Talk:Changing room/Archive 1

I have a problem with the use of the terms "change room" and "wash room".

The problem is that these terms are confusing.

"Change room" could be a command to a hotel clerk, i.e. I'd like to change from one hotel to another.

"Wash room" could also be a command to a hotel clerk, i.e. I'd like the bedroom to be washed. The bedroom is not a washroom, but is merely a room one might like to have washed.

When there are various terms, I think we should choose the one that's clearest, i.e. use Occam's Razor to pare down to the simplest term.

Thus I fail to see the benefit of adding one byte (a blank space) between "wash" and "room" or getting rid of the "e" in changeroom and replacing it with "ing " (four bytes for one). The extra three bytes don't buy extra clarity, in fact they buy negative clarity.

This desire to Americanize everything often makes things less clear. See for example the difference between GFCI (the American term) and RCD. The American term is not only ambiguous, but also just plain wrong, because an RCD has nothing to do with ground. It just so happens that ground is one possible way electrons can try to violate Kirchoff's Current Law... Glogger 04:35, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Changing room" could be a statement to the effect that I am changing my room, e.g. going from one room to another room.

Hi, Glogger. I honestly don't understand why you accompany your article change with the above discussion of the terms "change room" and "wash room", when those terms had already been removed from the article in my previous version. But I'll try to respond all the same. The phrases "change room" and "wash room", (and "changing room") should be, and were at one point in the life of the article, explained and disambiguated as phrases, not as the accidental conjunction of the words "change" and "room", or of the words "wash" and "room", or the words "changing" and "room". Even as mere word conjunctions, these particular ones are rather difficult to find in real life, as your (to me) amazing examples above demonstrate. I believe you're a native English speaker. (Also an academic teacher.) Are you seriously telling me you would request a change of hotel room, or to have your bedroom washed (a curious locution in itself), by saying say "Change room!" or "Wash room!" to hotel clerks? (Accompanied by imperious pointing... ?) Please tell me you're kidding.

After this attempted explanation, I will revert your changes to the article. However, I kind of expect you to re-add the material about how "changing room" is ambiguous. (No, the phrase never is ambiguous in real life.) You did when somebody else removed it, so you obviously have great faith in it. I won't be back to revert you again, since I find it difficult to get het up enough over a page such as this to edit war over it, in fact I suspect you're pretty unique in wanting to. If you do re-revert, I'd be quite happy to either leave the page as a monument to your interest, or to have it turned into a redirect. It was originally a redirect, and I'm kind of sorry I ever changed it. (The David Storey play doesn't really need disambiguation.) Would you like it to be a redirect to Changeroom?--Bishonen 13:47, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC) P.S. I see you just edited the article yet again. What does "ambiguation" mean?--Bishonen 13:47, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Move?[edit]

from VfD:

It's not that there's anything wrong with this article in itself, it's more that I don't see the point of it. Changing rooms are never called changerooms in the UK, so I assume this is an American term I just haven't come across before, but if we're keeping this, there might be some debate about the best title. Deb 17:36, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Changing room and clean up a bit. -- [[User:Bobdoe|Bob Doe]] 17:48, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I've lived in the US- they are not called that there, either. They're either Changing rooms, Dressing rooms, or Locker rooms, depending on context (and the presence or absence of lockers did not seem to affect this). Move & redirect- FZ 18:17, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Move to changing room. It's not a common term in America either. — Gwalla | Talk 19:52, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. After deletion, create Change room and Changing room and make both redirect to Dressing room, which already has a discussion. Geogre 20:24, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: It has been pointed out to me by Bishonen that Changing rooms is not an appropriate redirect to Dressing room because it is the name of a play. It is also the name of a popular BBC show. Oops. Geogre 18:30, 22 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've heard "changeroom" in Australia, and I think it might even be the most common term here --Rlandmann 21:53, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise - it is more common than any other of the terms listed here. Interesting. An Australianism I wasn't even aware of. Well, if it's only in Oz, it could probably be moved to some more international title, with this remaining as a redirect. Lacrimosus 22:34, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Right, redirect. The question is which is more common internationally: Changing room or Dressing room? func (talk) 22:39, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- No Wikipedia policy is to leave unchanged regional article titles. Licorice might get far more hits than Liquorice but we do not want to move every article to its American spelling. - SimonP 23:34, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  - Though this is the first time I've seen "licorice" spelled with a "qu". [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 17:03, 22 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
    - And I've never seen "liquorice" spelt with two "c"s! -- Necrothesp 01:06, 23 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- Er, Ok. But we need to deal with the issue of duplicate content. So long as all appropriate redirects are in place, the actual name of the article isn't important, but having two or more articles to place the same content is a problem, (Licorice and Liquorice go to the same article). func (talk) 23:48, 21 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Changeroom is a superset of fitting room, e.g. the fitting room is something for a department store, whereas the changeroom is a more general concept. The term lockerroom would also be possible, but that implies lockers. Although "lockerroom" is used in the wide sense to denote rooms that may or may not have lockers, strictly speaking this usage is incorrect, so changeroom is more precise. Also, it seems like it's good to use a single word, when possible, rather than a phrase. From my experience, both (i.e. with and without a space between "change" and "room"). It's like "over head projector transparency" being shortened to "overheads". We lose the space between "over" and "head", to simplify matters. It also makes it easier to search, when the single word is used. I'm in favour of keeping changeroom but including links to various kinds of changerooms. Glogger 01:16, 24 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Also, when I "google" changeroom I get almost eight thousand hits (7,910). When I google "change room" I get a lot of false hits, such as View/Change Room. The term "change room" also means, for example, to book a hotel room, and then change your room booking. "Change room" also means to move from one room to another, e.g. when I go out of one bedroom and into another, I have changed rooms. For this reason, changeroom is the only precise and clear way of saying it. I also fixed many of the defficiences in the article, so it is much improved now from when it was last evaluated for vfd. Glogger 03:22, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Keep. We have articles on various types of rooms so I see this one as no different and it should not be deleted just because the majority (Americans) don't use the term changeroom. What it's called is just a matter of where you're from, I think. Rlandmann from Australia calls it a changeroom and I am from Canada where this is also a common term for this type of room. If Americans have a different term then I suggest just creating a redirect to this article. SD6-Agent 03:28, 24 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Keep under whatever name. Looks fairly ok content at first glance. Kim Bruning 16:59, 25 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a slighly closer look at this article, and something's not quite right with it. People have been traumatized by communal stripdowns in recent anthrax scares, and this represents a return to people being "socialized into accepting their own body image?" What looks like an ad for Moore Lockerbaskets at the end? Additional links to the same site in the middle of the article? Increased privacy in lockerrooms the result of "transhumanism and perceptions of gender in the cyborg age?" Respectfully suggest we keep this nomination on VFD for a few more days while we sort this out. - RedWordSmith 18:38, 27 September 2004 (UTC)[reply]

end moved discussion

I concur, RedWordSmith. This is really odd. An anon (65.49.77.82) made numerous good edits to the article, and then suddenly starting inserting the whackiest stuff imaginable. These later edits need to be gone over with a fine toothed comb. func (talk) 03:02, 6 October 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I accept blame for the cyborg and wearable computing stuff; this is my own experiences and problems, i.e. they probably don't pertain to the mainstream Wikipedia audience; sorry if I cluttered with too much material that may not be of interest until most people are wearing computer gloging hardware. I am, however, only my way to a conference on 'glogging, and there are several companies now doing lifelong capture, e.g. Nokia, HP, Microsoft, etc.. Sooner or later these issues will come up, so we might only be able to ignore them for a little while longer... Glogger 04:28, 8 October 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following:

This trend was due, in part, to transhumanism and perceptions of gender in the cyborg age.

Another important question that arose was gender ambiguity, especially possible with cyborg technology. For example, what is the operational gender of a blind man who wears a computer vision system that sends live video to his wife for remote seeing help that she provides on a back channel that goes to earphones he wears. The transmitting end of the link is male, but the remote seeing end is female. Should he use the men's room or the women's room? Society seemed to be giving him a reasonable alternative, namely a private area to change where s/he would not see or be seen by others -- even others of his body-gender, and certainly not others of his visual information processing mind-gender.

To the very best of my knowldge, we are not living in "the cyborg age," and I doubt anyone can provide references to when and where the "important question" of gender ambiguity arose in the history of changeroom design. All of this is just the tip of the iceberg, however... the association between terrorisim and changerooms... come on, what is this? func (talk) 04:06, 6 October 2004 (UTC)[reply]

--- I created an article for washroom. Hopefully this is OK, rather than needing to change to "wash room", since the unique text string will be easier to search, and for the same reason as changeroom, e.g. "wash room" could mean like you're telling someone to wash a room, wash the living room could for example be listed on a note to one's spouse saying "wash room", but has nothing to do with a washroom.

I hope we can keep them both as "washroom" and "changeroom" without having to mainstream americanize them.

Note for example, the change from GFI (Ground Fault Interruptor) to RCD, which is alot more clear and correct. GFI is actually wrong, because these devices don't detect ground leakage, they simply enforce Kirckhoff's Current Law (i.e. they should be called Balance Fault Interruptors not GFI). By not insisting on Americanizing everything, we actually get terminology that's more correct, and more clear, and more definitive. Thus RCCB in favour of GFI, and hopefully also "changeroom" (only one meaning) in favour of "change room" (multiple amgigous meanings). Glogger 04:24, 8 October 2004 (UTC)[reply]

--- Below is some material removed from the article (perhaps it's OK to move this material into this talk page so we can discuss it further)

Changeroom or "change room"[edit]

- Sometimes a changeroom is referred to as a "change room", but such terminology leads to a non-uniqueness, e.g. the phrase "change room" can also mean for a person to move from one room to another room, or to change a room booking (e.g. to change rooms at a hotel). "Change rooms at a hotel" could mean one of two things: - *To change a room booking from one room to another, or to change from one room to a different room; - *A place in the hotel, e.g. the public swimming baths or public bathing area, where patrons change their clothes.

- For this reason, the term "changeroom" is preferable to the term "change room". Preceding unsigned comment added by Gloggger (talk) 04:40, 8 October 2004 (UTC)[reply]

move to changing room[edit]

This should be moved to changing room which is a term that can be universally understood. Changeroom makes no sense to me. Mintguy (T) 09:24, 12 October 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Globalize[edit]

This article is written from a Canadian POV. Most of the examples are from Canada, and presented as the only way changerooms are. It would help if this article were expanded to include areas not in the Western world, as well as the UK and Europe. The United States also seems to have been left out.

I have also copyedited the article completely and edited out a lot of text which was speculative. This article is not sourced at all and badly needs it. I probably won't be watching this article, but I did want to put forth the issues I saw instead of tagging and leaving. Happy wiki-ing! --Keitei (talk) 05:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only counted two examples from Canada and one from Germany. I'm not sure anything more is needed; if those two examples had been from the US instead of Canada, I doubt anyone would have noticed. As for the sources, I agree. The late section on terrorism, acclimatizing males to communal undress for military purposes, and anthrax scares is downright bizarre and probably ought to go (original research, at the very least). Powers 14:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "Trends in Changeroom Design" section[edit]

This section was simply full of all kinds of ridiculous unsourced information and original research, as well as being largely off-topic. The talk surrounding this article's recent VFD seemed to arrive at a conclusion that this information has no place in this article, so I've removed this section. A brief mention of actual trends in changeroom styles may be appropriate, but owuld need to be re-written and probably doe snot warrant it's own sub-section.

74.60.80.39 22:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archives[edit]

Old messages: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony Appleyard (talk • contribs) 09:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Changing room/Archive 1

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. There is a discussion not resolved and that is, is it changing room or dressing room. To me, they may be two different things. There there is the issue of what is a locker room. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changeroom → Changing room — Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia policy is that articles should occupy the most-common form for their subject. Consequently a regional variation ("changeroom") should not be the location of this article. DionysosProteus (talk) 10:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose. I'm not convinced that "changeroom" (as awkward as it sounds to my ears) is any more "regional" in nature than the other possible terms for this type of room. It's been at Changeroom since the very beginning, in 2004, so I daresay we would need some sort of evidence that some other term is far more common. Powers ^T 18:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It's regional because in the UK, at least, the term "changeroom" is meaningless. It is a "dressing room" or "changing room" in Britain. DionysosProteus (talk) 23:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think "It's been at this location since the beginning" is a very poor argument when there's a huge (if muddled and, it appears unresolved) discussion earlier on the page that is largely about whether this is the best title. If nobody had objected to the title since "the beginning," that would be different, but clearly there has been objection and it's not apparent that there was consensus supporting the current title. Propaniac (talk) 16:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair enough, but I'd still like to see some evidence of usage rather than just perception. And this is speaking as someone who had never heard of the word "changeroom" before reading this article some time ago. Powers ^T 21:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support move per nominator and per 70.29.208.247. Propaniac (talk) 16:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Respecting national varieties of English is fine (WP:ENGVAR) but which national variety is this and how widespread is it? — AjaxSmack 01:43, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support the original article was written about Toronto, which should use Canadian English. "Changing room" is acceptable in Canadian English, and my personal Canadian preference for spelling it. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 03:57, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Security cameras in changing rooms[edit]

The article mentiones that some changing rooms had security cameras. Can someone proove this? I would not want to change in front of a camera, I doubt that anyone else would want to. -- 62.156.55.33 (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definition: What is part of a changing room and what isn't?[edit]

I have a question regarding the exact meaning of the word "changing room": In English, are shower rooms and locking facilites (which may be outside the changing room) regarded as part of the changing room or are they considered to be outside the changing room and something seperate? Ok, this may be a bit off-topic here but I think that the article should be extended to answer this question. -- 79.238.164.126 (talk) 03:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Locker rooms with no lockers?[edit]

I think that the heading "locker room" is not quite appropriate (or we may need to add another type of changing room). I have been to changing rooms with no lockers at all. These changing rooms are solely supposed to be used by groups which change at the same time (school classes, clubs, etc.) and the whole room would be locked so noone could steal anything. As there are no lockers in these rooms, they cannot be called locker rooms. -- 62.156.55.33 (talk) 21:35, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the heading to "communal changing rooms". I'm not sure if this term is appropriate. Anybody who has a better suggestion can feel free to change it. -- 79.238.164.126 (talk) 04:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Individual changing cubicles?[edit]

This article claims that people who change at public pools ALWAYS have to do this in front of strangers of their own sex. This is not correct, at least not where I live. Here in Germany, public pools usually have gender-neutral changing cubicals (where you can change in private, without anyone watching, and you got a door that you're supposed to lock) as well as gender-segregated changing rooms where you cannot hide from others. Showers are mostly gender-segregated gang showers. -- 79.238.170.25 (talk) 17:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So add the word "usually" to the sentence in question. Powers ^T 22:18, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Usually" isn't enough, most (public) pools that I know of have changing stalls. Pools that don't have them are the exception. -- 79.238.164.126 (talk) 03:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please, just make whatever change you feel is necessary. If you don't want to do so without consensus, at least propose a specific change here. Powers ^T 15:22, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Changing room. 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/20130927015609/http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/projects_redevelopment/universal-change-room.aspx to http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/projects_redevelopment/universal-change-room.aspx

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 12:14, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Changing room. 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/20130313055437/http://www.travelgayasia.com/blog/gym-locker-theft-in-bangkok/ to http://www.travelgayasia.com/blog/gym-locker-theft-in-bangkok/

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 20:22, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unisex changing rooms?[edit]

A paragraph about unisex changing rooms (not green rooms) could be included. As I'm not too familiar with the concept of changing rooms, I'm writing this on the talk page so others who've done more research can judge better. There's a negative article about unisex changing rooms in The Sunday Times today [1]. wumbolo ^^^ 09:21, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]