|WikiProject Technology||(Rated Start-class)|
Names of office supply stores
I am deleting the last sentence - individual office supply stores don't need to be named, especially as it's more likely to be found at an art supplies store. If anybody wants to put this information back in please go ahead, but re-work it so it doesn't sound like an advert for said stores.18.104.22.168 05:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
There is a major error on the page, on the bottom, their is a box with sewing articles, when it should be about different kinds of paper and inks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aminy23 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
"Translucent papers are dense and contain up to 10% moisture at 50% humidity. This type of paper is roughly 25% lighter than regular paper." I think this is the quote giving rise to the point made by 22.214.171.124 on 12 March 2009 in another section. Comparing two stacks of equal volume, if translucent paper is more dense, it will also be heavier then regular paper. Wistful (talk) 23:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
"This material has a refractive index close to 1, which makes the material translucent to normal light".
There's a bracketed instance of "dubious-discuss" after this, and in all honesty it should be. That sentence is nothing but "sciency" words that have nothing to do with a refractive index close to 1. For example, diamonds have a refractive index of over two and are completely capable of being translucent. All the refractive index does is show how quickly light will move when travelling through something, not whether light travels through it at all. This is why words like "opaque" exist to describe objects light doesn't penetrate, and "translucent" to describe things it does. I'm doubtless that tracing paper has a given number describing its index of refraction, but I'm also well in doubt that an index of refraction has anything to do with why something is translucent.
Falling short of my rant, the sentence adds nothing to the paragraph in which it exists; it looks precisely like nonsensical filler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carbonatedserpentine (talk • contribs) 23:55, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
"It was originally developed for architects and design engineers to create drawings which could be copied precisely using the diazo copy process"
This statement is false.. If you look through draughting instruction manuals from the past (check archive.org, there's loads of books on the subject from the time period) you will frequently find reference to tracing paper (usually made by soaking in various oils and drying) it was often used to produce duplicates of engineering drawings by simply tracing the design. In fact this process not only predated the photographic copying method, but was often prefered to the blueprinting process as it was thought to be more accurate at the time. 2A00:23C3:37DF:F900:5C42:67EB:61FB:B7B6 (talk) 04:38, 4 February 2017 (UTC)