This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HLHJ (talk | contribs) at 04:50, 17 August 2020 (→Page move: talk merge). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 04:50, 17 August 2020 by HLHJ (talk | contribs) (→Page move: talk merge)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Occupational Safety and Health C‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
A fact from N95 respirator appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Did you know nomination
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 11:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the melt blowing technology used to create N95 respirators had previously been used to make bra cups and premade ribbon bows? Source:
- Reviewed: Leah Lowenstein
- Comment: Much of the text is closely paraphrased from public domain U.S. government sources, which is within policy, but this text doesn't count towards the 1,500 character limit. However, there is more than 1,500 characters of original text, mainly in the lead and the history section. See DYK rule 2b.
Created by John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk), Victorgrigas (talk), and Fuzheado (talk). Nominated by John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) at 01:50, 2 April 2020 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
What were N95 respirators originally designed for?
This article says that N95 respirators were originally designed for ... but there is no authority for that. I think the original purpose of the masks is important and an authority for that is important. Sam Tomato (talk) 00:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- The source is the California Department of Consumer Affairs. You don't think that citation is valid? MartinezMD (talk) 00:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
KN95 vs N95
OK So my experience
Bought these at my local electronics store (Needham, MA) 10 @ $5.00 each on May 25, 2020
Some details (Comparison)
These masks have similar superior properties as N95, but they go by different names based on where they are certified. The WHO (World Health Organizations) considers N95 equivalent to KN95 and other similar masks. (WHO Article 1. WHO Article 2.)
I'm sure there is no wikipedia article on KN95
So worth a mention in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.252.76.29 (talk) 03:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Page move
@HLHJ: Your justification for the page move was "per talk" but I see nothing here or at Talk:FFP mask. Which talk page were you refering to? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 04:41, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, Horse Eye Jack. The merge template redirected to Talk:Mechanical filter respirator#Merge discussion. Since no-one else participated, this basically consists of my explaining why I think it's a good idea. Now that someone else has taken an interest, I'd be glad to discuss it in more detail. HLHJ (talk) 04:48, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- I should probably have merged this talk page too... will wait now, or as you see fit. HLHJ (talk) 04:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)