Talk:Ruler: Difference between revisions

Metalworking Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Sorry for describing the last removal as a removal of linkspam. The linkspam I was after was already removed. However, I'm not sure if the link I removed was really relevant either. If you feel it was, please feel free to reinstate it. Aapo Laitinen 14:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I know Wikipedia isn't meant to be safe for kids, but I'm a little queasy that so much of this article is devoted to hitting people with rulers! Is this really necessary? Sometimes the focus of Wikipedia is a little...strange. --Wtshymanski 15:58, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to sit still for this. You have the power to change Wikipedia for the better. See below. -- Michael Geary 02:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the content related to the use of rulers in punishment to its own article. It seemed rather out of place here, as one can see from previous complaints.

Thank you,

Michael Geary 02:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this link helpful, or should it (as I think) be removed again? Thoughts please: 10:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

• Online ruler at iRuler.net —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thorney¿? (talk • contribs).

It was really helpfull for me. I think it would be better if this link is not removed from article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.195.82.2 (talk • contribs).

You already know WP:EL, so you obviously must be joking... Stop pushing for your site. Femto 18:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I use this site regularly. I think it should exist at wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.110.16.255 (talk • contribs).

Yeah, you already said that from the other IP. Give up already, you won't get your site listed. Femto 12:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think iRuler is funny but effective site. I say Yes for It. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.18.204 (talk) 23:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Ruler" means a person who runs a region. Use of the term to mean a measuring device is colloquial. The proper term for a measuring device is "rule". In many varied texts on scientific instruments that I have, the term "ruler" is not present; only "rule" is found. This includes both historical and modern instruments. This article should be called Rule and it should point out that "ruler" in incorrect usage in this context. The introductory statement Strictly speaking, the ruler is the instrument used to rule lines and the calibrated instrument used for determining measurement is called a measure. is something I've never heard stated before and is at odds with what I've learned in the past. Michael Daly 18:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on moving this article, surely the fact that it is colloquial doesn't mean it should be moved? Or should one simply redirect to the other? Thorney 00:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I congratulate you Michael for pointing out the incorrect use of "ruler" for "rule" and agree this should be changed. John Darby 12:41 GMT, 10 February 2013

Actually i opened this page to get least count of diferent measuring instruments like vernier, steel rule, screw gauge, micro meter.but i faild to get data exactly what i need. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.117.246 (talk) 10:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

anyone know who invented it originally ? 12.41.255.10 (talk) 20:20, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above polls are inconclusive (only partisan votes so far). So I'm going to open this up to a community RfC to get more input. I'll close the above discussions as inconclusive.--Ludwigs2 00:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should a number of smallish measurement related articles - Measuring rod, Tape measure, Yardstick - be merged into the Ruler article? The merge request focuses on two points:

• That all these are small. stub-like articles that might make one decent sized article if merged.
• That the 'measuring rod' article lends itself somewhat to fringe material, since it mainly deals with ancient tools and iconography

Should these articles be merged under the 'ruler' rubric, or are they better left as stand-alone articles? --Ludwigs2 00:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as nom. the articles all strike me as stubs, without much possibility of expansion. merging them would make one good-sized article, resolve some redundancies, and give some useful structure (for instance, placing the 'measuring rod' material in as historical background for more modern rulers). --Ludwigs2 00:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment—I'm not clear how Measuring rod can be regarded as a stub; it is perhaps better developed than the current article. The Tape measure article is also much longer than a stub and is clearly different from a ruler; I'd be more inclined to keep that article separate from ruler than I would Yardstick or Measuring rod. Hence my preference would be to only merge Ruler, Measuring rod and Yardstick. The Tape measure has more in common with the Surveyor's chain.—RJH (talk) 23:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem with the measuring rod article is that it's tremendously overwritten and tends towards OR. The history section could be reduced to about a third of its size without loss of information, the iconography section could be reduced to 3 or 4 lines and blended into the history section - really, that section should be titled something like "List of oblique references to measuring rods in religious documents". further, direct and indirect references to the 'megalithic yard' need to be removed - that's a fringe theory that holds that ancient cultures (broadly put) shared a common measuring rod for building megalithic structures (implying broad communication in the ancient world). That was, in fact, the more-or-less explicit intent of the author of that article, who does a lot of work on fringe theories related to ancient megaliths (which I don't mind, it just needs to be kept from being presented as mainstream). The reason I haven't made those changes in the article is because I'm anticipating the merge - if the merge doesn't happen, I'll have to do that and the article will shrink significantly. --Ludwigs2 00:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree with above comment - I think RJHall got it right, since the 'ruler' , 'rod' , and 'yardstick' would all be in similar characteristic to the ruler itself, while the measuring tape (whilst performing the same/similar function) is used much more like a surveyor's chain. And As to your comment, Ludwis2 about the OR and unverifiable claims, yeah I can definitely see where that would look apparent so I would say go ahead and merge ruler, rod and yardstick but think twice about the measuring tape before doing so. Demokratickid (talk) 00:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge only yardstick A measuring tape is a different tool used for different reasons and has a different history than a ruler; therefore it shares almost nothing in common and should not be merged. A yardstick is either a kind of ruler or a kind of measuring rod, but is used the same way as those tools. Also, yardstick is unit dependent and we do not have an article on meter stick. Zginder 2011-05-12T02:35Z (UTC)
• Merge all - The three "rigid" devices Measuring rod, Tape measure, Ruler, should certainly be a single article. An argument could be made that Measuring tape is sufficiently distinct, however, until the depth and detail in Measuring tape are increased, it may as well be a section in Ruler. When the measuring tape material gets voluminous enough, it could be split out per WP:Content fork. --Noleander (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tape measures aren't rigid. Whilst I'd agree with measuring rod & ruler, I can't see that going backwards is a good way to go forwards. If tape measure is so terrible, fix it first. It's hardly hard to source. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Ruler is, correctly, a small article for a small topic; it appears fairly complete as it stands. Measuring rod is more complex, because measuring rods are more complex. Please see the discussion by Hayes of the two cubit-rods in the Metropolitan Museum of New York, quoted by Clagett, Ancient Egyptian Science, A Source Book. Volume Three: Ancient Egyptian Mathematics, pages 10-11. That is not a description of a ruler. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]