Talk:Tiny-house movement

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): JeshuaKJohn. Peer reviewers: Zooshoe.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Marta.tkachuk.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2021 and 14 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lin.jaide. Peer reviewers: Daniellesori, Emmazeko, HannahLH.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Possible false assumption

The only example of a country with a trend towards building larger houses mentioned in the article is the obvious one - the United States. Are there any others? Maybe Canada and Australia. Certainly not the UK, where I live, where new houses and flats tend to be wretchedly small. Nor most of Europe, based on personal observation, or Japan. (Rapidly developing countries hardly count - if there is an increase there, it's because masses of people are changing their social status, not because people of a given status are building bigger homes than their predecessors of the same status.) The article mentions a 353 square foot flat in Manchester as if it is remarkable. Not so: I once bought a flat slightly smaller than that in London (not in an elite area) It cost me about eight times the national average salary. Wimstead (talk) 23:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Weasel words

This article seems to be written by activists, some of the words are simply not objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.230.160.233 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

'Small house movement' or 'Small houses'

The article currently reads like an article about small houses, there is no description of an organised movement. Is there one? The FT article mentions a Small House Society and the "small house movement, as it is popularly known, is especially vocal in the US". Just because the FT article goes off on a tangent and talks about small houses in general shouldn't mean this WP article goes of on tangents! Sionk (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there is a movement, and it is called the "Tiny House movement." I think that we should seriously consider changing the name of this page to "Tiny house" or the "Tiny House Movement." I was glad to be directed to this page, but definitely think that it could be better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.162.35 (talk) 06:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Image Problem

The image of the small house and the RV claims to be taken in Arizona. If true, the image is flipped horizontally since the cars are driving on the wrong sides of the road for the United States. There is also a watermark in the photo which is displayed correctly the way the image is currently showing, so perhaps the image creator flipped it prior to adding the watermark. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HylandsRanch (talk • contribs) 01:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC) Look closer and you will see that the tiny house is parked beyond the far lane and the photo is not flipped so nevermind... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:282:4180:64:4457:82E5:319D:E9A9 (talk) 12:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Concerning the lack of information of the ecological aspect of tiny houses.

This article could definitely benefit from a more objective point of view to give an unbiased perspective of the movement. I also think the article address more how this movement has spread globally and even nationally. However, I think most importantly this article could benefit from more information about the ecological impact of houses (the resources used in the process of building as well as the resources used in living in a house), as well as why tiny houses are a good anecdote to the issue of sustainability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mushroomhunter111 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

TV programs

Should we have a list of shows focused on this? I know some were Tiny House Big Living and Tiny House Builders and Tiny House Hunters on HGTV and Tiny House Nation on FYI and there was this other one but I forget the title. Also upcoming is Tiny House Enthusiasts. Not sure if any are popular enough to get articles though. --174.92.135.167 (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Problems w/ Physical Disability under Cons?

I think there should be a mention under cons of how most tiny houses are not friendly to people with varying physical disabilities or challenges because of the lack of movement space and the tendency to utilize vertical space for many basic needs (esp. sleeping/bedroom). C4bl3Fl4m3 20:17, 1 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by C4bl3fl4m3 (talk • contribs)

Interior Image(s)

It would be nice if there were an image or two to illustrate the typical/common interior layout of tiny houses. Entrybreak (talk) 20:24, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Organization of Article

This article might be better organized if we create a more “timeline-like” progression of events for the tiny house movement. Anyone have thoughts on the issue? Thanks! 2601:644:401:1C68:E1F1:D372:26DB:BC6C (talk) 17:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC) 2601:644:401:1C68:E1F1:D372:26DB:BC6C (talk) 17:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Headwind

The article currently states "Tiny houses on wheels are often compared to RVs (...) tiny houses are built to last as long as traditional homes, use traditional building techniques and materials, and are aesthetically similar to larger homes". Now, I've only ever lived in UK, Norway and Australia, but "RVs" is not a word used in these communities. Campavans, sure. Mobile homes, sure. But houses on wheels are never "compared to 'RVs'" in these countries because people don't know what "RVs" means. Indeed, setting Firefox's spellcheck to English English marks 'RVs' as a typo. It would seem to me that vehicles (including those which incorporate accommodation) are designed and constructed to withstand ongoing, substantial headwinds of easily 150kmph for several hours while travelling. I am no architect but I suspect few traditional homes are designed and constructed to withstand 150kmph winds from one direction for hours. But this is one hazard amateurs assembling tiny houses on wheels must consider and safeguard against that professional architects of traditional homes might not prioritise so highly. If tiles fly off a traditional house in strong winds, you might get soggy wallpaper and mouldy carpet; if tiles or other components fly off a tiny house on wheels in highway traffic, you get maimed motorcyclists, smashed windscreens and dead bodies. This sentence seems to elide these considerable differences entirely. The article would better represent this by saying that in constructing a road-transportable house, one must comply with both the legal design requirements of houses and the legal design requirements of vehicles because it is both. 49.195.73.9 (talk) 12:19, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge with Mobile Home?

Seems like the "movement" is just a rebrand? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.69.71.10 (talk) 05:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Takaharu Tezuka's the House to Catch the Sky

This example in Outside the United States section goes way back to the earliest edit of this by user Ekem on March 5, 2009 without any citation. By Deor's edit on July 1, 2013, also without any citation, the floor space of the house was expanded from 458-square-foot to 925, and it has remained so since then.

I looked for a citation for the house and found Tezuka's web site as a source, which claims the floor area to be 86.58m², which is a bit different from the modified value as 85.9m², far from the initial value as 42.5m². It seems that he has built at least four editions under the same title, the first one (86.58m²), the second one (74.08m²), the third one (89.46m²), and the last one (103.12m²). None of them matches the value 85.9 or 42.5 provided in the article. I guess it could be the first one or the third one. Maybe the first.

However, I wonder how the house (any of his model houses) could fit in tiny-house movement. To me, this size is quite typical as a small house in Tokyo, Japan. A real tiny-house could be like this (51.19m² -- this is total floor area. Building area is even smaller -- 29.75m²). So, why is Tezuka's house in particular? I guess the entry should be removed due to lack of citation and being an inappropriate example. --直蔵 (talk) 17:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

• Tezuka's House in the sky has been removed. Ekem (talk) 18:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Tiny House Giant Journey in the Petrified Forest and an RV.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 16 April 2022 (UTC)