Talk:Water meter

---

removed

Removed subjective descriptions from links. This is not a place to advertise. All statements should be factual only.Utilitysupplies 18:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted external link to Hexagram since they don't actually make meters. This article is on "water meters". not AMR. Utilitysupplies 02:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed most links as SPAMs. 68.39.174.238 06:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

AMI category

I suggest that the added section on AMI is mostly beyond the scope of "water meters" in general and belongs in the separate articles on Automatic meter reading or Advanced Metering Infrastructure and be linked from here in the "see also" section. I suggest that a more brief mention of the meter/Encoder functions fits here, but the details of AMR or AMI and networks should be held to the more detailed articles linked above. Utilitysupplies (talk) 15:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Cubic Meter->Cubic Metre

Hello. Just thought I should explain why I changed cubic meter to cubic metre. Not trying to step on people's toes here, and I realize that articles do tend to follow the original style used in articles. It wasn't even to match the spelling used in the Cubic metre article (though that was a happy side-benefit). I just thought it would be preferable to switch to a far less ambiguous convention here. (ie. an article that addresses 'metres' and 'meters' as distinct words with distinct meanings seemed more understandable than treating 'meters' and 'meters' as having distinct meanings) 139.57.100.104 (talk) 23:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I have seen many water meters and none of them were cubes, so I don't think there is much danger of confusion due to ambiguity. Per WP:ENGVAR I have changed back to "cubic meters" which was used in the initial version of the article. The practice is to leave articles in whichever version of English they started out, unless there is some strong tie to British or North American English (as in articles about Shakespeare or the American Civil War). Both versions of English are fine and appropriate. The spelling absolutely should not flip back and forth within an article (check/cheque, color/colour). Edison (talk) 00:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Um... just to check, you did read what I said, right? About realizing that articles normally follow the original style used (in this case, normally favouring an american spelling)? However, the issue of ambiguity still exists. Granted, a well-reasoned person can tell the difference between a meter that has a cubic shape and a 'cubic meter', but it still doesn't seem to be the most unambiguous.

You won't see me trying to change all 'checks' to 'cheques', unless an article makes use of both the verb 'check' and the noun 'check'(in the financial sense) within the same sentence. (particularly if the latter is a link to the 'cheque' article) The MoS was designed to reduce bickering, not clarity. 139.57.100.104 (talk) 02:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Added m³ and ft.³ designations which should clear up any ambiguity. Utilitysupplies (talk) 19:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Article move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was consensus not to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 09:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

---

Water meter → Flow meter — A more accurate page title. —harej (talk) 03:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

This article clearly explains a meter connected on a piping system for flowing substances. Also, as a flow meter can be used for any substance (eg including oil, chemicals, ...) I suggest that the -water- part is left out and article is rewritten.

I disagree, water meters deserve their own articles, althought the flow measurement article could get a face lift based on this one.Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 02:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose this article is clearly for water meters, not for flow meters. If you want to write a more generic article, then write another article. The WP:COMMONNAME for the devices described in the article is water meter, and is not likely to be confused with a flood level gauge, a tidal float, or other sorts of meters of water. Further, flow meters also exist that measure in CFMs, and I hardly think expanding this article so much to cover HVAC meters is appropriate when another article could be written, instead of diluting this topic to the extreme. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 04:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree with Headbomb that if you want a more general article use flow measurement, but there is no need to change its name either. --Bejnar (talk) 06:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - If you put water meter into "flow meter" then you should also put gas meters, oil meters, chemical meters, and anything else that measures flow of a liquid or gas. Meters for different liquids are extremely different types of products and mixing them would only confuse readers and make the flow meter article too general and non-concise. Flow meter also currently redirects to Flow measurement, and is more about the general theory or science of flow measurement than information about water meters. Almost every home and business has a water meter, and water is the most measured liquid of any, so it is well deserving of its own article. Having originally started this article and written and edited a large portion of it, I highly recommend keeping it as is. Utilitysupplies (talk) 16:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Same reasons as above --SteamedTreacle (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

water flow

question ? when a meter rocks back and forth does meter read in both direction or only one direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.19.231.250 (talk) 01:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)