Talk:Chemical waste

Copied from Template:VfD-Chemical waste

Probably a worthy subject, but as it is, a sub-stub, practically a dicdef (and not even a good one) Dukeofomnium 02:47, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

• delete if not expanded by April 9. --Jiang 06:22, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to industrial waste as was done one year back. Jay 06:47, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. It has potential for a lot of information. SD6-Agent 10:40, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, do not redirect to industrial waste since there are other important kinds of waste (biological, radioactive). Important topic. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:07, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - as noted above, this is a topic that can be greatly expanded and has relevance. This is a very usefully stub for further expansion and no need for some arbitrary time criterion expansion. Lestatdelc 22:26, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, it's a stub with great potential of high importance. I'm sure it will become a real article sooner or later. Cacycle 23:19, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• delete - distinction between industrial and chemical waste is splitting hairs and confusing for users. Users are very surprised to find almost no info in Wikipedia on this crucial topic; both should redirect to hazardous waste --Espoo 11:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but expandAlex 14:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

---

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chemical waste. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113141754/http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/imr/index.htm to http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/imr/index.htm

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) 03:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Ways to Improve the Article

After reading through this page I have a few suggestions for ways it could improve. First, the fifteenth link in the references does not work. Additionally, the third link in the references to the Disposal of Laboratory Waste from the University of St. Andrews is inaccessible because it leads to an insecure network. Also, the page seems to mainly focus on laboratory disposal and lacks other aspects of chemical waste. Furthermore, the United States and Canada are the only two countries mentioned but the effects of chemical waste extend beyond Canada and U.S, so I recommend adding facts about other countries as well. Finally, the entire section titled Chemical Waste in Canadian Agriculture is based off a link that does not work, which I mentioned above, and therefore that section should either be removed or a new source should be found and linked in the reference section. Phoebestern (talk) 00:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Rename to "Laboratory chemical waste"

There is a larger article on wikipedia Hazardous waste that is more comprehensive. The current article on chemical waste appears to be from the perspective of University EHS chemical waste and retrieval personnel (hence the "how-to" tone). The article also contains seemingly randomly inserted sections discussing pollution and environmental hazards, which are not topics of chemical waste and rather an effect of improperly handled chemical waste.

The introduction originally contained many disjointed sentences on items not defining "chemical waste".

I have made the following changes and suggest a few.

1. I simplified the introduction to specifically address the definitions important to the article
2. The second section was renamed "laboratory chemical waste in the US" because this was the perspective it was originally written. I shortened this section for conciseness and provided more general citations (e.g., instead of citing specific EHS departments I cited literature and government agency policies. When providing citations to EHS departments I provided at least two or three different departments to provide breadth). See note below about "how-to"

I suggest the following new changes

1. the article be renamed "Laboratory chemical waste" because (a) that's what the article was originally about and (b) to avoid redundancy in the hazardous waste article.
2. I suggest the sections after "Laboratory Chemical waste in the US" be deleted as it is not very relevant. The topics covered in these later sections are "pollution" and "regulation", and these are not fundamental to the article's main points

The Maintenance tab says there is too much "how-to" on this page. this still needs to be addressed. RoBunsen (talk) 20:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)