Talk:Blu Tack

Name

Is it Blu-tac or Blu-tack? The header and lede are differently spelled. Marnanel 15:40, Apr 16, 2004 (UTC)

Everything official I could find (including the packet in front of me) says Blu-Tack, and it doesn't seem to vary by country. I've moved the page and updated all links.--Dtcdthingy 21:36, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The official website says it's "Blu Tack", so I've moved the page. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 13:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added a photograph which clearly shows the correct spelling. -- Longhair\^talk 12:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the very link given above gives it as "Blu-Tack". Yes, the URL is "blutack", but we read "Blu-Tack" within the page. Meanwhile, the British page blu-tack.co.uk has a hyphen in its URL and repeatedly says "Blu-Tack". Tama1988 (talk) 09:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though I have to concede that the Australian page uses (both!) "BluTack" and "Blu Tack" instead. Tama1988 (talk) 09:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: I live in the most North Easterly part of Atlantic Canada and I've never heard of "Zorkai". Quote from the main page - Blu Tack is known as "Zorkai" in north eastern areas of Canada". It might be a Quebec product but I highly doubt it and regardless it ain't popularly known as that. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.206.32 (talk) 11:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My girlfriend is also from a north easterly part of Atlantic Canada (aka Newfoundland), and she's never heard it called "Zorkai" either. Unfortunately a sample size of two isn't statistically valid. That said, a quick Google search shows no hits for "Zorkai" on a Canadian TLD, which casts serious doubt on that claim IMO. On that basis I'm strongly tempted to remove it. Does anyone else agree? Quickos (talk) 02:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this article to clarify whether to say blu-tacing or blu-tacking, and was surprised that the k was present in the current packaging. Whilst I'm happy to be proven wrong, I'm convinced that it was without the k in mid-80's Britain! Gandru (talk) 01:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting Info

I took out:

Interesting info

blu-tack is fun to play with, you can mould it into different shapes.

due to....I dunno, complete stupidity? --Stretch 05:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey now, let's be fair. Someone was just trying to help. They didn't quite succeed at doing what 'kpedia is for, but hey, but at least they tried. --Lenoxus 19:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I get some?

Worldwide availability, or only in Europe and North America? Andycjp St Andrews Day 2006

I've never seen it in North America. Maybe ask a contact in the UK to post you some? Marnanel 14:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The basic product is available in most North American office supply stores, at least it would seem to me, but maybe not the specific brand. --Lenoxus 19:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Australia, and it is sold commonly over here. So it is not "only Europe and North America" Retro Agnostic (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"its original purpose is unknown"

What does this mean? Was it discovered in the ruins of a lost civilazation and/or space colony? I see no reason for its "original purpose" not to be the same as the one it is used for today. (I still didn't remove it because perhaps it is true in a way that can be better clarified.) --Lenoxus 19:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone and removed it, because it's a rather odd thing to say, and probably needs to be clarified with a source. — Matt Crypto 19:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Along the same line, I replaced 'The product was discovered' with 'The substance was invented' since the former supports the 'found on an alien planet' metaphor. --204.11.228.96 23:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC) (first wikipedia edit, btw.)[reply]

I thought one of the original uses (if not purpose) was for cleaning out the gunk you get between typewriter keys (You know the things that we had before computer keyboards)I still use it for computer keyboard cleaning myself. This is even stated on the packaging. I have not added this to the page as I have no source (other than the packaging).. should this be added ??

MSDS link broken

The link to the MSDS is broken and I couldn't easily find it perhaps someone else could 128.250.6.247 14:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kneaded Erasers

Is this substance at all related to the kneaded eraser? Aside from being tougher than the kneaded eraser, the two act and look very similar.67.150.217.132 05:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True. Dfrg.msc 08:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very different. You don't erase with blu tack. --Preceding unsigned comment added by GavinTing (talk • contribs) 15:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly haven't tried. It works reasonably well. 130.194.13.105 01:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misconduct

It looks like someone has been goofing around on this article. I would strongly suggest a cleanup and verification of contents. --Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.159.15.76 (talk) 03:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DIfferent "tacks"

Should the fact that there are such ones now called green-tack and red-tack and other coloured tacks be mentioned?--Coin945 (talk) 11:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use as a drug?

Well, I don't know but it seems to me that alpha-11-benzomasterbakerpropyl isn't a name of a chemical compound... I'm a chemistry student and I have never seen a "master baker" inside a chemical name... Probably somebody playing with the words? If you're wondering where I got this, try looking up the Drug section at the bottom of the page.

Joonhon (talk) 04:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was a vandal. I've reverted that edit twice now. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 14:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Chiefly British?"

My impression as an American who lived and worked in the UK for 12 years is that adhesive putty is much more popular in Britain than elsewhere. I think nearly anyone who works in a British office is familiar with Blu-Tack, but few in America would be familiar with adhesive putty at all. (I don't know about other countries.) In the UK, it seems to have nearly the same level of recognition as Post-It notes; indeed it seems to be almost a cultural phenomenon. If this is true, should something be said about this in the article? If not, could someone set me straight? G Sisson (talk) 03:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a British boy in the 80's, Blu-Tac (I'm sticking with that for discussion!) was an essential item - how else would posters for Spectrum games be stuck to the wall? Oh dear... I have the impression (from films, I suppose) that Americans favour poster hangers? Gandru (talk) 01:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would subscribe to the view blu-tack has a special place in our hearts. What we need is an appropriate citable source. The reference in this article to the popularity and extensiveness of the artistic/unconventional uses section on the British Blu-tack website suggests the appetite (real or not) for such content and thus a status as cultural phenomenon or icon - not that i am authorative user of these terms. So, if you have any good citations to strengthen what is already suggested here, you go ahead and think of how to include or restructure to include this assertion. Otherwise, I think this will have to do for now, wont it? Kathybramley (talk) 20:21, 2 May 2010 (UTC), British thirty-something.[reply]

Special mention of German Blu-tack properties

'"White Tack", made by the German company UHU, is similar but, as the name suggests, is white, so coloured so that it doesn't stain walls or show through easily on posters as Blu-Tack does.'

In South Africa, Prestik is white as well (by default anyways), so why does the German "White Tack" get special mention of being white, especially since the name is so self-evident. Removing this special reference. Geqo (talk) 04:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is "Blu-Tack"...

...a trademark? I had a quick look at the Blu-Tack website and didn't notice any of those "®" or "TM" characters, but I think that whether or not it is a trademark should be clarified and then mentioned in the article. 212.84.121.75 (talk) 05:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]