Talk:Shoe-fitting fluoroscope

Removal of copright material.

I have reverted the article to a previous version because a large chunk of another copyright web page had been added. Also, by copying and pasting a page that included layout formatting, the resulting addition caused some text to overflow the right hand side of the window.

The article needs links to other pages rather than copies of them. (Minician 17:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC))

Cleared up a lot of confusion

Especially part that compared whole body exposure and foot exposure. At that dose (1 Gy/min) you would be a toast in under 5 minutes. Fireice (talk) 01:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Children only?

These things were gone before I was born, I think, so I have no first-hand knowledge. The article suggests that the machines were only used for fitting children's shoes. Is that right? Uranographer (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

No it isn't right. I clearly remember the machines being used by adults. I also remember that the machine was taken out of use suddenly and then removed from a local shoe shop in the 60's in Loughton, Essex, UK, and the staff never knew why. Apart from images of surviving machines, you can see a machine in a department store in the film "Billion Dollar Brain" starring Michael Caine. Near the beginning, he takes a flask into Whiteleys store in London and uses the machine to look at what is inside. 82.29.215.181 (talk) 23:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I worked in Whiteleys after school in 1969-71, the X-ray machine was still there when I started, not sure if it was gone by the time I left. Its use in Billion Dollar Brain is important because (a) as far as I know it's the only appearance of these machines in media that people are actually likely to see, (b) it proves that thety were still in use in Europe that late, and (c) it actually shows what the screen etc. looked like, although it isn't a foot that's x-rayed. Marcus Rowland (talk) 12:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Interesting! I've made mention of this in the main article. Norman21 (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I had already included it in the regulatory timeline under 1967; maybe it doesn't belong there. It seems to meet the WP:IPC criteria.--Yannick (talk) 18:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I hadn't noticed that. I think the "new" location is better, but should the header be "In Popular Culture", as you have indicated? Norman21 (talk) 07:28, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I was born in Stockport, England, UK, in April, 1947, and as a child in the early to late 1950s, I remember my feet being placed in these Pedoscopes at regular intervals as my feet grew larger and I needed new shoes. Exposure to the radiation that produced an image of the foot inside the shoe on what I remember as being a green screen, was only for about ten seconds, but this may have been enough to cause long term health problems. Now in my 72nd year, I am having considerable trouble with my feet, particularly my left foot and I wonder if there is any connection to my exposure to this radiation in the 1950s. David Rayner.

I don't have a strong preference. "In Popular Culture" is the most common section heading in other articles, but not always and not required. The WP:IPC guideline suggests spinoff article titles of "X in popular culture", "Cultural references to X", "Cultural depictions of X", or "X in fiction". I picked "Fictional depiction" because the Billion Dollar Brain is no longer all that popular, and I doubt we're going to find any fiction books, songs, or statues that would justify the broader terms. I just didn't want to leave a "Miscellany" heading, because experience says that's just asking for cruft.--Yannick (talk) 15:09, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shoe-fitting fluoroscope. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://staff.tamhigh.org/lapp/xray.pdf

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:33, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Template

This article had a template on it (since July 2009!), stating that "This article is written about the US-based Adrian fluoroscope, it should be edited to cover a broader number of manufacturer". It is debateable if that was true even then; it certainly isn't applicable now, so I have deleted it. I trust everyone is OK with that, Swanny18 (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Radioactive source? Decommissioning?

What was the radioactive source in these devices? And what was done with them at the end of their working lives? Seems like decommissioning would be worth a mention if reliably source information can be found. --Danimations (talk) 04:21, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Results of tools An equipment established

From The National Museum of Health for Olympics 99.19.86.216 (talk) 12:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)