Talk:Fire

Chemistry section, fire extinguishing part 3

Currently the article states as Step 3 in the part about extinguishing a fire: "application of water, which removes heat from the fire faster than the fire can produce it (similarly, blowing hard on a flame will displace the heat of the currently burning gas from its fuel source, to the same end), or"

I think it is important to mention here that there are some circumstances in which one would never want to put water on a fire. This information can be found in any lab safety textbook, but it is not common knowledge. There are still people who are attempting to put out grease fires with water (never do that!), and it ends up making the fire worse. Since the example used in the article is of a fire caused by a gas flame (like a kitchen fire), it seems very important to clarify this.

There are some other circumstances in which one should never pour water on a flame, as that will only make the fire get worse and spread faster. I hope someone has time to look this up and add it to the article. (I think the part about fire extinguishing is well-written, by the way, it just needs this one part clarified.) Thanks. Fallendarling (talk) 00:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

(I'm new to wikipedia talk, so please excuse any etiquette mistakes I make) I agree. There are indeed some cases in which pouring water on a fire is not a good idea, and can even make it worse. Take for example calcium oxide (quicklime). It may actually ignite other nearby flammable materials if water is poured on it. Alkali metals are explosive in water. Not all fires are safe to pour water on Cormac596 (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request from Thisisleonidas, 1 April 2011

fire is light Thisisleonidas (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

How to increase this article's comprehensiveness

There is almost certainly a wide folklore surrounding fire, and this article's comprehensiveness would be increased if it referrred to that. At present, this article is biassed towards physics and chemistry and says little on humann issues, e.g. on fire safety. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Good idea. Potentially, it's a very wide topic and a new daughter article, with little more than a linking {{Main}} template here, might be better as "future proof". --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:55, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

When someone who can edit it happens along, you might like to replace the dead link in the references with the following archived version: http://web.archive.org/web/20091028180012/http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast12may_1.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.58.240 (talk) 12:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair use for Darkness Fire.jpg

Even though darkness is a fire type which is purple and not orange and red. I could believe there should be an image which contains a darkness fire on the article so may wanna put some fair use things on the description so that it can stay on the article.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 22:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

agree~~

File:Darkness Fire.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Darkness Fire.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)