Jump to content

Talk:Carbonless copy paper

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Usage

[edit]

Writing on the back side of carbonless paper gums up pens and pencils. When writing on the backs, the last page or bottom page, should be used as it lacks certain properties and will take a pen or pencil mark more readily. Make sure to seprate the page from top pages to avoid writing through them and onto the fronts.

Aaron TaddikenAarontaddiken (talk) 03:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carbonless Carbon Paper

[edit]

My father, Robert R. Wissinger, was the Chief Chemist for the Frye Manufacturing Company, Des Moines, Iowa from 1951 to 1968. I was always under the impression that he and his team discovered the carbonless carbon paper technique (AKA microencapsulation of ink on paper) and that the Frye company sold the rights to this technique to the NCR Corp. who later refined the process and marketed it as NCR paper. I was very surprised to read in this Wiki that the process was invented by chemists Lowell Schleicher and Barry Green, working for the NCR Corporation. Unfortunately, my father is deceased and the Frye Manufacturing Company was sold many years ago, so is it difficult to prove or disprove my understanding. If anyone can elaborate on this, I am very interested in learning more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwissinger (talk • contribs) 00:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carbonless Paper Cartel

[edit]

Is there interest in adding a section on the carbonless paper cartel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs) 17:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OR

[edit]

This edit (explained in the summary) is WP:OR in my opinion because advancing of the word high without relation to anything. The article clearly implies levels are "high" in comparision to the levels that are discussed leaching from polycarbonate. The source estimates a non-published non-peer reviewed value of 60-100 I simplifed this to ~80. This is in line with good editing, as "Carefully summarizing or rephrasing source material without changing its meaning is not synthesis—it is good editing." -Shootbamboo (talk) 03:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tempering what appears to be a tendency towards unnecessary vagueness, in my opinion, also drove my recent edit. -Shootbamboo (talk) 03:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are the one making original research, making an average (without having the actual data). You are also advancing a position when you restrict the comparison to plastics, where the source says "the biggest exposures, in my opinion, will be these cash register receipts". High BPA concentration, for you information, is defined in comparison with the TDI (0.05 mg/kg) when we are talking about 60-100mg of free BPA here. Your edit also misrepresent the information (high concentration) that is supported by many sources, not a single one. I'm reverting your edit.--Nutriveg (talk) 12:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't follow. How do you think I am doing OR? What do you think I wrote without data? How do you think I misrepresented a source? -Shootbamboo (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can not make an average just from a range because you don't know how is the data distribution within that range, and even if you had access to the actual data that would be OR. You misrepresent by isolating a source from others that support the information (high concentration) and writing the text in that sense.--Nutriveg (talk) 12:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

Hello! Can somebody translate correctly this SVG-file (carbonless paper diagram) from Russian? Юкатан (talk) 09:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody put the colors in the correct order? A 3-part form usually has the pink sheet under the canary sheet.162.206.141.210 (talk) 14:06, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citation request for up to 10-part forms.

[edit]

The recent edit added the citation request for 'Stacks of ten or more copies were not unknown'.

I've just done a quick websearch and found by looking at currently-offered printing services that, today, 2-4 parts seem to constitute the large majority of NCR multi-part forms. There are however a small number of companies offering services of more than this, e.g.: http://www.briggscorp.com/UserFiles/File/Custom%20Products%20PDFs/MultipleParts_OrderForm.pdf who offer up to 8-part 'custom unit sets'.

I suggest in the light of this that the citation request is deleted. The NCR volume now is tiny compared to that of its heyday. [I have personally collated at least 12-part sets by hand.] I have also deleted the reference to the number of forms typically being 2-4- that may well be true now, but it wasn't 40 years ago. Gravuritas (talk) 17:40, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a citation is needed for verifiability; common sense dictates that someone, somewhere, would have made NCR forms with ten or more sheets, since there is theoretically no limit to the number of sheets (except for the pressure required). It would, however, be interesting to have a citation as an example of this 20th-century office technology carried to its extremes. What were the colors used, and what were the purposes of the forms?
A former employee of the MTA in NYC recalled eight-page forms in a conversation I had, and couldn't remember any more than six colors. (FWIW, white, canary, pink, green, blue, goldenrod.) We also discussed the fact that correction fluid was available for all colors used on NCR forms. Roches (talk) 23:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Carbonless copy paper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carbonless_copy_paper&oldid=1206544340"