Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/01/Category:Smokestacks
While chimney and smokestack may be interchangeable, in some contexts, in others they aren't. Steamships have smokestacks, they never have "chimneys". Now, in 2019, none of the subcategories of chimney has a nautical application. So, I think the original merge was in error. Geo Swan (talk) 15:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
- I was pinged on this. Any outcome here is fine with me. - Jmabel ! talk 16:42, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
- Can we have a source for ships never having chimneys? Because, see:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funnel_(ship) "A funnel is the smokestack or chimney on a ship used to expel boiler steam ..."
- https://www.shutterstock.com/search/ship+chimney
- https://www.google.com/search?q=define+smokestack "a chimney or funnel for discharging smoke from a locomotive, ship, factory, etc."
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimney " Chimneys may be found in buildings, steam locomotives and ships. "
- http://www.steamboats.com/museum/engineroom.html " Imagine how it must have been-paddlewheels noisily creaking and splashing, crude steam engine shaking the deck, black sooty smoke belching from the chimney "
- https://books.google.com/books?id=KYQyAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA606 "... if section 24 did not apply to the chimney or funnel of a steam-tug plying on the Thames"
- So while I'm not against having a nautical subcategory, say Funnel (ship), I would think it would be a subcategory of Chimneys --GRuban (talk) 22:54, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
- Category:Ships' funnels would be as acceptable to me as Category:Ships' smokestacks. Category:Ships' chimneys would seem like fingernails on chalkboard. Geo Swan (talk) 04:26, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
- I am going to @Stunteltje: , a contributor who has had wise opinions on nautical matters for a decade or so. Geo Swan (talk) 23:31, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
- As a start, I've added a single sentence to the chimney paragraph referring people to "smokestack industries" and the historic impacts of environmental pollution this term brings up. I would add much more like the relationship to climate change impacts from the industrial burning of fossil fuels but its clear that this article and whomever suceeded in redirecting smokestacks here should be at best reversed so that the historic development of pollution can be placed in context. Note all the pretty pictures of modern smokestacks rather than the historic ones showing acid rain and cities so polluted by clouds of coal dust that the general readership would not even connect this subject to one of the most controversial environmental issues of the 20th century. Lastly, the referral to smokestack industry article and that it itself is not more than a sentence implies just how much damage this slight of word manipulation is, again, leaving general readers with a dead end if they were looking for any kind of help in understanding this subject.Energynet (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Closed (currently redirected, no consensus to change redirection; if further discussion warranted, new CfD can be raised) Josh (talk) 23:32, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
@Geo Swan, Jmabel, GRuban, and Energynet: Seemed simpler than it was. Currently the parent category is Category:Exhaust systems with Category:Chimneys (presumably for structural exhaust systems) and Category:Engine exhaust systems (presumably for vehicular exhaust systems). Figured I would re-open and ask if this setup is acceptable at this point or if further discussion was warranted. Josh (talk) 23:44, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
- A year later! I'm ok with what we have now, with Category:Funnels (ship part) under Category:Chimneys of vehicles under both Category: Chimneys and Category:Vehicle exhausts. --GRuban (talk) 13:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
