Talk:Pencil/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

H & B

Please change:

Many pencils across the world, and almost all in Europe, are graded on the European system using a continuum from H (for hardness) to B (for blackness)

to:

Many pencils across the world, and almost all in Europe, are graded on the European system using a continuum from H (for Hardtmuth (as in Koh-i-noor Hardtmuth) and not, as commonly assumed, 'hardness') to B (for Budweis, and not for 'blackness') . . .

Source:

H and B do not stand for 'hard' and 'black' -- a common misconception -- but rather Hardtmuth and Budweis as per https://thescene.com/watch/thenewyorker/comma-queen-on-impact (at 2:35).

Doctor Johnson (talk)

Thanks for that. Would you happen to have a source? (I really must get round to reading Petroski) It's better for editing protected articles if statements are sourced from the outset.

Also, do you have anything similar to add on 'F' as a grade? Andy Dingley (talk) 09:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

• Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. --Cameron11598 (Converse) 08:02, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, my source is this New Yorker video: https://thescene.com/watch/thenewyorker/comma-queen-on-impact (Caroline Weaver explains at 2:35) filmed at http://cwpencils.com/.

Unfortunately I don't have any thing on F, but will reach out to CW to see if they have more information.

Thanks, User:Cameron11598, I was able to make the update.

Doctor Johnson (talk) 13:51, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

So if B is supposed to stand for Budweis what possible relation has that to the grade of pencils? Similarly the H, that Hardtmuth invented the clay/graphite process does not suggest a link to the grades of pencils. Rather a lot of UK dictionaries (which I trust rather more than random videos) go with Hard and Black and Fine, complete with citations. I suggest this whole bit is some sort of joke. Gowt (talk) 15:10, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

As a non-native speaker I have a bit trouble deciding whether the Comma Queen is serious or satire, but KOH-I-NOOR HARDTMUTH do not support the claim of "Hardtmuth" and "Budweis" being the sources for the grading letters H and B. On the page Graphite base products of their website, they name "Hard" and "Black" as the words behind the letters. -- Cat's paw (talk) 23:55, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Elsewhere on the same site, Koh-I-Noor Hardtmuth say "World standard of marking gradations with the help of numbers and letters HB or F originated at KOH-I-NOOR HARDTMUTH company at České Budějovice. For the first time this marking appeared on pencils with designation 1500. “H” stands for Hardtmuth, “B” – for Budějovice and the special medium gradation “F” stands for Franz Hardtmuth who invented modern technology, which permits to produce graphite pencils in gradation."

The Comma Queen interviewee claim that the scale is named after "the last names of the guys who invented it" is slightly off in that Budweis/Budějovice is a city and Franz is a forename.

I've updated the article to clarify that Hardtmuth/Budějovice is a terminology claimed by Koh-I-Noor Hardtmuth rather than the "correct" one, using their site as a source. I'm not seeing any other obvious sources out there that cover this. --McGeddon (talk) 15:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

This is becoming like an urban dictionary definition, you are trying to justify what can only be a back formation, if you can find a single reference from elsewhere I won't argue Gowt (talk) 00:06, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

To clarify, I edited the article from "H definitely stands for Hardtmuth, not hardness as some people think" to "H is commonly interpreted as hardness, but Hardtmuth claim it means Hardtmuth". I agree it does sound a lot like a backronym, and it'd be good if we could get dates for when Brookman and Hardtmuth both claim to have invented the same H/B/F system with different origin stories. --McGeddon (talk) 09:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2016

Big text A 'PENCIL' IS A WRITING IMPLEMENT OR ART MEDIUM CONTRUCTED OF A NARROW,SOLID PIGMENT.IT IS LONG AND THIN OBJECT. IT CREATE MARKS BY PHYSICAL ABRASION,LEAVING BEHIND A TRAIL OF SOLID CORE MATERIAL THAT ADHERES TO A SHEET OF PAPER.PENCIL ARE MADE OF GRAPHITE MIXED WITH CLAY AND PIECES OF WOOD THAT CAN EASILY ERASED.PENCIL USED FOR DRAWING SKETCH. THERE IS NO RISK OF LEAD POISINING IF YOU STAB YOURSELF WITH A PENCIL. 1HB,2B,3B,4B,5B,1H,2H,3H,ETC ARE THE TYPES OF PENCIL.

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article.
And please do not use ALL CAPITAL LETTERS, as this is considered rude/shouting. - Arjayay (talk) 07:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2017

82.33.220.57 (talk) 11:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC) a pencil is a pencil which makes pencil mark on pc lol_wby

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 11:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2017

Pencils are sold through different locations now. Ipuurple (talk) 18:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Yes, pencils are widely sold. I don't see this article suggesting otherwise, or why readers need to be told this explictly. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Grading and classification

The section Grading and classification had several problems:

1. It is only for one type of pencil, the graphite pencil.
2. Graphite pencils are not introduced until a couple of sections later.
3. The wording (e.g. "European system") made it sound as if grading represented some company independent standard and if there were more to it than simple designations. This was particularly so through the wording for the pencil test, which deviated significantly from the actual wording at https://www.iso.org/standard/55329.html?browse=tc, even going so far as to use the term "to measure" and to claim "the resistance [...] is determined", as if it were a measuring method like those used for resistance#Physics.

It was not until the last paragraph that I realized that there actually is no such thing as a standard. What especially irks me was that I first had to read through and make sense of all those company specific idiosyncrasies. Therefore, I'm changing the article as follows:

1. Making it clear that this applies to graphite pencils
2. Moving this section behind the introduction of graphite pencils
3. Moving the last explanation, that this is not a standard, to the top and rewording it accordingly.
4. Adjusting the wording to make it clear that it's not a standard.

I also think the pencil hardness test deserves its own section;

There were some other oddities I corrected, such as the use of "continuum" for the obviously discontinuous designations. — Sebastian 04:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Comparison with Mohs hardness

What would make the discussion of gradings of different companies really useful would be listing the Mohs hardness for each grade for each discussed company. — Sebastian 04:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST:Pencils Collective Noun

Edit Request: This is a request to add the name of the collective noun for a group of pencils to the page; it is a "fort". Similar to how a group of ships is a "fleet" a group of pencils is a "fort". Please add this under the general information section.

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billlamm20 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

• Source? Andy Dingley (talk) 23:22, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

SOURCE: is the tradition from the beginning of production of the "classic" American pencil, the Dixon Ticonderoga, in 1815 in Ticonderoga, New York. Located so close to Fort Ticonderoga, tradition states that the collective noun for a group of pencils-often Ticonderoga- has been maintained as a "fort" for 203 yeas.

<ref> https://web.archive.org/web/20101020182126/http://dixonusa.com/ Billlamm20 (talk) 02:00, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I do not see anything in that link to corroborate the claim. Just plain Bill (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

10 May 2018 - Small grammar and phrasing mistakes in eyeliner pencil section

Change "eyliner" to "eyeliner". Change all singulars to plurals.

ORIGINAL: Eyeliner pencil Eyliner pencil is used for make-up. Unlike traditional copying pencil, eyeliner pencil usually contains non-toxic dyes.[47]

EDIT: Eyeliner pencil Eyeliner pencils are used for make-up. Unlike traditional copying pencils, eyeliner pencils usually contain non-toxic dyes.[47] Lavodan (talk) 08:44, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done Gulumeemee (talk) 10:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2018

On the page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pencil" In the section "Pencil hardness" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pencil_hardness). Add the following clarification following the sentence "The standard writing pencil is graded HB". "This is not related to the Brinell scale hardness unit HB." 45.72.135.96 (talk) 13:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

 Done I don't see that as too likely to be confused, but since the abbreviations do match and they're in the same general field I did add an explanatory footnote. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Using pencils in space

@Andy Dingley: You claimed that I wrote a wrong claim about pencils used in outer space and indecently threw me an accusation of typical of the Grauniad.

Would you please respectfully explain what was wrong with point I added which was sourced? --Mahmudmasri (talk) 21:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Did you write that Guradian piece? If not, then don't take it so personally.

This story is a regularly repeated urban legend. Shame there's nothing to it.

Aircraft - long before spacecraft - have been using Chinagraph pencils for navigation and making notes. Not pencils, as within the scope of the article here. They work, they work in freefall, they even work in a vacuum. Pencils don't work in spacecraft - they make conductive dust, they would be totally impractical to sharpen (Chinagraphs are bad enough).

As a story that's far too complicated to cover here, and where almost every aspect as reported is wrong, then it doesn't belong here. As it doesn't even involve pencils (as described here) either way, then it certainly doesn't. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for elaborating. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 22:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Problem with initial description

The opening paragraph currently runs:

A pencil is an implement for writing or drawing constructed of a narrow, solid pigment core inside a protective casing which prevents the core from being broken and/or from leaving marks on the user’s hand during use.

The obvious problem with this description is that the tip of the pencil is not mentioned, so it is utterly unclear how the thing described can be used to write or draw; as described, the thing with a case and core might as well be a Twinkie.

A second problem is that the casing is described as having the primary function of protecting the core or the hand, but no mention is made of the fact that the material of the casing allows it to be shaved and the material of the tip can be sharpened.

In other words, this description does no justice at all to the function of the pencil. I propose this revision:

A pencil is an implement for writing or drawing whose long, usually graphite shaft, surrounded by a casing, usually of soft wood, breaches the usually conical top of the casing to come to a visible tip that the user moves across a surface to mark it. The casing keeps the shaft from being broken or staining the user's hand and can be shaved away from a blunted and shortened tip to give the tip the desired length and sharpness.

I think this description suffices to indicate how the structure of the pencil supports its function and how its materials allow for its primary and secondary manipulation. Wordwright (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

The lead section essentially covers all that in a later paragraph, also including mechanical pencils, whose casings do not need to be carved away from the tip. Just plain Bill (talk) 00:50, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

You have ignored the essential problem: if the initial description does not indicate the function of the pencil, then it is inept. I take it that the initial statement in an article is supposed to inform the reader of the essentials, and the function of the pencil is not indicated in the paragraph as it stands. In the paragraph as it stands, the description of the relation of the core to the casing does not do justice to the fact that there is a tip, that the tip gets blunt and short, and that the casing must be such as to allow for restoration of the tip. It is a poor excuse of an encyclopedia article that does not tell you the essentials in the opening description, but leaves them for some time "later."

I am perfectly aware that mechanical pencils don't need to be shaved away; that is why I used "usually" in describing the casing. I find that too many WP editors really don't understand the difference between a prototype and a member of a class; the fact that there are members in a class of things that are not like the prototype does not mean that it is incorrect to use the prototype as the basis for an initial definition. These are people who say that the statement "birds fly" is not true because penguins don't fly. Philosophers call this the fallacy of converse accident, where "accident" refers to a reality that is contingent and does not figure in the constitution of a thing, and "converse" because it is the opposite of the fallacy of accident, in which one tries to apply a general rule to an exceptional case, e.g., you say that the army is an un-American institution because America is a democracy and the army is not democratic.

Thus to claim that my proposed definition is inept because it does not include mechanical pencils is to make use of the fallacy of converse accident. The very fact that you need to call a mechanical pencil a mechanical pencil is an indication that the class-name pencil has a prototype, and that that prototype is not the mechanical pencil.

The problem remains. Wordwright (talk) 02:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

The article's first sentence indicates the function of a pencil as "an implement for writing or drawing". Further specifics follow in close proximity, along with a picture showing a pencil point. I consider your proposed definition inept not because it fails to mention mechanical pencils explicitly, but because it is wordy and stilted. Just plain Bill (talk) 02:31, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Why is this article bending over backwards to avoid saying 'lead pencil'?

There is not a single place in the article where the term 'lead pencil' is used. Yes, we know that the 'lead' in pencils is actually made of graphite, but bending over backwards to avoid the term 'lead pencil' at any point in the article actually makes it harder to understand, not easier. For instance:

The words for pencil in German (bleistift), Irish (peann luaidhe), Arabic (قلم رصاص qalam raṣāṣ), and some other languages literally mean lead pen.

This is actually misleading. It sounds as though other languages use terms meaning 'lead pen' but English does not -- which is quite simply false. Only someone with a fanatical aversion to the term 'lead pencil' would allow this kind of implicit misinformation to stand in the article.

Chemistry was in its infancy and the substance was thought to be a form of lead. Consequently, it was called plumbago (Latin for "lead ore").[9][10] Because the pencil core is still referred to as "lead", or a "lead", many people have the misconception that the graphite in the pencil is lead,[11] and the black core of pencils is still referred to as lead, even though it never contained the element lead.[12][13][14][15][16][17]

Such an array of sources to back up the assertion that the stuff found in pencils isn't lead! That's because, even if 'lead pencil' is banished from the article, it still needs to be explained that the 'lead' in a pencil isn't actually lead. Unlike 'lead pencil', 'the lead of a pencil' can't be easily banished from the language because it is common usage. And ignoring 'lead pencil' is a distortion of the facts. The misconception that pencils contain lead comes both from the term 'lead pencil' and the term 'lead (of a pencil)'.

Although lead has not been used for writing since antiquity, lead poisoning from pencils was not uncommon. Until the middle of the 20th century the paint used for the outer coating could contain high concentrations of lead, and this could be ingested when the pencil was sucked or chewed.[60]

In this section, 'lead pencil' is like a ghost limb. Rather than explain that 'lead pencils' don't contain lead, the section starts with the almost irrelevant observation that lead hasn't been used for writing since antiquity. It then goes on to point out that lead poisoning does occur, but only because of the paint used. Why tiptoe around the issue? Just say outright that the lead in pencils can't give you lead poisoning but previously the paint used for the outer covering could.

As can be seen in the points above, the 'political correctness' of avoiding the term 'lead pencil' doesn't actually add to clarity; it detracts from it. The intelligent thing to do is note that while the term 'lead pencil' is (or was) commonly used, the lead in pencils is actually made of graphite. Problem solved! Everyone becomes the wiser. 'So "lead pencils" don't actually contain lead!' Or if you didn't know this term, 'That's historically quite interesting!' And no one has to have panic attacks about the possibility of lead poisoning or gnawing doubts about the 'lead' in pencils. Sometimes the direct way is the best. Articles with 'ghost limbs' (or 'an elephant in the room', if that is your preferred expression) simply confuse.

122.201.21.91 (talk) 03:39, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

grade F for "Firm"

Faber-Castell said F is for "Firm", not "Fine" Source: [1]--𝒞𝒽ℯℯ𝓈ℯ𝒹ℴℊ (talk) 18:06, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Staedtler Mars Lumograph

I'm not sure if we should give such details about individual companies, but the information about the pencils "Mars Lumograph 100" by Staedtler is outdated. The pencils range for a while from 9B to 9H and not from 6H to 8B. Newly, they are even offered from 9H to 12B. The latter can be found only on the German homepage (second link, maybe just offered in Germany at the moment) on the English one it's still 9H to 9B.

https://www.staedtler.com/intl/en/products/pencils-and-accessories/graphite-pencils/mars-lumograph-100-premium-quality-drawing-pencil-m100/ https://www.staedtler.com/de/de/produkte/mars-lumograph-100-zeichenbleistift-100-g24.html

--Blaubeermarmelade (talk) 14:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

According to Staedtler Japan page, Staedtler produces 10H to 12B. Source--𝒞𝒽ℯℯ𝓈ℯ𝒹ℴℊ (talk) 18:11, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

The pencil is important around the world. Children use it during important tests, for homework assignments, and many other things. Adults also use it. Massive important buildings around the world all start with a sketch. That sketch is done with a pencil.

background

Some interesting insights in this BBC item: Have we all underrated the humble pencil?. Onanoff (talk) 06:31, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2019

Broken link, erase * How pencils are made (video) ArielK (talk) 09:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done. Regards, Willbb234 (talk) 12:55, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2019

Sebe4367 (talk) 04:59, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Pencils are a universal tool for any person that needs to write. They can also be a great tool for resourcing wood.

 Not done: This is already included in different wording — IVORK <sub>Talk</sub> 05:00, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Why Lead

It would help to understand why the graphite in pencils is called lead with one further inclusion. People when they discovered the graphite in Borrowdale Cumbria were already used to lead mining, and used to seeing Galena which is an ore of lead. Galena and graphite in the ground both look very similar hence the initial name "blacklead" . It is this initial visual association which resulted in the name which makes the relationship clear. I think this should be included because leaving the description in its present shorter form has people confused not being able to understand why a grey/black graphite should be thought of as a silvery shiny metal. Its about the discovered form not the manufactured form of both these materials.EducatingAndy (talk) 09:10, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

ref https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galena ref https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphite

Circular Reference

The section New pencils from graphite powder, and graphite and clay contains a circular reference (25), which is a link to a page quoting the text from this article. The information referenced is not verified. This should be edited to be reworded, and the reference removed. 23.242.50.95 (talk) 14:43, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2021

2601:5CC:C500:D820:60DE:9A2E:6AE2:7572 (talk) 20:16, 13 January 2021 (UTC) pre-pre teenagers are real they are people the age of 11

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DarthFlappy 20:44, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Clarification of "unspillable"

There is a "clarification needed" comment attached to the word "unspillable" in the paragraph headed "Golf pencil" in reference to use of pencils in libraries. The meaning seems clear enough, but...

Public and semi-public spaces where there may be a need for writing, such as filling out of forms, etc., including public libraries (dating to the Roman Empire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_libraries), public banks (dating to at least the 1400s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_banking), and post offices (dating to at least the 1600s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Post_Office_Department#Foundations) often make writing implements available for the purpose. Obviously from the dates, many of these pre-date pencils; liquid ink would have been used, with the danger of spillage ruining documents.

The "clarification needed" comment seems unnecessary. 68.112.227.60 (talk) 23:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

The "clarification needed" cites “meaning of "unspillable" pencil”, but the text doesn't say that. Rather, it says "unspillable writing instrument", whose meaning is obvious. So I'm going to go ahead and remove the offending WP:Please_clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin Kealey (talk • contribs) 06:28, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2021

In the table, please change the grammatical errors "extreme hard" and "extreme soft" to extremely hard and extremely soft. Thank you.

 Done. Likely not a technical term. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)