Talk:Central vacuum cleaner

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

+

Images requested[edit]

Searching Wikimedia Commons only turned up 5 images. For the benefit of readers not familiar with central vacuum systems, the following types of illustrative images are requested:

  • Typical vacuum tools assortment, including turbine-type air-powered brush
  • Different brands and types of central vacuum power units, including true cyclonic and filter bagged types
  • True cyclonic power unit, with translucent dirt collection canister, partially-filled
  • Closeup of true cyclonic dirt canister, showing a variety of collected construction debris
  • Filter bagged central unit, opened to show bag installed in place
  • Cross-section or cutaway photo or diagram of true cyclonic and filter bagged power units
  • Central vacuum in use, showing vacuum inlet, deployed hose and tools
  • Heavy-duty "workshop" central vacuum installation, view of central unit, ducting, "blast gate" hookups to table saw, bandsaw, etc.
  • Closeup picture of "VacPan" or "VacSweep" type kickspace vacuum inlet, valve closed and open (in operation)
  • Specialized compact systems for small apartments or large vehicles (motor homes or boats)
  • Cross-section diagram showing a typical central vacuum tubing system installation in a house
  • In-wall tubing being installed in new construction, before drywall installation
  • Retrofit installation of central vacuum tubing in an older house
  • Unobtrusive vacuum exhaust outlet, exterior shot, in context
  • Older, "antique", or "historic" central vacuum cleaner installations

Don't worry if there only seem to be a half-dozen slots for pictures in the article. If a large selection of useful images is available, an image "Gallery" can be set up. Thanks for any help you can offer! --Reify-tech (talk) 14:54, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More information about the working principles of the system?[edit]

Somebody who is knowledgeable of central vacuum systems (as a European, I only know them from Tom and Jerry cartoons) should expand the article with information regarding the operation of these systems, especially how they are turned on and off remotely from the hose, and what happens with the other inlets not in use while one of them is in use. --Rev L. Snowfox (talk) 22:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added a new section "Operation". Also flagged Template:Globalize/US for coverage needed beyond the US. Reify-tech (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising?[edit]

This article is probably entirely factual, but it seems somewhat promotional and POV, and it has very few references. I've already added a few tags and removed instances of 'claim', and I'm not done yet. Some of it is also quite vague and/or weaselly and hard to verify -- for example, 'a promotional article in a trade magazine'.

Two of the sections, namely 'Advantages' and 'Disadvantages', actually seem rather out of place on Wikipedia. I'd only expect to see that sort of stuff in a promotional brochure, especially seeing that the 'disadvantages' list is so much shorter than the 'advantages'. It seems like an attempt to convince the reader to acquire a central vacuum unit, honestly.

As for the sparse references, I'm not terribly confident in those that are simply promotional websites for vacuum systems. I suggest they become external links and, of course, better sources found to replace them (if there are any, that is; there ought to be). Cathfolant (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The advantages and disadvantages sections are now tagged with {{unreferenced section}}, by the way. Cathfolant (talk) 21:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since nobody's expressed an opinion, I'm going to go ahead and chuck the sections. If you can think of any good reason why they should be here or how they could be turned into something appropriate, please give a squeal. Cathfolant (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Cathfolant (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't chuck out the material. It is actually surprisingly difficult to find good references on the web, or in print. The Fine Homebuilding article is one of the few published sources found the last time I went out and searched. Hold on, and let me take a look at what can be found. Reify-tech (talk) 20:53, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I wondered if there might not be many references. Should I put back the sections then? I still think they were unencyclopedic though. Perhaps incorporate their ideas into other parts of the text?
I should be digging up references too. I just have too much on my plate...will check on google when the homework is under control. Cathfolant (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
More references have been added, though it is still not easy to find them online, and non-advertising printed literature is even harder to find. Reify-tech (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thin-wall injection molding?[edit]

The central vacuum tubing is described by manufacturers as "thinwall", but I don't think it is made using the "thin-wall injection molding" process. Instead, I think it is manufactured using "extrusion", as evidenced by linear streaks sometimes seen running the length of a piece of tubing. Unless a WP:RS can be found one way or another, I propose removing any claim about how thin wall tubing is manufactured, since this isn't an essential feature of the article anyway. Reify-tech (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Power[edit]

Article should more explicitly focus on power capacities like range of units of watts, pascales, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.56.136.107 (talk) 23:46, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Central vacuum cleaner. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:33, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Health Benefits[edit]

The paragraph in Health Benefits that talks about the UC-Davis study is misleading as it was only the Beam brand of central vacuum systems that was studied and was not indicative of ALL central vacuum systems improving allergies. The referenced article is also misleading as it wrongly has the references to Beam redacted. The original, non-redacted article is here and should be the article referenced.

Tim.muller (talk) 23:50, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide[edit]

Very useful article. However whilst the text focuses on North America, the pictures reference other countries, notably Germany, Sweden and Norway. It would be nice if information was provided on these systems used around the world, and more of a history than one 19th century invention, which may not have even been the first. Claverhouse (talk) 10:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Central_vacuum_cleaner&oldid=1167529855"