Talk:Flush toilet

Toilet Etiquette

I have removed the following from the article:

"Frequently, in public bathrooms in the United States and other countries, in deference to others using the bathroom, toilet users who have defecated may perform what is known as a courtesy flush, despite the fact that they have not yet finished sanitizing themselves with toilet paper, merely so that the exposure of others to the aroma of feces is minimized."

I removed it because it does not make any sense. Once the feces is underwater (as it would be in a flush toilet), no noticeable smell would be emitted. -SCEhardt 21:19, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are two reasons why that might be in there (and in fact does happen): 1) stool floats and 2) the evacuation of the water down the drain does in fact seem to take with it some standing air which reduces the odor load in the room as well.
--Baylink 20:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to find some sort of learned treatise on courtesy flushes to get it into the article? I somehow doubt some Ph.D has written a treatise on what people do in the men's room . . . . --Hrodulf 02:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because your excrement is under water does not mean it does not stink. The act of 'courtesy flushing' should be ptacticed by all particularly in public restrooms. The act of having a bowel movement usually causes other gas excretions that considerably contributes to fowl smell. In most cases of stage III & IV diarrhea, the stool is floating thereby creating a noxious smell to all.

Toilet Tech

I've read Thomas M. Stewart 15 October 1907 invented the self-cleaning toilet bowl, in St. John, NB. Can someone confirm, & include it? Trekphiler 04:37, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Direction of Flush

Can someone with knowledge of this add a section about the direction of the water's flow during the flush. I've heard that it changes directions in the southern vs. northern hemisphere, but I've also heard that this isn't true. Please advise. Reuvenk 01:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're refering to the coriolis effect. It is untrue infact. Read the article. 70.111.251.203 15:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia, toilets don't have nearly as much water in the bowl compared to the ones I saw in North America. You don't really see eddies in either direction. --James 04:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flushing

What about the good ole manual flush lever? It's not on the list, not even the first. 70.111.251.203 15:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Toilet water on your toothbrush

How about a section on toilet plume? In 1975 Professor [Charles] Gerba published a scientific article describing the little-known phenomenon of bacterial and viral aerosols due to toilet flushing. http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a990416.html (also http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f02/web2/stan.html ) Ewlyahoocom 15:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another word for the "S" bend

Can this piece be called an airlock?--I hate to register 14:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly, but I think trap and water trap are more common terms. An airlock is usually (i) the spaceship thingy or (ii) a bubble of air in a pipe that is meant to be full of liquid. --Heron 18:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it is interesting how the airlock between two spaceships or submarines is similar in function to that of the canal lock. The bubble of air in a pipe such as in the fuel system of a diesel engine, which is called a vapour lock, and in the filtration circuit of a swimming pool can be a nuisance. The terms air trap or gas trap are better than water trap in toilet terminology because it is the foul smelling air that is being trapped. In the fuel cicuit a water trap would be used to isolate the unwanted water in the circuit. Gregorydavid 06:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually space ship thingey is airlock whereas a trapped bubble of air is air lock.WolfKeeper 12:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of the Ettiquette section

I replaced it with an added link now so it's sourced. And I understand the original research concerns, but it's a news flash to me that going "number two" is "original research." It would be nice if a few things that were within the universal modern human experience, such as that the sky is blue, the world is round, and that people courtesy flush, could be accepted with the wikipedia equivalent of judicial notice, without people busting balls over policy to a truly ridiculous degree. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to conduct some more "original research" into the subject matter of this article. --Hrodulf 03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]