical controllers. Electromechanical timers reached a high state of development in the 1950s and 1960s because of their extensive use in aerospace and weapons systems. Programmable electromechanical timers controlled launch sequence events in early rockets and ballistic missiles. As digital electronics has progressed and dropped in price, electronic timers have become more advantageous.

Electronic timers are essentially quartz clocks with special electronics, which can achieve higher precision than mechanical timers. They have digital electronics, but may have an analog or digital display. Integrated circuits have made digital logic so inexpensive that an electronic timer is now less expensive than many mechanical and electromechanical timers. Individual timers are implemented as a simple single-chip computer system, similar to a watch and usually utilizing the same, mass-produced technology.

Nowadays, many timers are implemented in software. Modern controllers use a programmable logic controller (PLC) instead of a box full of electromechanical parts. The logic is usually designed as if it were relays, utilizing a special computer language called ladder logic. In PLCs, timers are usually simulated by the software built into the controller. Each timer is just an entry in a table maintained by the software.

Computer systems typically have at least one hardware timer. These are typically digital counters that either increment or decrement at a fixed frequency, which is often configurable, and which interrupt the processor when reaching zero. An alternative design uses a counter with a sufficiently large word size that it will not reach its overflow limit before the end of life of the system.

More sophisticated timers may have comparison logic to compare the timer value against a specific value set by software, which triggers some action when the timer value matches the preset value. This might be used, for example, to measure events or generate pulse-width modulated waveforms to control the speed of motors (using a class D digital electronic amplifier).

One specialist use of hardware timers in computer systems is as watchdog timers, which are designed to perform a hardware reset of the system if the software fails.

Software
These types of timers are not devices nor parts of devices, they exist only as software. They rely on the accuracy of a clock generator usually built into a hardware device that runs the software.

Applications
Due to the increasing popularity of mobile phones, many timer apps have been developed that mimic the old mechanical timer, but which have also highly sophisticated functions. These apps are also easier to use, because they are available at once, without any need to purchase or carry separate devices. Timers can be software applications phones, smartwatches, or tablets. Some of these apps are countdown timers, stopwatch timers, etc. These timer apps can be set for a specific time and can be used for tracking working or training time, motivating children to do tasks, replacing an hourglass-form egg timer in board games such as Boggle, or for the traditional purpose of tracking time when cooking.

Apps may be superior to hour glasses, or to mechanical timers. Hour glasses are not precise and clear, and they can jam. Mechanical timers lack the customization that applications support, such as sound volume adjustments for individual needs. Most applications will also offer selectable alarm sounds.

Some timer applications can help children to understand the concept of time, help them to finish tasks in time, and help them to get motivated. These applications are especially used with children with disabilities like ADHD, Down syndrome, etc., but everybody else can also benefit from them.

title: Timer


text:
Mathcounts

Mathcounts, stylized as MATHCOUNTS, is a non-profit organization that provides grades 6-8 extracurricular mathematics programs in all U.S. states, plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam and U.S. Virgin Islands. Its mission is to provide engaging math programs for middle school students of all ability levels to build confidence and improve attitudes about math and problem solving.

In Mathcounts, there are four different rounds. There is the Team Round, Target Round, Sprint Round, and Countdown Round. You are only permitted to use a calculator in the Team Round and Target Round. Calculators are not permitted for the Sprint Round. The Sprint Round has around 30 questions and aims to test how well you can compute without a calculator. The question get progressively harder on that round. In the Target Round, You are given questions in sets of two four times and are given around six minutes to complete each set. The difficulty is more scattered on this round than the Sprint Round. For the Team Round, the top four people from each school are on the school’s team. The Team Round has ten challenging questions. In the Countdown Round, the top ten testers compete based on their score, which is one point per each Sprint Round question answered correctly and two for each Target Round question answered correctly. The tenth-place scorer competes against the ninth-place scorer and if they win they go against the eighth-place scorer and so on till a winner is determined. The top individuals and teams from Chapter move on to State and the top four individuals from State move on to Nationals.

Mathcounts also provides numerous math resources for schools and the general public.

Topics covered include geometry, counting, probability, number theory, and algebra.

History
Mathcounts was started in 1983 by the National Society of Professional Engineers, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and CNA Insurance to increase middle school interest in mathematics. The first national-level competition was held in 1984. The Mathcounts Competition Series spread quickly in middle schools, and today it is the best-known middle school mathematics competition. In 2007 Mathcounts launched the National Math Club as a non-competitive alternative to the Competition Series. In 2011 Mathcounts launched the Math Video Challenge Program, which was discontinued in 2023.

2020 was the only year since 1984 in which a national competition was not held, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The "MATHCOUNTS Week" event featuring problems from the 2020 State Competition was held on the Art of Problem Solving website as a replacement. The 2021 National Competition was held online.

Current sponsors include RTX Corporation, U.S. Department of Defense STEM, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, National Society of Professional Engineers, 3M, Texas Instruments, Art of Problem Solving, Bentley Systems, Carina Initiatives, National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying, CNA Financial, Google, Brilliant, and Mouser Electronics.

Competition Series
The Competition Series is divided into four levels: school, chapter, state, and national. Students progress to each level in the competition based on performance at the previous level. As the levels progress, the problems become more challenging. Each level has many rounds, always including a Sprint Round (30 questions, 40 minutes) and a Target Round (4 pairs of harder problems with calculator use, 6 minutes each pair).

All students are either school-based competitors or non-school competitors ("NSCs"). Most students participate through their schools, starting with a school-level competition. A student whose school is not participating in the Competition Series starts at the chapter level as an NSC, competing individually.

School level
Coaches of each school select up to 12 students from their school to advance to the chapter competition, with 4 of them competing on the official school team. The rest compete individually.

Chapter level
All qualifying students compete individually. Students on an official school team also compete as a team. The Countdown Round is optional and can either be used to determine top individuals or as an unofficial round. The top teams and individuals advance to the state competition. The exact number of qualifiers varies by region.

State level
All qualifying students compete individually. Students on a qualifying school team also compete as a team. The Countdown Round is optional and can either be used to determine top individuals or as an unofficial round. The top 4 individuals qualify for the national competition. The coach of the winning school team is the coach for the state team. Some states have universities within the state that give scholarships to the top individuals of the state.

National level
Qualifying students and coaches receive an all-expenses-paid trip to the national competition. The competition typically lasts 3–4 days on Mother's Day weekend. The coach of the state team is the supervisor for the team. The students compete individually for the title of national champion. They also compete as a team to represent their state.

The 12 highest scoring individuals advance to the Countdown Round. The winner of this round is declared the National Champion.

Scholarships and prizes are awarded to the top individuals and top state teams. In the past, prizes have included trips to Space Camp or to the White House to meet the current President of the United States.

National Math Club
In addition to the Competition Series program, students can also participate in the National Math Club program.

The National Math Club program allows schools and non-school groups to start a math club for free. Upon registering, club leaders earn free online access to dozens of games, explorations, and problem sets.

Clubs that meet at least five times during the program year can achieve Silver Level Status, and clubs that complete a creative and collaborative project can achieve Gold Level Status. Clubs that achieve Silver Level and Gold Level can earn prizes and recognition.

Alumni scholarships
Each year, Mathcounts awards two types of scholarships to multiple alumni who participated in at least one of the Mathcounts programs during middle school. The Mathcounts Alumni Scholarship is awarded to alumni whose experience in Mathcounts was extremely influential, and the Community Coaching Scholarship is awarded to alumni who start Mathcounts programs at underserved schools.

Math Video Challenge
In 2011, Mathcounts started the Reel Math Challenge (later renamed to the Math Video Challenge). The Math Video Challenge program allowed students in teams of 4 to create a video that explained the solution to a problem from the Mathcounts School Handbook in a real-world scenario. The program was discontinued in 2023, but a similar video project opportunity is offered through the National Math Club.

Competition winners
Below is a table documenting each year's winning individual, winning state team and coach, and the location of the national competition.

title: Mathcounts


text:
Preen

Preen may refer to:

Birds

 * Preening, personal grooming of a bird's feathers especially by using its beak
 * Preen gland, also called the uropygial gland, an oil gland found in many bird species
 * Preen oil, an oil made by the uropygial gland found in many bird species

Products

 * Preen, a trade name for trifluralin

Surname

 * Garyn Preen (born 1991), Welsh footballer
 * Alan Preen (born 1935), former sportsman who played Australian rules football

title: Preen


text:
Talk:Rebirthing (breathwork)

Article history
The artlcle states "Rebirthing-breathwork is one of the practices critiqued by anti-cult experts Margaret Singer and Janja Lalich in the book Crazy Therapies: What Are They? Do They Work?.[1] Singer and Lalich write that proponents of such "bizarre" practices are proud of their non-scientific approach, and that this finds favor with an irrational clientele."

This whole thing is rather incomprehensible to me. For example, what does "finds favor with an irrational clientele" mean? Is this paragraph acceptable for an encyclopedic article?

Unsigned, 5/31/15. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.43.22 (talk) 17:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

The Rebirthing article started as a discussion of only "Rebirthing-Breathwork" and omitted all the related theories which go by the name "rebirthing". Specifically, the early version omitted all mention of compression-theory and its dangers. There is good evidence that at least some of those more controversial theories were based on or drew philosophical support from Orr's theory.

The original article was extensively rewritten to cover the more general topic of "rebirthing". It lists Orr's theory in a History section but includes the other practices. Since then, several people have attempted to edit that article back to a more narrow focus on Orr's "rebirthing-breathwork" framework. I've now broken that off to this separate article. I'm not sure I got all the details right in the transfer. In particular, the first four bullets in the "Theories" should be validated as appropriate to "rebirthing-breathwork". Thanks. Rossami (talk) 21:52, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the four points, they are accurately tied to Rebirthing Breathwork. Many practitioners including Leonard Orr also use the term Conscious Breathing, as there are many benefits beyond just clearing Birth Trauma or other suppressed emotional energies. I've made some minor notes in several places in the text to expand what is there. shinyblue 20 Apr 2005

article page "Criticisms" section

I removed the 1st point. I took out the line because there is now scientific evidence of cellular memory in transplant receipients. 86.132.228.51 11:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)chris
 * And I've put it back pending a verifiable citation of your source. That is an extraordinary claim and deserves extraordinary confirmation.  Rossami (talk) 05:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Breathwork criticism
There has been a longrunning dispute about the weight that should be given to the reported or alleged dangers of Holotropic Breathwork (see Talk:Holotropic Breathwork), and this has now been referred to the Mediation Cabal Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-23 Holotropic Breathwork NPOV disagreement. Many of the criticisms are actually common to all types of Breathwork. Rather than repeating the arguments under each therapy, one suggestion is that Breathwork should become the primary WP article, with links to the subtypes. Observations are welcome. Jedermann 13:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi all the subtypes are listed on Breathwork, but I agree these articles are sprawling/lots of them, I have merged a couple of duplicate one's now though.

List form
Some of this article is in the form of lists of points. Stylistically, encyclopedia, and Wikip articles, usually are not. We should make these lists into proper paragraphs.Merkinsmum 23:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Half of this Article is Ridiculous
Maybe I've just been watching too much Law and Order but I seriously Object. "due to ignorance and misunderstanding on the part a few medical professionals (and parents/family)" Seriously? That doesn't even belong in a personal memoir, much less an encyclopedic article. I don't know much about the subject so I can't really edit it myself but someone needs to clean this ridiculous drivel up because it sounds like an uneducated 5th grader wrote it. Sixthcrusifix (talk) 10:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

In Universe
This article describes a subject from within a coherent and solely self-referential literature. It is "in universe" and not written as an encyclopaedia entry for the general community who do not share these beliefs or literature. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but that is not an appropriate use of that particular tag. "In-universe" has to do solely with fiction.  While I consider Orr's opinions and practices to be more than a little flaky, they are real-world beliefs, held by real humans, documented in real journals and occasionally resulting in real deaths.  The "in-universe" tag does not apply. Now, if you want to apply a NPOV tag or to suggest specific rewrites here on Talk, I would not disagree with your assessment.  This page has been hijacked at various times by devout advocates and/or apologists of these practices.  It is a constant struggle to maintain balance.  (And as you may guess from my tone here, I do not consider myself completely unbiased on the topic so I try to limit my edits.)  Rossami (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sources 1 & 2 are singularly unimpressive as sources of facticity. The remaining four sources are criticism.  It looks like fiction to me, if with an intense otaku cosplay scene. Fifelfoo (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Self Induced Alkalosis
For anyone researching this:

The Hyperventilation technique of Rebirthing puts the body in Alkalosis

Personally, I have found this to open the barrier between the conscious and subconscious.

More detailed non personal point of view information: The Psychosis of Metabolic Alkalosis, James S. Howard

Researching Mr. Orr's personal experience and explanation is a scientific dead end.

If I get better infomation or sources I will post a proper article entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.58.22.99 (talk) 15:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

the essence of rebirthing
I've been 'rebirthing' people for many years now. The essential method is simple: a wave-like inhale from the belly to the chest and a total relaxation (neither controlled nor forced) on the exhale. The exhale and the inhale are connected (there is no pause between). Thus, the breathing is circular (not broken).

In my experience, memories of birth come up infrequently during rebirthing sessions. They do come up, however, and are often intensely felt by the client. Most rebirthing experiences do not relate directly to the birth process.

While rebirthing, clients frequently feel some strong sensations in various parts of their body followed by a release of feelings/emotions. Primarily, these take the form of anger and sadness. Often fear or guilt come up as well. The presence of the rebirther is very securing when these emotions are being processed. Frequently, the major issue(s) of the 'rebirthee' turns around one or two individuals (often a parent or both parents). By discreetly asking the right questions, the rebirthee will recollect or state what their issue is with that person. Usually, there is a release of held-in emotions and sometimes strong feelings of guilt that may or may not be valid.

After the session the rebirthee feels lighter, freer, happier -- as a rule. People who have been seriously traumatized (sexual abuse as children, for example) require a series of rebirths. The best rebirthers/breathworkers are also able to intuit which questions to ask the rebirthee during the process. The right questions (not 'leading' questions) support the rebirthee in letting go of what they have been suppressing. The questions should be few, brief and direct. The rebirther should be asked to respond in only a word or two. If the rebirthee begins talking, he/she will stop the rebirthing process, which will be counter-productive. Also, by asking the right questions, the rebirthee will reveal what his/her negative (perhaps largely unconscious) judgments are concerning others as well as him/herself. When the rebirther points out what these judgements are at the end of the session the rebirthee can begin to engage in a self-enquiry concerning his/her largely unexamined assumptions about others and about themselves. Simple writing and communication techniques can then be very useful in enabling the rebirthee to either let go of or modify those judgments which are harmful, counter-productive or delusional.

It has been my experience that rebirthing, when practiced properly with a rebirther who has a grasp of how the mind works, results in a great 'letting go' which in turn results in better physical health, mental health and social/financial health. Energy levels go up; reliance on pharmaceutical and other drugs (including cigarettes, alcohol, sugar, etc) goes down. Egocentricity diminishes; a heathy and positive sense of Self increases.

A competent rebirther combines empathy with objectivity, intuition with knowledge. He/she does not allow any sexual energy to pass between his/herself and the client. Confidentiality is established at the outset. An understanding of the location and nature of the body's major energy centers (chakras) is also extremely useful, even essential.

Duart Maclean beingandconsciousness.com rebirthing.ca — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.226.174.69 (talk) 16:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

If you had mentioned 'chakras' at the beginning of your original research, it would save a great deal of time in determining the woo content of this post. If this is an accurate portrayal of rebirthing, then it most certainly does not belong in medicine, as there is a distinct lack of falsifiable, controlled evidence for any such therapy's benefit. In good faith, could you supply references outside of your own research? Specifically, a description of what is meant by 'energy center,' and what sort of 'energy' is being referred to, would be most helpful. Also, to note: 'intuition' and 'objectivity' are polar opposites; to speak of combining them is nonsensical, in the way that speaking of having a 'triangular square' is nonsensical.```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by WoobMonkey (talk • contribs) 04:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Making the article more informative
The article should contain more information on what rebirthing (breathwork) is. Here a suggestion: "Rebirthing-breathwork is a type of breathwork invented by Leonard Orr.[1] Orr proposed that the correct breathing technique can cure disease and relieve pain.[1] He proposed the technique of connected breathing which means to make no pauses between inhalation and exhalation. By keeping the attention on the breathing for a longer time, suppressed memories can become conscious and can be released." References: Dowling, C. (2014), Rebirthing and Breathwork: A Powerful Technique for Personal Transformation. ISBN: 978-1495345760 Minett, G. (1994), Breath and Spirit: Rebirthing as a Healing Technique. ISBN: 978-1855383531

Plus: The reference <> should be deleted as it belongs to another site (Rebirthing (attachment therapy)) (Wilfried-Ehrmann (talk) 20:04, 19 October 2015 (UTC))
 * This is a fringe topic so we need to avoid in-movement sources and use WP:FRIND instead. The Skeptical Inquirer reference is fine. Alexbrn (talk) 20:08, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

 * The Skeptical Inquirer reference points at another technique, a certain type of attachment therapy using a carpet to trigger birth memories. This has nothing in common with the rebirthing breathwork that was invented by Leonard Orr except the name. When there should by a "mainstream scholarly discourse" (WP:FRIND), this distinction is crucial, otherwise the page creates confusion (and blames a person - Orr - for inventing a technique which kills people, which is an unfair accusation insinuated in this article). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilfried-Ehrmann (talk • contribs) 09:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

 * As there came no answer to my argument above, I removed the Skeptical Inquirer reference, which is misleading and insinuating, but it came back soon after. So it seems that this page is sealed against any change, so someone wants it their way without communicating why and without arguments on common sense ground or scientific integrity. Sorry for the bias that contradicts wikipedias guidelines and violates the claims for objectivity and neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilfried-Ehrmann (talk • contribs) 09:52, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

alt med
User:204.13.204.194 please explain, based on the sourced content in the article, why this is not alt med. thx Jytdog (talk) 18:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Rebirthing (breathwork) Article
I would like to make the following suggestions for the Rebirthing (breathwork) article:

1. It may be true that "Orr proposed that correct breathing can cure disease and relieve pain" but it was wrong of Leonard Orr to say that. The goal of this modality is to heal suppressed feelings such as anger, fear, etc., as discussed in the book "Rebirthing: The Science of Enjoying All of Your Life" by Jim Leonard and Phil Laut. I have had many, many, rebirthing-breathwork sessions and not once has my rebirther asked me what diseases or physical pain I would like to work on. It simply is not the goal of this technique to heal disease, and this statement should be removed, in my opinion.

2. Regarding the sentences "Rebirthing-breathwork is one of the practices critiqued by anti-cult experts Margaret Singer and Janja Lalich in the book Crazy Therapies: What Are They? Do They Work?.[1] Singer and Lalich write that proponents of such "bizarre" practices are proud of their non-scientific approach, and that this finds favor with an irrational clientele":

a. First I would like to discuss the part about proponents being "proud of their non-scientific approach." I have read the section on rebirthing-breathwork in "Crazy Therapies" and what they seem to mean by "non-scientific" is that this technique hasn't been tested in an experimental way, say by having 100 subjects rebirthed and then seeing if most of them experienced benefits. Well, of course it hasn't, as rebirthers aren't clinicians. Also, the technique doesn't lend itself to this kind of verification as the results are feeling based. Should this be removed from the article?

b. The part about "finds favor with an irrational clientele" seems to not belong in Wikipedia as it is criticizing clients of this technique because they use something that hasn't been "scientifically" proven.

3. Regarding the sentence "In 2006, a panel that consisted of over one hundred experts participated in a survey of psychological treatments considered rebirthing therapy to be discredited." I examined the poll cited and, beyond rebirthing-breathwork, seems to also refer to (at least) the modality called rebirthing that some psychotherapists have practiced (which is not rebirthing-breathwork). Also, proponents of rebirthing-breathwork claim that this technique can heal suppressed emotions regardless of when they were suppressed, not just at birth. I would suggest that this be removed.

Also, I would like to add more information about rebirthing-breathwork but I'm concerned that someone who dislikes this modality would edit it out. For example, I once added to the article a statement that rebirthers often suggest affirmations (i.e., positive thoughts) to their clients. This innocuous statement was then removed!

I welcome any feedback. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.13.204.194 (talk) 17:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * as you note, there is a therapeutic goal here. we need sources per WP:MEDRS to talk about things related to therapy. Jytdog (talk) 19:22, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

 * No, Jytgod, that's exactly my point, there is no medical goal in rebirthing (breathwork). It's simply a breathing technique akin to yoga, so your request for medical sources is unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.13.204.194 (talk) 17:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Except "Orr proposed that correct breathing can cure disease and relieve pain". Alexbrn (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

 * He was wrong. Time marches on and progress is made. Would you take a quote from a scientist in 1800 that we now know to be wrong and insist that's the way scientists think now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.13.204.194 (talk) 18:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are going to keep contributing here, indent your posts and sign them. This is basic courtesy here.  Jytdog (talk) 18:32, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * In my initial response, when I wrote, "as you note, there is a therapeutic goal here" I was responding to your OP, where you wrote "... The goal of this modality is to heal..." (emphasis added).  "Healing" is therapeutic.  If you didn't believe it was effective at healing - in other words, actually therapeutic -- you would not be here.  You seem to be trying to make a distinction that therapy is not about health; it is. Jytdog (talk) 18:32, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Not helpful
I am not a proponent of this technique, and am aware it is controversial. But it would be helpful to know what it entails... there is very little description of the actual method. Keep the criticism by all means, but please explain what "rebirthing" involves! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.146.53.202 (talk) 12:22, 1 July 2018 (UTC) Seems reasonable to me. In-world sources can be used to describe the method - provided we don't imply that it accomplishes unproven benefits. --Karinpower (talk) 03:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Merge
As I see it, Breathwork is more comprehensive and has room for some description of each method (including criticism). Since this page has so few sources, is it noteworthy enough to have its own page? Borderline. --Karinpower (talk) 03:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC) PS. Let's discuss this on the Talk page of Breathwork instead of here. This is my first merge proposal so I'm learning as I go. --Karinpower (talk) 04:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rebirthing (breathwork)


text:
Talk:Marathon

new woman record in 2022
https://nos.nl/artikel/2424610-brinkman-spot-met-wetten-van-topsport-en-loopt-nationaal-record-in-rotterdam Nienke Brinkman "Prompt klokte ze 2.22.51, waarmee ze het negentien jaar oude Nederlandse record van Lornah Kiplagat uit de boeken schreef." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.149.83.125 (talk) 02:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Ambient temperature double-check?
> runners recorded their fastest times when the temperature was around 6 °C (43 °F)

That value, just six centigrades above freezing sounds strange, because such kind of weather (late autumn / early winter) usually implies high humidity, like fog or rain as well - a combination that places heavy toll on joints, esp. the knees and thus detrimental to running. Even road cycling races (where athlete's body weight doesn't burden the knees) tend to cease by mid-autumn and restart in late February at the earliest (from European perspective). 94.21.121.96 (talk) 15:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

 * Since 1981,the Marathon world record progression list shows all the records have been either spring or autumn, so your comment doesn't seem to match the data.
 * And I'm dubious that humidity is high when temperature is around 6°C. Surely this is going to be very location dependent. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Paragraph break
I've added a paragraph break for clarity, which editor Track1News  talk has been reverting for unknown reasons.

This seems trivial, but the main desideratum of an encyclopedia is that it should be readable. Excessively long paragraphs are hard to read. A paragraph that wanders from one topic to a different one is hard to follow.

I'm baffled as to Track1News talk's zeal for eliminating paragraph breaks. The explanation "we didn't have a paragraph break here before so we don't need one now" has no basis in Wikipedia policy.

Geoffrey.landis (talk) 15:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Marathon


text:
Holbrookia

Holbrookia is a genus of earless lizards, known commonly as the lesser earless lizards, in the family Phrynosomatidae. The genus contains six recognized species, which are found throughout the Southwestern and Central United States and northern Mexico. They are characterized by having no external ear openings, presumably to prevent soil from entering their bodies when they are digging.

Etymology
The generic name, Holbrookia, is in honor of American zoologist John Edwards Holbrook.

Description
Lesser earless lizards grow to about 2.0–2.5 in (50–65 mm) snout-to-vent length (SVL), plus a tail of 3–4 in (75–100 mm). They are typically grey or tan in color, with black blotching. The males usually have blue patches on either side of their bellies, whereas the females do not. Females often change to have bright orange patches when gravid.

Behavior
Holbrookia species are diurnal, basking lizards. They spend the vast majority of their time sunning on rocks, even in the heat of the day, until the surface temperature reaches around 104 °F (40 °C), when they will retreat to a rock crevice or burrow.

Diet
Lesser earless lizards are insectivorous.

Species
The genus Holbrookia contains six species which are recognized as being valid.

Geographic range
Earless lizards (genera Cophosaurus and Holbrookia) are found in the Southwestern and Central United States, in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, and as far north as Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming. They are also found in Mexico, in the states of Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Sinaloa, Durango, Zacatecas, San Luis Potosí, Nuevo León, Tamaulipas, and Veracruz.

title: Holbrookia


text:
Knobcone pine

The knobcone pine, Pinus attenuata (also called Pinus tuberculata), is a tree that grows in mild climates on poor soils. It ranges from the mountains of southern Oregon to Baja California with the greatest concentration in northern California and the Oregon-California border.

Description
Individual specimens can live up to a century. The crown is usually conical with a straight trunk. It reaches heights of 8 - 24 m, but can be a shrub on especially poor sites. The bark is thin and smooth, flaky and gray-brown when young, becoming dark gray-red-brown and shallowly furrowed into flat scaly ridges in age. The twigs are red-brown and often resinous. Its wood is knotty and of little interest for lumber.

The leaves are in fascicles of three, needle-like, yellow-green, twisted, and 9–15 cm long. The cones are resin-sealed and irregularly shaped, 8–16 cm long and clustered in whorls of three to six on the branches. The scales end in a short stout prickle. Cones can sometimes be found attached to the trunk and larger branches.

Distribution
The knobcone pine can be found growing in the dry, rocky soils of southern Oregon and northern California, between 300 and 750 m above sea level. It forms nearly pure stands, preferring to grow where there is no competition.

Ecology
On the coast, the knobcone pine may hybridize with bishop pine (Pinus muricata), and Monterey pine (Pinus radiata).

In the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada, knobcone pine is often a co-dominant with blue oak (Quercus douglasii).

The species is susceptible to fire, but this melts the cone resin, releasing seeds for regrowth. The species seems to be shade intolerant.

title: Knobcone pine