Talk:Lyocell/Archive 1

Archive 1

lyocell or Lyocell?

The word "lyocell" appears with the "L" in upper case (mid-sentence) sometimes and lower case sometimes. Is "Lyocell" a trade name? Should it be capitalized? Cheolsoo (talk) 20:13, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

VfD

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Tencel was listed on VfD. After some research the generic name was found, and Tencel was redirected here. Here is the archived delete debate: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcb21 (talk • contribs) 10:14, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

• This one is also Wiktionary-bound. Denelson83 08:44, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: dicdef - Texture 14:16, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: As I said above, I think we should allow dicdefs to be speedy-deletion candidates. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:50, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)
  • And this article is an example of why they shouldn't be. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 21:41, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Keep: useful
• Delete. Quinwound 02:43, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, unless some information is added concerning the fabric's uses, properties, preperation, etc. Then it would be useful. The subject has potential, but this hasn't yet been exploited. Perhaps this should be made into a stub? Sietse 10:07, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Redirect: Geesh. A few seconds Google work showed that this is a brand name for lyocell, which is a very important fabric and trivially an encyclopedic topic. I redirected Tencel to lyocell and wrote a small stub, that can obviously be dramatically expanded. I really wish people mindlessly writing "Delete!" on topics they nothing about, and moreover don't even attempt to find anything about would STOP IT. The time would be much better spent fixing articles. Oh, and keep by the way. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 15:25, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Keep: This is a fine example of people mistaking a stub for a dictionary definition, apparently through a failure to do even basic research. Jamesday 00:39, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Uhh...

I'm no expert at this, but shouldn't it be in English? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elkasamsim (talk • contribs) 05:39, 28 Mar 2007 (UTC)

Modal / Lyocell / Viscose / Triacetate etc.

I'm wondering if eventually these articles oughtn't be combined into one called 'cellulose-spun fabrics' or something. The main difference between lyocell and modal seems to be that they're made by different companies and lyocell's sold in the US and UK whereas modal's sold in continental Europe and its manufacturers specify the type of cellulose they use. Google turned up a few pages of interest for anyone interested in organising/adding: [1][2][3] [4] That second link indicates a merger between the two companies. I've linked to each article from each, which is just as good as merging till some more research is done—they might turn out to be very different, or used for different purposes, or something. Njál 13:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Added an extra link, number 2, to Njál's comment, which is an update to a moved page. I've left his in at link three just in case I'm wrong and anyone wants to check. Agree that these fabrics are interesting to readers, either as vegan leather substitutes or environmentally friendly cotton alternatives Veganline (talk) 12:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Plus lyocell is recognised as a different class of fibre to rayon[5] as it is not made using the viscose process, undergoing no significant chemical change and sharing more physical properties with cotton than it does rayon.[6] Paulwhaley (talk) 15:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)