Jump to content

Talk:Refrigerator/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

designing refrigerator for a new market

there seem to be now more avenues to vdenture into i would want t know if i could get some pointers regarding this i mean i am a student of product design and am to design a refrigerator for a new market

Good -day Sir/madam


I am a final year student of a college am asign to contruct a refrigerator woking on the principle of an airconditioner I would be most grateful if u could assist me with some guaid lines Thanks

Abasiubong Umoh ÷== Merging with refrigeration == I don't think this should be merged with refrigeration. Refrigeration is a process, a refrigerator is an appliance. Two different things. Hot water heater 14:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Domestic or commercial

Moved here from Domestic refrigerator because only 6 or 7 articles linked directly to that article, while the vast majority linked here. Plus, Wikipedia articles are named according to common usage, and calling this device a "refrigerator" is orders of magnitude more common than call it a "domestic refrigerator". It doesn't matter if "domestic refrigerator" is more correct, or if you think the article should be there. All that matters is commonness. This title is much much much more common than that one, so it gets to host the article. --brian0918™ 13:55, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

As I understand it, there are domestic and industrial fridges. I know nothing about the latter, but I'll fix the intro to explain that. --SPUI (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Commercial refrigeration is talked about more in the refrigeration article. Sometimes these units, depending on size, get different names. The word refrigerator is most related to the home units. It is important to undertand that commercial applications which existed as much as 40 years earlier were not considered safe for home use. Magi Media 14:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Magi Media

Add-ins

I noticed that the "how it works" section was a little lacking on how it works, so i added in my two bits. Still think refridgeration should be merged with this, but the page needs to get better, at least to 5 degrees. =P Teh Teck Geek 01:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

No merge. This is a specific article on one item which applies the laws of refrigeration. Then we should include air conditioning and freezers and box cars. Someone already added two extra paragraphs on refrigeration that don't need to be here. Leave it alone, Geek! Magi Media 03:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Magi Media

Merge?

Although they may be sold as stand-alone units, the history, technology, and application of the "cooler" and the "freezer" are the same. Both are refrigeration units that could be explained at refrigerator; one is simply turned up a notch. I would argue that freezer should be merged and redirected into refrigerator unless there is something substantial about this term that means it should have a different article. To have them together would be much more informative considering the historical background on the refrigerator page, and the two would have to be constantly kept in synch. Dekimasu 05:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Object - just because the history and technology is basically is the same doesn't mean they have to merge. In time, the article will develope on it's own. Freezer is a common appliance after all. It's like saying cell phones should be merged with telephones. --andrewI20Talk 05:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
A telephone doesn't become a cell phone if you carry it around, but a refrigerator becomes a freezer if you turn the setting up. I could be missing something, but analogies don't often follow through on their promises. Dekimasu 05:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Correct, just Google search "freezer" and many links come up that feature many "freezer-alone" products. Needless to say, I object to the merge suggestion. —EdGl 01:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand why being able to buy them separately means that there should be a different article. What you do with a freezer is refrigerate things. Dekimasu 01:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree. I'm not an expert on fridges but I don't think that there is enough to say about freezes that doesn't also apply to most other types of coolers. Jeltz talk 14:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Coolers and iceboxes also refridgerate things, and they have articles. Do you want those merged into the refrigerator article as well? That's like taking everything in an entire category and merging all of them into the category's article. Also, Freezer burn exists, so why shouldn't freezer? —EdGl 01:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Those don't use refrigerants. They cool things, but they don't refrigerate things. Freezers use refrigerants. Dekimasu 01:45, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, freezer burn would be just as well dealt with at frozen food (and is dealt with to a certain extent there already). Dekimasu 16:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
  • MERGE: I just looked at the freezer article, and it's a STUB. Merge the articles, corelate the science part, then discuss the products separately. Most household refigerators are sold as "refrigerator/freezers" in a combo unit.--Magi Media 13:40, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
This may be a good idea - and if the "freezer" section grows, then we could then possibly make it a separate article again if it would be expedient to do so. (On the other hand, maybe making it a separate article again would be inevitable, so why bother?) Hmm. Good arguments, Mahi Media and Dekimasu. —EdGl 18:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I feel it's time to go through with this merge. No edits (aside from vandalism) have been made to the freezer article since I made the suggestion a month ago. Only one sentence has been added to the freezer article since at least July (adding an internal comment on icemakers). Dekimasu 01:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Not convinced. Object - the two do completely different things; a refrigerator keeps items cool, generally at around 4°C. A freezer has a far lower working range, and requires a good deal more energy due to the latent heat of freezing of the foods. Only in a freezer do the foods actually get frozen, and preservation in a freezer is fairly indefinite, while preservation in a fridge is not. The freezer article is short, but it's still an article. --Firien § 15:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes merge! And after this I think we should also merge Apples and Oranges. --Meanmeancoffeebean 08:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Refrigerator image

Why is there a guitar in the refrigerator? That is a ridiculous image and inappropriate for an encyclopedic article. I replaced it with an appropriate image only to find it was reverted the following day. If there isn't a reasonable explanation of why a refrigerator containing a guitar--not a typical refrigerator--should be used in place of one containing only consumable products, I'm replacing the image again. Regards, LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 16:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Meat-Locker Redirect

"Meat Locker" should not redirect to refrigerator. A meat locker is between 34-38 F degrees. A refrigerator is 40 degrees F. Also, beef will absolutely not age in a refrigerator. - MSTCrow 03:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

That's just a difference of a couple of degrees. The difference between a fridge and a freezer is much larger. For the same of consistancy, "meat locker" should continue to redirect here, at least until "freezer" gets its own page again (which it should) Deepfryer99 18:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Einstein's Refrigerator

Mention should be made that Albert Einstein and his buddy Leo Szillard designed and patented a refrigerator in the '20s. It was driven by a liquid metal piston pumped by an external electric coil. Since the coil never contacted the metal, it could be in a tightly sealed container with the refrigerant, nearly eliminating the chance of leakage. But it was noisy, and freon was invented, so it was never extensively manufactured. Bigmac31 (talk) 22:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

tetrafluoroethane

Shouldn't it be 1,1,1,2 tetrafluoroethane rather than 2,2,2,1 ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.11.220.226 (talk) 08:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Types of domestic refrigerators

Regarding the text:

Compressor and Peltier refrigerators are invariably powered by electricity; absorption units can be designed to be powered by any heat source. A noticeable difference between the two types is the absence of CFC-compounds with the Peltier coolers (these use a different method of cooling). Peltier coolers however do use more electricity.

I disagree with the 'noticeable difference between the two types is the absence of CFC-compounds' as this implies most compression systems still use CFC's. This is not the case, and in fact most domestic fridges and freezers (at least in the UK) do not even use HFC's. (More often using R600a - isobutane). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Twostaricebox (talk • contribs) 11:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Was Fridge a brand name?

I heard some one say that Fridge was actually a branded refrigerator. The company ceases to exist but the brand name became part of the language. Can someone confirm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.171.164 (talk) 18:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Stereotype of the day

It's funny how this article shows a fridge crammed with stuff, while the same article in the German Wikipedia shows a fridge in which everything is orderly sorted and arranged. So much for stereotypes ;) --18.252.6.173 (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

the refrigerator

i am doing a project on the refrigerator and so far so good and i am speaking for many people that this topic is very interesting and this website is the one to go on if you need to know anything important about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.86.3.177 (talk) 02:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

1937 more than 2 million Americans owned refrigerators not 60% of the population

In the article it states that 60% of households owned a refrigerator in the 1930's. That is false. 2 million is the accurate figure. In 1930 the US population was 122,775,046.

Resources

The United States Government

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/recycle/documents/Refrigerator%20Timline_x.pdf

The Institute of Refrigeration

http://www.cibseashrae.org/presentations/dunsdon1205.pdf

Others

http://www.articles-central.info/Art/175115/99/A-Brief-Look-at-the-History-of-Kitchen-Appliances.html

http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/refrigerator.htm --Mouse1961 (talk) 18:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

"The first known artificial refrigeration was demonstrated by William Cullen at the University of Glasgow in 1748"

The William Cullen article says the year was 1756. At least one of these articles must be incorrect. GPS Pilot (talk) 04:27, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Note the back to the land movement and eco movements where people who are not poor are choosing to go without a fridge and are relying on traditional cold storage methods, pantry management including canning (called bottling by UK) and drying methods. A fridge is NOT a good measure of wealth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.219.242 (talk) 17:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Refrigerator vs. Freezer

This article is currently written as if a refrigerator and a freezer were the same thing by starting out with A refrigerator (sometimes shortened to fridge) or freezer is an electrical appliance that uses refrigeration to help preserve food.. That is not true. A refrigerator and a freezer are not the same thing and so should have separate articles. A refrigerator is where you might store sodas and a freezer is where you might store ice cream, not the same thing. A refrigerator keeps stuff cool and a freezer freezes stuff. If you put a bottle of Coke in the refrigerator and it will be cool, but if you leave a bottle of Coke it the freezer for too long, it will freeze. This page refrigerator should be split into two articles, refrigerator and freezer. 64.200.124.189 00:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

You are mixing technical and vernacular. Technically a refrigerator is a device that moves heat from one place to another, creating "cold" (less than ambient heat) on one side and pumping that heat somewhere else. Whether it cools to 20 degrees below the environment it's working in or 70 below makes no difference. The ammonia cycle, which has been scientifically known for a few hundred years and was demonstrated with a machine 150+ years ago easily runs below 0F on the cold side. Changing that from what you call fridge to freezer is just an adjustment of the controls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.110.31 (talk) 18:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

If you read the article now as it has been edited you might realize that the freezer and fridge are the same thing. Technically all refer mechanisms have the ability to freeze. It's all in how you control it. It was never thought initially that home consumers would want to freeze things. They always just needed to keep things cool. The first introduction to freezing was ice trays. Then the freezer box was added. But the units always had the ability to freeze. This article could add freezer-only units to it just as an aside or to show pictures, but a separate article will just end up either redundant or a stub. Actually, I read the article and its not bad, but that whole article could be a sub- in this article. Magi Media 14:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)Magi Media

Another category is the commercial "blast freezer", used to quickly reduce the temperature by blast the food with air typically chilled to -40 to -60 Celsius, I have worked in one of these and the difference between that and a regular freezer is at least that between a freezer and a refrigerator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.180.211 (talk) 12:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm?

"If you suspect a problem, test the temperatures with a refrigerator or outdoor thermometer." How exactly am I supposed to test the temperature of my refridgerator with my refridgerator? 72.224.120.101

Well, I spend more time on Wikipedia than I should but, God bless you, this is the strangest, and even the most feintly disturbing talk page attached to any article I've yet come across. --bodnotbod 07:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

RICH OR POOR?

YES A FRIDGE IS A GOOD TOOL TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOUR HOST IS RICH OR POOR.

THIS FACT MUST BE INCLUDED IN THE PICTURE TEXT. e.g:

THE 1ST PIC BELONGS TO A RICH MAN, LIKE RICHYRICH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE NEXT MILLION YEARS. THE 2ND PIC BELONGS TO AN OLD MAN, LIKE SOMEONE CALLED GERHARD AND THINKS WE STILL LIVE IN WW2 LOL. THE 3RD PIC MOST PROBABLY BELONGS TO A POOR MAN HAVING HUGE HUNGER. YOU WILL MOST PROBABLY NEED TO WATCH YOUR BACK NOT TO BE USED AS SUPPLIES FOR THE WINTER THERE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.132.14.103 (talk) 16:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


edit: see the correct old version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Refrigerator&oldid=235978869 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.132.14.103 (talk) 19:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

The first pic belongs to a fat man most likely to die from heart desease around 30~40 years old.
The second pic belongs to a man starving into severe diet to lose weight fast.
The third pic most probably belongs to a family with 4 kids. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.79.197.9 (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Misuse of sources

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Jagged 85 (talk · contribs). That's an old and archived RfC, but the point is still valid. Jagged 85 is one of the main contributors to Wikipedia (over 67,000 edits, he's ranked 198 in the number of edits), and practically all of his edits have to do with Islamic science, technology and philosophy. This editor has persistently misused sources here over several years. This editor's contributions are always well provided with citations, but examination of these sources often reveals either a blatant misrepresentation of those sources or a selective interpretation, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent. I searched the page history, and found 2 edits by Jagged 85 in October 2008. Tobby72 (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I would like to know what type of metal the general electric freezer units were made of in the 1940s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.253.153 (talk) 23:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

no 'd' in refrigerator

Spelling notes The spelling of 'r e f r i g e r a t o r' clearly indicates that 'fridge' is incorrect, though widely used. Perhaps this usage comes from the brand 'Frigidaire' -- but there again, the 'd' is the last letter in 'frigid', so 'fridge' is still incorrect. So, keep food cool or cold in a 'frige... short for refrigerator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.99.107 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 18 September 2008

I agree. Unless there is some dispute here, it should be changed to 'frige'.--Wraithdart (talk) 17:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
And I heartily DISAGREE. There is no absolute reason to expect such consistency, especially in this case ( 'refrigerator' and 'fridge'). Words do morph, often for very good reasons, and so here. The letter 'g' is very frequently pronounced soft at the beginning of a syllable, e.g., generate, gyrate, gist, gesticulate, and so on. Such is the case with 're-fri-ger-a-tor' ('g' begins a syllable). Whereas in 'fridge' the 'g' *completes* the syllable, and a lone 'g' in that position is never (or almost never) pronounced soft. Hence the need for the extra 'd' in 'fridge' to soften the 'g', despite the absence of any 'd' in 'refrigerator'. Compare also 'frigate' and 'fidget'. Toddcs (talk) 00:23 UT, 29 March 2009
Frigate and fidget are their own words, not shorter versions of existing words. No d in refrigerator, so no d in frige.--Wraithdart (talk) 14:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Don't be so STUPID!!!! It's not about whether the words are shortened editions of other words, it's about the spelling mechanics! THINK before you COMPLAIN, Wraith. [>{>Drakonis<}<] (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Before you burst a blood vessel, maybe you should read up on WP:CIV. Thanks!--Wraithdart (talk) 22:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Now that I've calmed down, I apologize. That was uncalled for. Either way, however, what was being referenced was spelling mechanics. Whether or not there is a "D" in refrigerator, the "D" is required in fridge in order to soften the G so it's pronounced correctly. Understand what he's saying now? [>{>Drakonis<}<] (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The comments regarding orthography ("spelling mechanics") are correct. "Fridge" is the correct spelling, and a cursory glance in any dictionary will confirm the same. Without a D, *frige would rhyme with "liege." Petecollier (talk) 19:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Mmm, refrigerators.

Mmm, in just a few days' time I'll be able to have cold beer and cold soft drinks again. You'll only learn how much to value them when you no longer have them. JIP | Talk 20:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I hear ya!!! -- Ϫ 18:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Writers Needed

As everywhere else in Wikipedia, this article needs writers, not writer wannabes.

For example, the sentence: "Cooling is a popular food storage technique in developed countries and works by decreasing the reproduction rate of bacteria." is most absurd! It actually says that by decreasing the reproduction rate of bacteria you get cooling, instead of stating the reverse.

Wikipedia is useful to getting references from articles' reference list as a aid to serious research. A few content editors control the POV of any substantial article, and do not allow alternative even though verifiable material. This can be seen in almost every article, including this one, where some sources are discredited in favor of others, based primarily on the biased perception of one or a few content censors!

There has been a heated discussion elsewhere in Wiki as to whether government sources/citations are "more" valid for the content or should "outweigh" competing sources. The answer is of course obvious to the intelligent person (think Watergate, Iran-Contra, WMD's, secret torture, illegal spying, and a million other lies here!). Clearly not so obvious for the people who control and/or edit these articles! 146.23.68.40 (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

"Current models that are Energy Star qualified use 50 percent less energy than models made before 1993." - not true

The Energy Efficiency sections contains this quote "Current models that are Energy Star qualified use 50 percent less energy than models made before 1993." nearly verbatim from the referenced website. However this is not accurate unless strongly qualified. An accurate statement would be "... use 50 percent less energy than the average models made in 1974." The Energy Star 'propaganda' ignores the fact that many refrigerators made in the 1930s were far more efficient than most that were made later. This is understandable as new features such as auto-defrost were added. These features however reduced efficiency (as did just plain cost cutting). Only now are refrigerators getting back to the energy efficiency of 1930s models. And they are certainly not twice as efficient.

Here are my sources:

David Goldstein of the NRDC who seems to be THE expert on the subject and a major change agent - http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-999-2007-023/CEC-999-2007-023.PDF. See the chart entitled: "New United States Refrigerator Use v. Time and Retail Prices" And I'll also point out a closer source http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/appliance/app1.pdf which includes some of Mr Goldstein's discussion and indicates that the AHAM is his data source.

Then, looking for the pre-war story, I find this, at - http://eetdseminars.lbl.gov/download/Deumling_LBNL.Slides.5.27.08.pdf. See the chart entitled: "Explaining decline in refrigerator efficiency". And the somewhat confusing but very telling chart "Energy consumption and energy efficiency of Manual Defrost refrigerators through time"

So its, of course, vital that Wikipedia be accurate and not reflect only a biased industry presented point of view. Accordingly, I would like to change the wording of the energy efficiency section and add some detail. However, I will respectfully wait a month or so for comments before moving forward. Especially as I am, admittedly far from an expert in this area.

Ronewolf (talk) 05:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


Just getting back to this (3 years later...). Seems that no one has bothered to object to my suggestion for clarification and historical accruracy. However, in addition to making the comments above, I am also going to re-organize the energy efficient section. As it is now (pre-my edit), the section starts with a long (winded...) explanation of defrosting. I am just going to leave that as is but move it to the end of the section. I will also suggest that an in-depth discussion of the frost-free mechanism probably should have its own article and not be mixed in there with the general Refrigerator topic.

Ronewolf (talk) 09:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, as I'm working on the edits to this section in the article itself, I have to say that its an embarrassing mess. Full of grammatical problems and non-referenced content. I appreciate that the writer seems to have had good intentions, but, IMO, this is far below the common standards of Wikipedia. I only have limited interest in this topic and so will only give the cleaning up a short effort. But it needs far more. I can see, from this, why many are becoming discouraged with the apparently slipping quality of Wikipedia. A shame.... Ronewolf (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the pdf used for the source of the energy efficiency of current refrigerators vs. 1930s models is timing out (for me at least). From the other two sources you provided, it appears that current fridges are much more efficient than 1930s models. Today's are three times larger and use the same amount of energy as those from 80 years ago. From the chart in http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-999-2007-023/CEC-999-2007-023.PDF it looks like refrigerators from the 1930s were less efficient from the early 80s on. Phaicles (talk) 04:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Avicenna and the Refrigerated Coil

The "refrigerated coil" that Avicenna is credited with inventing at the start of the article is not some amazing anachronism.

I've changed the link on the term to point to the Wikipedia article on the item involved - Condenser (laboratory) - it's not something that anticipates the first demonstration of artificial refrigeration in 1748, but relies on something that's already cold, just as an icebox does.

So there isn't an extraordinary claim here, instead, the question might be one of relevance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadibloc (talk • contribs) 23:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Critique

The article on the refrigerator is fairly well written although it does tend to use oversimplified language and grammar lot. Also, there will be times where something is spoken about before being named which leads to confusion. There are also a lot of points within the article where there is an unnecessary paragraph delves into a topic that is little related to the refrigerator, such as the two paragraphs left to talk about vegetable freezing methods. And, there is a bit of repetitiveness at some points, especially about the icemaker. At some points the article tells of some advancement or event that was due to "a manufacturer" but the article would have a lot more credibility if it actually gave the name of the manufacturer and/or inventor instead of being so vague. For the most part the sources seem legitimate, though there are two sources that have to do with aromatherapy which does not make any sense. The illustrations are fairly useful, although it's odd that there is not one picture of a modern refrigerator closed. Theres two pictures of the inside of a fridge, one picture of an original fridge, and a diagram of the cooling technology. The subject is covered fairly thoroughly, though it could have beefed up the section about the effects of refrigerators a bit more. Compared to a conventional encyclopedia article, this wikipedia article covers more aspects of the refrigerator such as the types, energy efficiency, history, etc. whereas most of the encyclopedia articles I found only covered the technology used to make the refrigerator work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HIST406-10Jgreene2 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC) HIST406-10Jgreene2 (talk) 13:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Additional HIST 406 critique Added by cwhite12 10/4/2010

First I would like to note the good things about the article and what I mean by “it did it’s job.” The article defined what a refrigerator was in simple terms which proved to be of great importance later on when someone commented about the differences between refrigerators and freezers. The article went on about the use of refrigerators in kitchens and how most people like to store their food in it. The author also gave a brief history of the refrigerator and explained that there were two types, coil and absorption. As far as general knowledge and dates are concerned, I feel the article was helpful in at least pointing the reader in a (not necessarily correct) direction. This is what I feel Wikipedia is best for. However, as a stand alone article I think some acknowledgement of the histories of the different types of refrigerators should have been paid more attention to. Once again, I do not know much of anything about refrigeration, but if refrigeration technology is anything like most other technologies, it is not likely that it has such a linear history as the article seems to imply. The article list dates and names of people who made breakthroughs in refrigeration and only notes the use and purposes for some of the advancements. I noticed the purposes that were mentioned were always for storing food. This is why I feel the article does not give a full history of the refrigerator and if I were to fully research the topic I would use the faults and successes of the article as hints for seeking more information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HIST406cwhite12 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

What's there is not bad, but the article needs a much more structured approach.
The General technical explanation section will likely puzzle many readers outside the U.S., who may only be familiar with "cold-wall evaporator" fridges which don't use a fan. The "Frost Free" or "Forced Fan" refrigerators seem more prevalent in the U.S. then elsewhere. These differences aren't mentioned in the Types of domestic refrigerators section either, instead we get a bit about different sizes, and five or six types of cooling that range from the niche (absorption, solar energy) to the non-existing (magnetic, thermoacoustic) domestic applications.
Only in the Energy efficiency section are most of the main domestic types mentioned, but anyone who isn't confused yet most likely will be after this...
The level of detail in the whole article is just too inconsistent and lacks structure. Not sure about the best way to fix this... DS Belgium (talk) 12:54, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Take-up of refrigerators in the US

Hi. Just reading the sentence that 60% of households in the US had regrigerators in the 30s, I knew this was not possible. There is no way of verifying the source, as it is a paid website. In the 30s all coutries were still very primitive whether in North America, Europe or elsewhere. Various sources indicate that "2 million" people in the US had refrigerators in the 30s. That is less than 2% of the population according to this table, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_population. Check information in these sources: http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/recycle/documents/Refrigerator%20Timline_x.pdf http://www.cibseashrae.org/presentations/dunsdon1205.pdf Energy Star is an official US government body: "About ENERGY STAR: ENERGY STAR is a joint program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy", Energy Star website. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:06, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Refrigerator helped reducing stomach cancer among Koreans

"한국인 위암 낮춘 주역은 '냉장고'였다". I read a news article about Dr. Yoo Guen-yeong (유근영) from Seoul National University School of Medicine who wrote about his/her research on refrigerators' role on reducing stomach cancer among Koreans. Does anybody have an access to academic papers? Komitsuki (talk) 12:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

food storage optimum temperature

"Optimum temperature range for perishable food storage is 3 to 5 °C (37 to 41 °F)."

It seems that for most food the ideal optimum storage temperature would be just above freezing, about 1C, 33F. Is this true? Where can one find detailed facts, tables and graphs of storage time as a function of temperature for various foods? What temperatures are used for ideal commercial storage of various foods?-96.237.13.111 (talk) 14:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Concept in the 19th century?

Charles Dickens calls someone a "noble refrigerator" in his novel Little Dorrit in 1857. See, for example, http://www.19thnovels.com/littledorrit.php?c=26. And it appears to be used in the same manner as we would use it today. So the concept existed earlier? Student7 (talk) 01:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Damper Allowing Too Much Cold Air to Refrig Should Make *Freezer* Too Warm

Is this is a mistake? Wouldn't the problem be the freezer becoming too warm in this case?

This knob is only controlling the amount of air that actually flows into the refrigerator via a damper system. This means that the refrigerator may become too warm. However, because only enough air is diverted to the refrigerator compartment, the freezer usually re-acquires the set temperature quickly, unless the door is opened.

194.90.154.230 (talk) 06:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC) Steve Weisberg

Edit request from 204.145.108.89, 23 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} In article on "Refrigerators", second paragraph, mentions refrigrants FREON and R-12....Freon is a trade name (DuPont, I believe, not a specific refrigerant...as is R(efrigerant)-12 22,502, etc), manufactured by DuPont, and others.


204.145.108.89 (talk) 17:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 18:50, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe what 204.145 was trying to suggest was something like:

Practical household refrigerators were introduced in 1915 and gained wider acceptance in the United States in the 1930s as prices fell and non-toxic, non-flammable synthetic Chlorofluorocarbon based refrigerants such as R-12 were introduced.

Freon is a Tradename of DuPont/GM. http://www2.dupont.com/Heritage/en_US/1930_dupont/1930_freon/1930_freon_indepth.html --Piershot (talk) 21:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

"Freons" are also used as colloquial name for chloroflourcarbons, pretty much like thermos and xerox went from trademarks to regular words. /BP 81.225.216.15 (talk) 19:46, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Why do many freezers not work when cold?

This article says nothing about 'climate class' or why the lower temperature of a garage is not always suitable for most 'modern' freezers. Apparently, this may be caused by lack of a separate freezer thermostat and refrigeration control on fridge-freezers, as explained in this article. Or it could be the type of refrigerant as hinted in this article, but without explaining how the type of refrigerant affects suitability for garages. Neither article mentions the reason of the other, and I do not know which reason is the most common cause of garage freezer failure. Intuitively, one would expect freezers to operate more efficiently at lower ambient temperature, but it seems that most modern ones can't even cope with cold! - JamesHaigh (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

2013 Critique

Wikipedia Critique: Refrigerator I am critiquing this article for a college course and I will specifically focus on the history portion of the article. My overall impression from reading it is that it is extremely well written and to-the-point with a high attention to detail but the quality falls off a bit in the second half.

The history section flows as you would typically expect. The beginning starts with early forages into the realm of refrigerating and the end focuses on modern refrigerating techniques. It is easy to follow and in particular the first half really shows the reader how refrigeration technique developed in the nineteenth century. The reader can really see how inventors took their predecessor’s work and improved on it to reach modern refrigeration as we know it. There are two illustrations and one video that accompany this section. In my opinion, the illustrations are rather few when you compare it to the length of the article and the sheer number of tiny inventions mentioned. Hyperlinks do provide more information though. Also the video is in Dutch/German and is probably not too useful for those who do not speak that language although the images in the video are interesting as they depict everyday usage of refrigerators in 1950’s Netherlands. All the information in the article is useful and frivolous contributions are kept to a minimal. Lots of dates and individuals are mentioned in the article adding to the completeness of the history section. The use of simple English, aside from the complex scientific terms, allows this section to be an efficient and accessible source for most of its readers. In terms of pure information, the Wikipedia article actually out duels the article on Encyclopedia Britannica on the history at least.

The article in the first half of the history section uses a wealth of credible citations. Fifteen sources are used, specifically when the article discusses important contributors/inventors. The sources come from a mix of textbooks and credible websites. However, in the second half of the section, no sources are cited and while the information still retains its high level of detail and information, the lack of sources hurts the article’s credibility. Sources should definitely be added to confirm the validity of the information. The first half contains many hyperlinks to important terms, such as vapor-compression refrigerator, that the average person probably would not know. This makes it very convenient for a reader who can be instantly linked to another article which provides more depth on a certain invention or inventor of his/her choosing. The second half is not only sorely lacking hyperlinks, but the few it does employ are often not related to the article’s focus on refrigeration or solely focused on individuals. Useless hyperlinks should be removed and important terms within the article should receive new hyperlinks. The article at the beginning contains an interesting look at an 11th century Persian physicist’s invention, but then there is a time skip to the 18th century. Is it really true that between those two centuries, nothing of value was invented regarding future refrigeration? If not, it is definitely an area that can be improved on and more information should be added. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refrigerator http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/495746/refrigeration

Thanks for the feedback! Nicolas1981 (talk) 05:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Validity of information in this article

In the most recent edit, I spotted a claim "motor had to work twice as hard to remove heat that the machine itself had produced.". The surface area of the motor compartment is relatively minor and obviously it is insulated between the interior and exterior. Claim that placement of condenser(where majority of heat is rejected) at bottom as opposed to top increases compressor load by two looks completely out of line. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 01:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Reference 23 is dead

just FYI — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.68.37.169 (talk) 07:14, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Types of domestic refrigerators

Perhaps it's a silly idea, but do liquid-cooled refrigerators exist ? If so can this be mentioned ? Traditional liquid-cooling uses one or multiple fan(s) on the radiator to discard heat; an alternative is a Peltier element to cool the radiator. I guess that it won't be as efficient, but the main advantage is that no Vapor-compression_refrigeration#Refrigerants toxic/environmentally-damaging refrigerants need to be used, so if it's possible, we should mention it. KVDP (talk) 16:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Functioning scheme

I added an illustration of the basic functioning of a refrigerator that we did as a school exercise Danieledep (talk) 15:00, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Herman C. Ells Sr.

"magnetic door gasket that holds the door sealed but can be pushed open from the inside. This gasket was invented by Herman C. Ells Sr. - http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2586/is-it-impossible-to-open-a-refrigerator-door-from-the-inside"

Herman C. Ells Sr is not named in the ref straightdope.com (nor any other inventor), and pages where Google finds him, look like copied from WP. On the other hand Max Baermann of Cologne/Germany claim that after their invention and manufacture of the first flexible permanent magnet using isotropic barium ferrite in 1957 they filed on October 31, 1957 the patent application for an even better flexible magnetic strip which became US Patent https://www.google.com/patents/US2959832 and the standard for refrigerator gaskets. --Vsop.de (talk) 10:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Refrigerator. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:24, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Eutectic ice refrigerator

Could the eutectic ice refrigerator be mentioned as a seperate type of refrigerator, or if not, be mentioned as a hybrid type ? See http://www.ozefridge.com.au/?page_id=24 KVDP (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Manufacturing numbers by country. Accuracy questionable due to passage of time.

Refrigerator: level-4 vital article in technology. I have no idea what if any maintenance schedule there is for such articles.

Noticed that article compiled around 2005 as that is the latest date for any of the figures relating to national manufacturing under "Production by Country". Confirmed 2005 via edit history. Could those numbers have become sufficiently innacurate 12yrs later as to be a problem?

Any chance of an update or some sort of note that they need revision and therefore should not be quoted as accurate? Don't want wikipedia to become contributory to misinformation. ;) Which it could if out of date stuff such as this ends up quoted as current fact - hence point.

Maybe a constructive idea would be to 'tag/flag' any article subsection the accuracy of which is entirely reliant on date - in order that it can receive periodic updates/maintenance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:72AC:BA00:871:90FD:C36A:14FE (talk) 10:39, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Styles of refigerators

This section has already been tagged for only representing the US situation, and I would concur.

The section also gives weights in US customary units, with the metric equivalent in brackets, which is contrary to the style of the rest of the article, where metric measures are used, with a US equivalence in brackets.

When the section is rewritten, the units used should be changed so that the consistency of the article is maintained. Petecollier (talk) 19:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I added some Canadian content... --Phil racicot (talk) 19:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

The adjective "modern" is used several times. That causes the information to become unreliable (as it depends when the text was written). The same is true for information given in the present tense, for example: "Most households use the freezer-on-top-and-refrigerator-on-bottom style." The latter may have been true when written but not several years later. At April 2017 almost all fridge-freezers being sold in the UK have the freezer at the bottom. I have not changed the WP article in case the UK is an exception (which I doubt). 2.98.203.222 (talk) 19:02, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Maximum outside temperature for various fridge technologies

Searching that simple fact. Could not find it here. 2001:14BB:71:A7D7:151B:A466:2908:ABFF (talk) 08:50, 17 June 2017 (UTC) //arl

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Refrigerator. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 07:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

History

The change from latch to magnet closing should be included in the history.  Some information about this is available at Refrigerator death. Kdammers (talk) 14:13, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
You can fix this yourself. A4032 (talk) 14:26, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Mortuary/Morgue image

An Ip keeps adding images of cold storage at a mortuary to this article. First it was an image of a dead body. Now it is an image of the cold storage. This use isn't mentioned in the article and I do not believe they are even called refrigerators. The article Morgue calls it cold storage. ~ GB fan 12:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Fine. The photo of the dead body has been removed, I agree, it was disgusting. Now its the photo of the fridge. You can also add it to cold storage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.100.11.3 (talk) 12:44, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
THis article does not mention this use, there is no indication it is called a refrigerator. Also there are more than enough pictures on the article already. ~ GB fan 13:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Chaim Weizmann Mansion versus Ernest Hemingway House

Chaim Weizmann versus Ernest Hemingway
File:General Electric "Monitor-Top" refrigerator at Chaim Weizmann mansion.jpg is a more descriptive photo and has all original branding File:Antique refrigerator - Hemingway House.jpg does not.
24.7.104.84 (talk) 20:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Solar refrigerator

This edit concerns me. I'm not going to revert it for the moment as the edit summary does contain a claim that the material was not properly sourced, but it was controversial and should be discussed.

There is an article Solar-powered refrigerator which is already linked from the See also section of this article, and a redirect to it from Solar refrigerator. It seems to me that this article, on refrigerators in general, should contain more than just a see also to a notable type of refrigerator... a short section with a Main template at the very least. Andrewa (talk) 16:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@Andrewa: plenty of room for a rewrite, which I would take no exception to. Please don't just restore the section without valid sourcing though per WP:BURDEN. VQuakr (talk) 17:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for discussing. But you do not seem to have read my post. I have no intention of reverting, as I have already said above.
Pending a rewrite, have you any objection to restoring the section just as sectstub and main templates? That would seem to me to be an advantage both to readers and potential editors. But is perhaps controversial. Andrewa (talk) 20:12, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't clear, I was voicing agreement with your OP that it shouldn't be restored. I'm actually not convinced coverage of solar-powered refrigerators should be in that section at all. The other "types of domestic refrigerators" use different technologies to address the thermodynamics of cooling, while a "solar refrigerator" is just a compressor refrigerator with a solar panel to power it. By definition any bluelink in the "see also" section will be to a notable topic, so that alone isn't sufficient reason to use a main tag instead of link in see also. Thoughts? VQuakr (talk) 22:16, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
While some solar refrigerators may be as you describe, the ones with which I am familiar do not use electricity except perhaps for control functions. The technology is of an absorption refrigerator using solar heating directly. These are particularly used in off-grid dwellings.
But our article Solar-powered refrigerator currently makes no mention of these.
Until recently there was an article at RV Fridge see this old version. I have not looked to see whether there was content there that should have been saved. I possess a disused 'fridge that uses either gas or electricity, and I'm not sure whether we currently cover this technology either.
It seems quite possible that we do not, and that this is because such units have been obsoleted by PV and battery technology, and by more efficient DC powered 'fridges. And I'm not even sure where to look for secondary sources that might cover the history of RV refrigeration.
There is much to do! Some stubs and sectstubs would seem to me a good start, and I suggested one above. Andrewa (talk) 12:14, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
The issue with solar-heated absorption systems is the same: we already have a section about absorption fridges, and I do not see a major difference whether the heat source is gas, solar, or waste process heat. Maybe the best approach is a more general re-write. Right now, we have "Refrigerator technologies" and "Types of domestic refrigerators" sections, but the difference between these is poorly defined. The prior might be better addressed at Refrigeration. VQuakr (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
I had a look at the RV Fridge old version; it appears focused on propane-fired absorption fridges. VQuakr (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Montreal protocol and banning of CFCs

Under the heading Commercial refrigerators it says "However, R-12 damaged the ozone layer, causing governments to issue a ban on its use in new refrigerators and air-conditioning systems in 1994." But there is no foot note. This strikes me as odd, since the Montreal protocol that banned CFCs came into effect in 1989. There was indeed a phase-out plan, but that is not what the sentence above suggests. Which page is right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cantharellales (talk • contribs) 21:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

ref needed

The interesting section on "Styles of refrigerators" has no citation.Kdammers (talk) 16:29, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Australian James Harrison invented the fridge in 1854,

Australian James Harrison invented the Frigidaire in 1854 ...... & as is the case with everything Australian ..... Aussies' Australianize & then shorten the word/s. ..... & the Frigidaire soon became the ( refrigerator ) & soon after that was just shortened to ( Fridge ) "Go get a beer out of the Frigidaire" does not have quite the same ring as "go get a beer out the frige". There's one in nearly every kitchen, at least in the western world, but the ubiquitous fridge was originally conceived in Geelong, Victoria, in the 1850s by James Harrison. His patented ether liquid-vapour compression system, whereby gas was passed through a compressor to be cooled and liquefied, and then circulated through refrigeration coils, is still the most widely used refrigeration system today — not just in fridges, but air conditioners in homes and offices around the world.

The Refrigerator is an Australian invention 1854.

& the Refrigerator & Fridge are both Australian words. with Australian origins.

Could somebody also please add the following link to the main page.

http://www.cnet.com/au/pictures/best-aussie-inventions-of-all-time/

Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.202.248.243 (talk) 20:33, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Nope. The first practical vapour-compression refrigeration system was built by James Harrison, a British journalist [actually a Scottish] who had emigrated to Australia [becoming a Victorian]. His 1856 patent was for a vapor-compression system using ether, alcohol, or ammonia. Where in that reference does it say he invented the refrigerator?
Methods for preserving food by cooling have been around for thousands of years, but the modern refrigerator is a recent invention. But we'll take a quick short path with the refrigeration research part, skipping the earliest forms of cooling and ice harvesting.
The history of artificial refrigeration began when Scottish professor William Cullen designed a small refrigerating machine in 1755. Cullen used a pump to create a partial vacuum over a container of diethyl ether, which then boiled, absorbing heat from the surrounding air. The experiment even created a small amount of ice, but had no practical application at that time.
Benjamin Franklin and John Hadley did some stuff in 1758. Oliver Evans did some stuff in 1805. Michael Faraday did some stuff in 1820. Jacob Perkins did some stuff in 1834. John Gorrie did some stuff in 1842. Alexander Twining did some stuff in 1850. Then came the person you mentioned James Harrison come on the scene in 1851. Skipping a few more other people in the history of it before comes the commercial use in 1842 by John Gorrie.
Let's go onto the home and consumer use part.
During the early 1800s, consumers preserved their food by storing food and ice purchased from ice harvesters in iceboxes. In 1803, Thomas Moore patented a metal-lined butter-storage tub which became the prototype for most iceboxes. These iceboxes were used until nearly 1910 and the technology did not progress. In fact, consumers that used the icebox in 1910 faced the same challenge of a moldy and stinky icebox that consumers had in the early 1800s. General Electric (GE) was one of the first companies to overcome these challenges. In 1911, GE released a household refrigeration unit that was powered by gas.
1913, Fred W. Wolf makes the first home electric refrigerator. 1918, William C. Durant begins mass producing the first home refrigerator with a self-contained compressor. 1927, the home refrigerator starts to see widespread popularity across the US. Separate freezer compartments came in the 1940s. Water dispensers began appearing in the 1980s. New configurations/colors and energy efficiency came too.
Oversimplifying and missed research is easy to do, but my point is you can't really give the history (ok, I mean beginnings) of the refrigerator without giving some/a lot/even most credit to the other people who also contributed. It's simply foolish to not do so. I'm not discredit anyone, and James Harrison was indeed a pioneer in the field of mechanical refrigeration, but to say "oh this guy invented the refrigerator" is really a head-scratcher and fallacious. The more specific the better, y'know.
As for the words refrigerator and fridge, let's see what the Merriam-Webster site has to say.
Artificial refrigeration was first demonstrated by William Cullen in 1748, and the earliest refrigeration machines developed in the first half of the 19th century. But the word refrigerator is much older; it dates to the early 1600s, and refrigerate, from the Latin verb refrigerare and ultimately from the adjective frigus, meaning "cold," dates to the preceding century. Frigus also gave us our adjective frigid. So I don't know what you're getting at or what you researched. Dang, there's so many old comments here that aren't archived.
Links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refrigerator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refrigeration
https://www.livescience.com/57797-refrigerator-history.html
https://www.marthastewart.com/1537798/refrigerator-history-explained
https://www.whirlpool.com/blog/kitchen/history-of-the-refrigerator.html
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/fridge-vs-frig-spelling-short-for-refrigerator

Cheers. — 2603:6011:9600:52C0:299B:AFAB:8E2A:5C29 (talk) 23:39, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Technology and Culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 9 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JAckerley (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by JAckerley (talk) 17:57, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Technology and Culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JAckerley (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Thecanyon (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

"Walk-in Refrigerators" / "Walk-in Freezers" / "(Walk-in) Cool Rooms"

  • This ties into the current lacking information in the commercial section, but Walk-in Freezers, the type a Grocery Store would have aren't mentioned in here really
  • Despite that there are some redirects out there
    • I was about to make one as well
  • 1.) What should be done about redirects, both existing and and ones to be made going forward
  • 2.) Would this concept be deserving of it's own page?
  • 3.) Does anyone who has already edited this / similar HVAC stuff know enough to add to this section?
  • In light of all that, depending on how things go i may end up researching+adding my own info i find eventuially
  • Was adjacently looking into these when documenting the "CoolBot" product for OSE wiki work
  • Thanks if you have read this far, and keep me posted!

--Eric Lotze (talk) 22:30, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Edward Toussaint's invention/patent of an absorption refrigeration system unsourced?

Should the article'sstatement that Edward Toussaint invented the first absorption refrigeration system in 1859 and patented in 1860 be edited if not removed? The claim is unsourced, and the only statement to that effect outside of Wikipedia that I can find in an initial search with Google and Google books is a brief statement in a search result for an article requiring a subscription to read in full, and may well be based on this very article. This seems like a significant claim to be overlooked in accounts of the history of refrigeration.

Worse, even if the claim that this person invented and patented an absorption refrigeration system, the claim that he was the first to patent an absorption machine using water and ammonia is absolutely false. Ferdinand Carre patented his first continuous absorption machine using water and ammonia in 1859, and his first intermittent adsorption machine using same obviously came before that. So at the very least, that part of the article should be heavily edited, and both Ferdinand Carre and Carre's priority on this system of refrigeration should be added. 67.168.191.4 (talk) 17:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

There's this source; though it's marked "Opinion," the part about Toussant is background, so it may be acceptable in this context. Strangely, Ferdinand_Carré is only mentioned in an image caption in the current article, so it seems reasonable to expand on his contributions in the text. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes - agreed on expanding on Carre's role in the text.
Hmm - looking at the relevant passage in your linked source, I do believe that is the same as the one I was seeing in my Google search results that kept turning out to require a subscription to read. Interesting.
So we seem to have a reference in a single article appearing in multiple publications, and a statement with no marked reference in the Wikipedia article, concerning what would seem to be an at least noteworthy inventor in the history of refrigeration; I feel like there's a mystery here that needs solving. Why are reference and sources concerning a French inventor patenting and marketing an ammonia based absorption system at virtually the same time as - though starting a bit later than - Ferdinand Carre be so difficult to find. I'm baffled. 2601:603:4E82:7C20:CE9A:9A0A:F6DB:AD17 (talk) 06:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
It's possible that the references on Toussaint are circular, though I doubt it's an outright fabrication as are some of these examples. It's not really an extraordinary claim (e.g., that Toussaint was the definitive inventor of refrigeration); feel free to expand on Carre's role in the body of the article as you see fit. As to why better sources are hard to find, this kind of material of often found in printed materials that do not easily surface in web searches. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Refrigerator/Archive_1&oldid=1229215450"