Talk:Glass brick
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kalkot. Peer reviewers: Melissa Luo.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
No Original Research
editHello.
I wonder why anyone placed NOR-notie in the introduction of the article where the author only mentioned facts that actualy don't need any evidence.
"Glass brick, also known as glass block, is often used as an architectural element in underground parking garages[original research?],..." - Okay, there isn't in every underground parking garage a glass brick wall, but it obviously is an architectural element.
"...washrooms[original research?], municipal swimming baths[original research?],..." - I asume the person who placed this note here hasn't ever been in school or in a municipal swimming bath, because glass bricks are nearly in every public washroom, for example in schools, or in swimming baths.
"...and other areas where privacy or visual obscuration is desired[original research?], while admitting light." - This is definitly fact. Glass bricks let light and brightness pass but not the views of a curious neighbour.
So please erase these notes and check the rest of the article because this was only the introduction... (precedecing unsigned comments by 79.217.108.138)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such some of the things we strive for are: a detached professional tone, completeness and accuracy, and properly-cited credible references. I added the citation-request and no-original-research tags to various parts of the article which made un-cited assertions. There are many statements in the article which (a) do not sound professional, and (b) sound empirical in nature. The fact that you feel "glass brick is often used as an architectural element in underground parking garages" is an opinion. Just because you think it's a good opinion (i.e. you agree with it) doesn't mean we can forgo Wikipedia policy and leave it un-cited. The fact that you see something often, or think that something belongs in a certain place, or like how something looks -- these are not professional, neutral bases for making assertions. There is no place for opinions on Wikipedia, or in any professional document. If the assertions made in the article aren't sourced soon, I will be removing them. The tags have been up for a while. Mr. P. S. Phillips (talk) 06:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Another issue is that, even if this building material happens to be common in 79.217.208.138's locality, it is unlikely that this material is equally commonly used throughout the world. I'm pretty sure I've been in plenty of school washrooms that didn't have any glass brick, perhaps due to budgetary restrictions. JNW2 (talk) 03:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- What officious ass decided to plaster this article with the stupid tags? Christ. It would be nice if some people on this site would actually focus on improving content, rather than amusing themselves by slapping warning labels all over perfectly reasonable content. 74.14.68.108 (talk) 20:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- Got to love the picture of the public bathroom including the glass blocks... I guess that photo is OR too :). He's wrong about the opinion though. The only part of that sentance that could possibly be construed as opinion is the "often" part, which is vague in it's own right and can be omitted. The phrase "glass brick is used as an architectural element in underground parking garages" isn't an opinion. It's an unsourced fact. And while I'm sure we'd all like to see wikipedia become the professional's choice for encylopedic knowledge, for the time being, it's not really usefully to hack the article to pieces simply because each fact hasn't been cited from a textbook. It's a sign that the person adding the tags is too lazy to find references for the material, and would rather play the watchdog who calls it out for deletion. I should know, because I've done it often enough myself. However, doing so in this instance has reduced the article to sub-stub quality. Ten paragraphs of unsourced, but easily verifiable information is better than 3 sentances of the obvious. Lime in the Coconut 19:25, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Gas
editGlass bricks are not solid - they contain a gas. Does anyone know what this gas is?La vita è dolce (talk) 20:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Copyvio reverted
editSee Copyright problems for details.--SPhilbrickT 17:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Glass brick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131127063948/http://www.greenbuildingtalk.com:80/Forums/tabid/53/aff/16/aft/61020/afv/topic/afpg/2/Default.aspx to http://www.greenbuildingtalk.com/Forums/tabid/53/aff/16/aft/61020/afv/topic/afpg/2/Default.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:58, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glass brick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304090123/http://www.glassblocksales.com/Faq.htm to http://www.glassblocksales.com/Faq.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
New Citations
editHi,
I would like to help contribute to this page. I've listed some references to possibly help with the history, which seems to be missing. Adding historical uses may be helpful since the material dates back to the nineteenth century. I also recall some architects used to integrate the bricks into their flooring systems as a health benefit for workers (e.g. Otto Wagner's Österreichische Postsparkasse), although I'm unsure of sources other than the Postsparkasse's museum. Does anyone know of any?
Other potential sources:
[1] Explains the different standard sizes and installation methods.
[2] Explains a manufacturing process.
[3] An early 20th century summary of glass brick use.
[4] The use today.
[5] Describes early color blown glass bricks.
Any other suggestions on avenues for historical context of the glass block or in general would be appreciated. Kalkot (talk) 03:57, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ Hornbostel, Caleb (1978). Construction Materials: Types, Uses, and Applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- ^ Gottmann, Peter (1995). "Glass brick production considerations". Glass International. 12: 19–22.
- ^ "Building Bricks of Glass". Carpentry and Building (1879-1909). 1: 206. June 1, 1909.
- ^ Eberlein, Harold Donaldson (1937). Glass in Modern Construction, Its Place in Architectural Design and Decoration. New York: C Scribner's Sons.
- ^ "Blown Glass Bricks for Building Purposes". Scientific American (1845-1908). 76: 10. Jan 2, 1897 – via ProQuest.
structural question
editDoes anyone know the structural properties of glass brick? i.e. How they distribute weight and whether the type of glass varies for different strength applications.NKyoder (talk) 16:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)