Talk:Childproofing

This article was nominated for deletion on April 9, 2011. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Wrong Title

The title of Childproof suggests that something can never be opened by a child. Nothing is childproof. A better title would be Child Reistant. Rlsheehan (talk) 19:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

This existing article and new article ‎Child-resistant packaging seem to be about the same thing. Whilst the above contributor is right that "childproof" is probably technically incorrect it is the commonly used name (in my experience at least) so I suggest merging into this article and creating redirects as needed. Ros0709 (talk) 22:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Child-resistant packaging is well defined by regulations with existing standards and protocols. By contrast, the general article about "childproofing" a home is fuzzy and not defined well. The two should reference each other but they are separate subjects: no merger.Rlsheehan (talk) 01:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit of a pop-culture article. Instead of a merge, it could use some expansion on its history. Why'd we start worrying about lead-based paint on toys? Chokable toys?68.75.224.214 (talk) 08:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do over

It looks like the AFD is going to result in a keep, and in good faith I have made substantial changes in the article, primarily in the area of actually giving it some structure, a cite or two, and wikification. All those who also voted to keep, please feel free to add a little more to our stone soup. Dennis Brown (talk) 17:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lighters

Disposable lighters sold in the US are required to be child resistant, requiring either a two-step process or a certain amount of finger strength to light. News clippings:

Montrose Wholesale Candies & Sundries Inc. is recalling about 247,000 disposable cigarette lighters. The lighters do not have child-resistant mechanisms, as required by federal law. Young children could ignite the lighters, presenting fire and burn hazards. [..] This recall does not involve lighters sold in the United States by Bic. In the United States, Bic sells only lighters with a child resistant mechanism.
Although a 1994 law requires lighters be made child resistant, novelty lighters were exempted, for unclear reasons. None of the novelty lighters have child-resistant features, Mr. Barton said. However, he said that many children are able to figure out how to ignite lighters even with the child-proofing. "Children love to play with lighters. They figure it out," he said. Ms. Mieth cited a national study in which 85 percent of children ages 3 to 5 were unable to light a child-resistant lighter. That means 15 percent of them could figure it out, she said. "We are starting to see a national decrease in juvenile fire setting, and we think it's because of the child resistance standard," she said. "But kids' brains do not have the ability to understand how dangerous fire is, and how quickly it can spread."
Safety-savvy firefighters are teaching parents about a child- proof lighter. Backed by experts from the Royal Victoria Infirmary, community firemen across the region are spreading the word about the safety lighters. [..] Their work is in line with a European ban, which will be implemented next year, on all disposable lighters that are not child- resistant.
DISPOSABLE cigarette lighters must be childproof in the future, EU chiefs demanded yesterday. Accidental fires caused by children playing with unsafe lighters kill up to 40 people in the 25-state bloc every year. The European Commission decided to force all such products placed on the market in the EU to be child-resistant. [..] The cheap devices are already in place in the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Apparently a similar requirement is now in place in Europe, and the above listed countries. It's worth a mention in the article. Will Beback talk 21:48, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is worth adding! If you have those refs handy, please do add a section (fire safety, perhaps) and add the citations. Doesn't have to be perfect, others will help, the cites are usually the hardest part. Thanks! Dennis Brown (talk) 21:56, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a couple of lines. It's an important topic, but it seemed the right "weight" in comparison to the rest of the article. We should add something about other Fire safety issues, like matches, if we can find sources. Will Beback talk 10:18, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, I added the photo of the lighter as well. Amazing how much difference from a week ago. Dennis Brown (talk) 10:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Childproofing. 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/20090504213525/http://www.iafcs.org/ to http://www.iafcs.org/

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) 23:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]