Talk:Moisture

Move Moisture Control in Products Discussion Under Its Own Heading

In my opinion the discussion of moisture control in various products should have its own heading for the following reasons. First, it assumes an extremely narrow interpretation of the meaning of "moisture". Second, because there is presently little other information about the word "moisture" the discussion could mislead some readers into thinking that this narrow interpretation is the only interpretation. Placing the discussion under its own heading would help clarify to readers that this narrow interpretation of "moisture" is only valid in the limited context of product production and quality control. Zaridu (talk) 08:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Moisture in the air

The article should be marked as a stub, given that this is precisely what it is. For whoever may be looking to expand the article, a specific topic I came looking for and found missing is the topic of moisture in the air, its measuring methods and any other related information. 79.179.53.198 (talk) 12:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Word etymology..

I would like to know the etymology of this word.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.77.154.8 (talk) .

Damp also redirects to Moisture, so here are both etymologies from etymonline.com [1]:

• moist [2]
• damp [3]

--Kevin L'Huillier 02:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Reference to Mormon culture

The Moisture article has intermittently contained an obscure reference to "Mormon culture":

“In Mormon culture, moisture describes any form of precipitation."

This reference should not be included, for the following reasons:

• This is basically no more than an "inside joke" and is not of general interest.
• Attributing the meaning to all of "Mormon culture" is a mistake, as the usage is regional--it is not found in the general Mormon population.

-- Mycroft1980 18:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)