Talk:Kelly Kettle

Some talk

Article merged: See old talk-page talk:Thermette
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fremte (talk • contribs) 02:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

To anonymous user 212.17.50.212, who modified my original content, I have reverted to a previous version and then added back in some of the additional information you added, for two major reasons:

• The original introduction read "The storm kettle, also known as the volcano kettle...". You changed this to "The volcano kettle, also known as the kelly kettle...". Why remove the reference to "storm kettle", when this is one of the names by which the device is known? Your edit made the article inconsistent in its terminology, as it refers to it by "storm kettle" later in the article, and indeed the article is titled "Storm kettle". I have now modified the first sentence to include all three names.

• I said that the Kelly kettle is made of aluminium, whereas the Eydon kettle is made of stainless steel. You changed this to say that both were made of aluminium. I own an Eydon kettle (the "Popular" version) and insist that it is made of stainless steel. The Eydon web site has been updated recently and doesn't now appear to say what Eydon kettles are made of, but the older version said that they were made of "spun stainless steel".

 Leon Robbins 22:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge

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.

The result was merge into Storm kettle. -- 2009-03-03

---

The kettles described in this article and Thermette are simply manufactured from different materials (copper versus aluminum) and have a slight different shape (cylinder versus cone). The only reason not to merge would be brand name support. The alternative is that each manufacturer has a different page. We'll let this sit for a little while, but then, unless there is some reason not to, a merge should occur. Fremte (talk) 17:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge complete after a month and no discussion. Fremte (talk) 02:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

There is some additional minor editting to do, and it would be nice to have an additional photo of a copper kettle/ thermette. Fremte (talk) 02:20, 3 March 2008 (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.

recent edit by Sharon Cawley

Deadlink. The policy is to tag deadlinks not delete them. This allows them to be repaired later. See .
Insertion of trademark info. There are multiple manufacturers of these kettles and tagging each of the various names with copyright info is not the solution. We might consider a generic label of "storm kettle" and a new section of modified section on "manufacturers". -Fremte (talk) 20:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Name of article

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.

The result of the rename discussion was merge into Samovar. -- 2009-06-06

---

The following was posted to my talk page, and I am placing it here so as to involve the community with this. --Fremte (talk) 15:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Kelly Kettle - redirecting to smaller Brand of 'storm kettle'

I am not particularly familiar with using Wikipedia so apologies if this message comes across in the wrong format etc.

I write to you regarding my company and brand Kelly Kettle® (Also Known as the Volcano Kettle®). Both of the aforementioned brands are our registered Trademarks in the E.U., Canada & the U.S. We have invested considerable funds over recent years to vigourously protect our IP rights as copies of our kettles occasionally appear on the market and the producers of these copies invariably try and sell under our Trademarks on E-Bay, Amazon, etc.
Our company has been trading for four generations and our products continue to grow in popularity every year. We ship to vitually every country in the world and are proud of our long established brand.
The purpose of this correspondence is to ascertain as to why it is that a Wikipedia search for our Global Brand Kelly Kettle causes the visitor to land on a page titled 'Storm Kettle'.

The 'Storm Kettle' is a UK based brand which is much smaller than our Brand.
The 'Storm Kettle' is a direct copy of our product and the brand is only about 10yrs old. This fact is undisputable as, the current director of the Eydon Kettle Company who provide the 'Storm Kettle', used to be a Director of the Kelly Kettle Company until he was removed from the company approximately 10yrs ago. It was then that a competing business/brand i.e. the 'Storm Kettle' was born.....i.e. the 'Storm Kettle' brand arrived decades after the Kelly Kettle.
The 'Storm Kettle' is a Registered Trademark in the UK only. The Brand is not widely known outside of the UK and it is not registered in any other jurisdiction which confirms my assertion that they trade very little outside of the UK.

How 'Storm Kettle' came to be used as a Generic Name I do not know. I removed the redirect on 'Kelly Kettle' a few days ago but it is back again. I find it intensely frustrating (to put it mildly!) that our long established and well protected, global brand, is treated as a afterthought to a much much smaller and UK based Brand. If anything, the Article page should be titled Kelly Kettle with any searches for 'Storm Kettle' redirecting to the more Generic 'Kelly Kettle' article.

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on this matter. I know that Wikipedia is an extremely popular and important source of information for Millions of users every day. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to my company, that our Brand is given the recognition that it duly deserves.

I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Thanking you in advance. Knockmoregaa (talk) 00:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I have consulted with the following link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NCON

• If the name of an inanimate or non-human entity is disputed by two

jurisdictions and one or more English-language equivalents exists, use the most common English-language name.

• Identification of common names using external references.

A number of methods can be used to identify which of a pair (or more) conflicting names is the most prevalent in English.

• The Google test. Using Google's advanced search option, search for each conflicting name and confine the results to pages written in English; also exclude the word "Wikipedia" (as we want to see what other people are using, not our own usage). Note which is the most commonly used term

1. Google Test - 'Storm kettle' dries up about Page 15 (using 20 listings per page) (approx 281-300 results) and many of the entries on the previous pages refer to Kelly Kettle / Storm Kettles in the same entries with more starting to make referenece to a different product altogether - the 'Storm'Electric Kettle. 'Kelly Kettle' search goes to Page 34 (again 20 listings per page) before the search starts to get muddled with other items. (approx 661-680 results)
   
2. Have checked with https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordTool to compare the numbers of 'Google' Searches for the different *Trademarks. results are as follows:
   1. 'Kelly Kettle' = averaged 9,900pm over past year (118,800 pa)
   2. 'Volcano Kettle' = averaged 1,900pm over past year (22,800 pa)
   3. 'Storm Kettle' = averaged 2,900pm over past year (34,800 pa)
   4. Together, our 'Kelly' & 'Volcano' Brands had 141,600 searches as opposed to 34,800 searches for the 'Storm' brand (4 times as many)
   5. www.kellykettle.com enjoys a Google Page Rank of 8/10 whereas www.eydonkettle.com (stormkettle website) is only ranked as 3/10.

PageRank is a numeric value that represents how important a page is on the web. The higher the ranking, the more important that Google perceives the page.

The wording on the existing article is written in a Neutral Manner to which I am agreeable. However, based on the overwhelming evidence provided above, coupled with a mountain of empirical evidence, I am adamant that the the article in wikipedia and current re-direct is a gross injustice to the Kelly Kettle and lends unacceptable Brand support to a small trademark which can lay no claim whatsoever to been the 'Generic name' for our type of kettles.
I respectfully suggest that the article should be changed back to its original name Kelly Kettle with any searches for 'Storm Kettle' redirecting to the 'Kelly Kettle' article page. The existing wording on the page is neutral so a couple of minor edits would be all that is required to complete the correction.
I look forward to hearing back from you and to your assistance in this matter.

Kind regards,
--Knockmoregaa (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I see no evidence that "Kelly kettle" has been in general use for more than ten years; the oldest mention of either in Google Books is from The Cybergypsies, a book on popular culture which uses "storm kettle" as though it were already well known. Another quote is "The storm kettle (also known as the Kelly kettle) is in regular use" from a book called The Woodland Year, from 2007. This is probably current usage; I see no case to adopt a trademark - especially since it could be seen as advertising (and might, in the long run, weaken the trademark, as with aspirin). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Proper article name

I'd like to suggest that the proper article name should be "Benghasi Boiler"; this would infringes on and use none of the trademarks, is somewhat historically accurate, and all of them (Thermette, Storm Kettle, Kelly Kettle, ...) can be redirected to that name. Otherwise, we're going to have a parade of makers wanting it retitled. Which of the companies has the best internet search presence is something for them to worry about; we shouldn't be enlisted into one camp or the other or yet another (we seem to have already be guilty of that in the merge, but a move to Benghasi Boiler would redeem that failing.) The assertion that the difference between the cone shaped chimney and the straight chimney is minor may be true, but it appears to be patentable. We don't need to go into the "better or not" of that; notice and describe the differences (without OR), and let them advertise elsewhere. htom (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't find much for references in a ggle search with Benghasi with an "s", more with a "z" as in Benghazi Boiler. In terms of commercial names, it may be that "Thermette" has precidence, and I agree that a non-trademarked name is the right idea. This page has it invented in 1929 in New Zealand. There is talk of patent there, but haven't found that yet. So you may on to the solution to this article's name. Let's see what other discussion and info comes. --Fremte (talk) 01:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

• Move request to Benghazi boiler. Please discuss! --Fremte (talk) 01:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• If "storm kettle" was a tradename, has it become genericized? And, it is a clearer name. The kit item may have been nicknamed "Benghazi boiler" during WWII, but has the name stuck? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• Support move to "Kelly kettle". 'Kelly' is the term that I have come across in general usage by the types of camping extremists who make the effort to carry one and show it off at every opportunity! (regardless of who the original manufacturer might be). —Sladen (talk) 12:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• Support Benghazi boiler (spelling in my posts is always woeful) as there are no copyright or trademark claims to that name; the others can be redirected. I want to say I've heard, long ago, "chimney kettle", but I suspect some corner of my mind is making that up. htom (talk) 13:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• But does anyone still call it a "Benghazi boiler"? Best use the name most widely used nowadays, whether it is a tradename or not? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
  

I'm very glad we have a discussion about this. Thanks and keep it going! I had thought "storm kettle" was generic, which is how it got there from being "kelly kettle" in the past. The "kelly kettle" page was deleted because there was some sort of dispute, that I don't know all the details of, something about brandname ownership, which it seems, is right back where we are. It is the brandname "storm kettle" that is bothering someone with "kelly kettle" connections. I'd like to see this settled, and picked up on Benghazi Boiler b/c that seemed to avoid all the past troubles. Let's see where this discussion goes. Thanks people! --Fremte (talk) 19:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• For what it is worth, the Google Books results for Benghazi boiler show eight results (four the same short story), all about WWII, and most of them suggesting something improvised. Is there any non-historic use? If we move there, this article will have to be rewritten:

  "A Benghazi boiler was an improvised warming device during the New Zealand campaign in North Africa in World War II, near Benghazi. Various commercial products of much the same design are now available..." Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• This seems like a flying disc situation: the generic, lesser-known term should be used since the article is about a generic class of products, not just the most well-known brand. Now we just have to find a term for this generic class of products that is used in current parlance. Not convinced "benghazi boiler" is it. -kotra (talk) 22:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• If we end up doing this, is "hollow kettle" any good? eg.

  "A hollow kettle is a device for boiling water over an open fire that differs from the design of a standard kettle. A hollow kettle is taller with the heat and flames funnelled up a central flue. The water to be boiled surrounds this flu on all sides; the increased surface contact area leads to faster boiling and the chimney effect enables operation in windy or wet weather. During World War II such an improvised design was called a Benghazi boiler. Modern versions are variously marketed under the names kelly kettle, storm kettle, thermette and volcano kettle, some of which have become common generic names for the style of design.

  —Sladen (talk) 23:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Is "hollow kettle" in current parlance? A cursory glance of Google's 344 results seem to turn up nothing relating to this type of kettle (anyway, all kettles are hollow, so it wouldn't be a very descriptive term). -kotra (talk) 23:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Possibly a slightly different search[1] is better suited (find uses of the proposed generic term and one of the tradenames). The first result on Google images is where I found the description of "hollow". The key is not to focus on this particular term (hollow), but to try and find a better combination of words. Yes, all kettles are likely to be hollow, but perhaps some stick out as being more hollow than others. The question to try and answer is "How would you describe *this object* in two words without using any of the terms above". ("Flying disc" is the answer to "How would you describe this object without using the word written on it"; it's unlikely you'd write "flying disc" much in practice and "flying disc" might well mean other things too, but for a generic name-of-Frisbee, it's good enough).

Personally if I was asked, I'd probably come out with something like "it's a toroidal kettle"—however, not everyone is likely to understand that description. —Sladen (talk) 00:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but I'm not sure if it's up to us to invent a name for this. "Flying disc" works because it's already a commonly used generic term. The 6-7 results from your search all use "hollow kettle" as part of a description, not as an actual name for the type of kettle, and so few results wouldn't represent a significant usage of the term anyway. If it turns out there isn't an existing generic term for this, I suggest we use whatever is the most common term (which seems to be "Kelly kettle"), as we've done with Velcro, or possibly conclude that the topic may not be independently notable (and so probably merge it into an article that is, like the suggested "Camping kettle"). -kotra (talk) 01:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Google search results

For straight result comparisons to show which term is most popular. I've made no attempt to analyze the results to determine which terms are actually used to mean the subject of this article.

• Storm kettle: 5,800
• Kelly kettle: 21,100
• Benghazi boiler: 651
• Benghasi boiler: 125
• Chimney kettle: 150
• Thermette: 2840
• Volcano kettle: 2440

Simply "Kelly" might be another possible term, but I couldn't figure a way to filter the results so they would be meaningful. -kotra (talk) 21:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Some slightly better filtered results; These ones exclude every other name from each result in addition to excluding Wikipedia. (This gets rid of pages that say "can also be known as 'kettle kettle', 'storm kettle' or 'valcano kettle'":

[2]:	kelly kettle	19,900
[3]:	storm kettle	4,480
[4]	thermette	2,380
[5]:	volcano kettle	988
[6]	benghazi boiler	251
[7]	chimney kettle	138 (mostly unrelated sentences)
[8]	benghasi boiler	4

—Sladen (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that is better. -kotra (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Propose renaming article 'Camping Kettles'

with all searches for the various items redirecting there.
The Kelly/Volcano Kettle has been widely used in the North West of Ireland since the 1890's. The earliest mention I can find in common Print was in "Fishing & Thinking" by A.A. Luce, First Published 1959 (chapter IX 'A day on Lough Conn' refers). Given that there are similar items from various parts of the worlds (some more popular or commonly known than others) it seems apparent that there can be no consensus on Generic Term for these items that will not:
(A) Potentially infringe on IP Rights and potentially weaken a well known brand in the long term by causing a genericized trademark issue (as with asprin or the Hoover Company as correctly pointed out earlier by wiki/User:Pmanderson)
(B) Lend unfair Brand support to one Brand/company over another.
All of the Brands can redirect to a new Camping Kettle page where they can have their own little piece (protecting TM etc. accordingly).--Knockmoregaa (talk) 23:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

It's not ideal, since this article is currently about a certain kind of camping kettle that has an interior space for hot air, not camping kettles in general, but I think it's better than the currently proposed options. The article would need to be expanded/rewritten to include all major types of camping kettles. -kotra (talk) 00:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Given that there is no existing article covering Camping kettle, then yes, doing a reverse-takeover might be the solution... I'd be happy with this as a suggestion. —Sladen (talk) 06:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

don't support "camping kettle". The term is not used at all to describe these devices. If a merely descriptive name is the ultimate solution, then at least "chimney kettle" provides some description, though it is also an invented name. Not sure that there are other types of camping kit that fit within the more general idea of "camping kettle" either. The Benghazi Boiler is the highest listed of non-trade marked items. So it is a competitor too. This is a puzzle about what the best solution is! I think we're making progress. --Fremte (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

What I'm suggesting is this article be expanded to all types of camping kettles, not just the "chimney kettle" variety. Take a look at this to see other types of kettles used for camping; the Kelly Kettle can be found on the third page (at least, for me). -kotra (talk) 20:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Suggested merge to Samovar, see this talk

These so called camping kettles appear to be just stove top kitchen kettles retitled camping for the sake of selling them. Does not look like there really is a legitimate item actually called camping kettle except with this sales purpose. These storm kettle water boilers look like they are sleeker versions of Samovar. It'd make better sense to have these items as a subtype of Samovar which also have a central chimney where fire heats water. The only differences are a water tap on the side of the water chimney in place of a pour spout near or on top, the fanciness of the construction and maybe Russian tea snobbery & various little Czarist accessories. So how about redirect to a sub-heading of Samovar. These storm kettles are actually "camping samovars"!!'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.132.50 (talk) 03:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

On this basis, I've added {{mergeto|Samovar}} and {{mergefrom|Storm kettle}}. —Sladen (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I added a section at Samovar about this, link in this section's title and here. --Fremte (talk) 00:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Let's see what other's think of this new idea! --Fremte (talk) 00:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

This is what I wrote on the talk:Samovar page:

"I'm going to support this. The Storm kettle article is being editted a bit and once it is a stable version, the move should occur in my opinion. Probably with a heading of Camping versions or similar. " --Fremte (talk) 21:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea. It's not a perfect match, but the two topics are similar enough. Support merge to Samovar. -kotra (talk) 03:26, 1 June 2009 (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.

• strong oppose. absolutely against the structure of wikipedia: different subjects are covered in different articles. Samovar and storm kettle, while similar in function, are quite different objects. - Altenmann >t 00:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

  My response to this comment at Talk:Samovar#Merge from Storm kettle suggestion (don't want to have the same discussion in two places). -kotra (talk) 01:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

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.

The result of the rename discussion was merge into Samovar. -- 2009-06-06

---

Rewrite, combining sections

I have combined the description of the series of kettles which appear very similar: Kelly, Volcano, Storm, Ghillie. There is not jsutification other than advertising that I can think of which would suggest seperate sections for each company which makes essentially the same device. We should not accept details that apepar to just promote one company. --Fremte (talk) 01:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed from WP:RM

 Administrator note Since there doesn't seem to be any consensus above on a name change, and since it seems that the discussion has leaned more towards a merge, I've removed the {{move}} tag above. If anyone wants to refile the move request if the merge discussion doesn't work out, please go ahead.--Aervanath (talk) 14:35, 31 May 2009 (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.

Article title

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 moved to Kelly Kettle as the lesser of two evils. Aervanath (talk) 18:27, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

---

Storm kettle → Kelly Kettle — Even though it is brand name, but search for good generic name failed so far. Timurite (talk) 19:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

• Support. Even though it is brand name, but search for good generic name failed so far. When found, may be moved again. Please see #Name of article for arguments. Timurite (talk) 19:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Please see some more discussion in Talk:Samovar#Merge_from_Storm_kettle_suggestion. Timurite (talk) 18:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support. This conflicts the previous resolution, but—based on the previous extensive discussion above—would be preferable to leaving it at the present Storm kettle. This is based on the conclusion (see above) that Kelly kettle is in considerably wider general usage (despite also being a tradename). —Sladen (talk) 19:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Storm kettle is the more common name and it not a brand name. That would be like having Cola renamed "Pepsi" or "Coca-Cola". TJ Spyke 20:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
  • More common? Did you read the usage statistics cited above? And yes it is a brand name: "STORM" is a registered trademark for this industry. - Altenmann >t 05:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Could you explain your reasoning a little more (it appears to 100% contradict what was established previously). A better analogy is of the cola article being named "Pepsi", despite "Coke" having greater common usage (and considerably more when both generic (Cola) and specific (Coca-Cola) uses are combined)—while the previous consensus was a merge to "soft drink". —Sladen (talk) 07:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
    • It looks like we don't understand each other. I am referring to usage stats in sect. #Google search results above. And I see no merge into "soft drink": pepsi and cola are separate pages. The analogy with "coke" does not work: we don't have such a common name in our case of these kettles. - Altenmann >t 17:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
      • #Google search results shows Kelly kettle > Storm kettle (by 4–5 times). How can that be that "Storm kettle is the more common name", when it has 1⁄5th of the usage? —Sladen (talk) 22:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
• In the middle - temporary keep as Storm kettle We've been through this all now a few times. cf, http://www.eydonkettle.com/stormkettle.html . It is close enough to a brand name that the problem of the article's name arose. In my view neither Kelly kettle nor Storm kettle are the correct name for the article, and we actually don't have a good one yet. In my view we leave it for now. --Fremte (talk) 22:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Of course it may sit under current title for some time, there is no rush. - Altenmann >t 05:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC) BTW, your link is quite evasive as to the original name, so I don't quite understand what kind of proof we are supposed to see there. I see that they say they started in 1970s, as opposed to Kelly, who claim 100 years (startincg from old trademark "volcano kettle" ). - Altenmann >t 05:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support - 100 years of marketing priority is a serious argument. - Altenmann >t 05:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
• Support per Sladen. Neither name is ideal, and we will need to change it to something better. But at this point, we are not finding a consensus for anything better, and Kelly Kettle is preferable to Storm kettle, so the move is a gain. Let's not let this move preempt consensus-building for a better solution, though. -kotra (talk) 19:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Trading one trade-marked name for another is not a good plan. Since "Benghazi boiler" didn't get much respect, how about "Toroidal Tea Kettle" ? htom (talk) 03:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

  Nobody uses "Toroidal Tea Kettle". We can't just invent a term, unfortunately. Also, this move to Kelly Kettle would only be a temporary one until we find a better term. -kotra (talk) 03:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible to have a "double-barrelled" name. I raise this for completeness of discussion. We've been through at least 2 namnig discussions. The possibility would be something like "Kelly Kettle or Storm Kettle", with the "or" being whatever is appropriate, e.g., even a "/". Ultimately I will support the consensus on this, But want an actual conclusion this time. Thanks. --Fremte (talk) 16:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

We can have a many-input or function: redirects from all of those to Toroidal Tea Kettle. Putting them into the article name is going to bring claims of favoritism, both from those excluded and those whose name isn't first in the list. htom (talk) 17:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Again, we can't just title an article with a term we've made up ourselves. Wikipedia:Naming conventions is clear: the name should be easily recognizable. Besides, the purpose is not to make tea, it's to boil water that can be used for tea, coffee, cocoa, etc. Please do not move it until we achieve at least a rough consensus. -kotra (talk) 17:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we can do an "or" name, it would be confusing and non-standard. It might be admissible to use "and", though, as per the policy: Kelly Kettle and Storm Kettle. However, that would restrict the article to those two brands only. Including all brands mentioned in the current article would make for a ridiculous name. So I don't think any of these "double-barreled" names are ideal, and I'd prefer Kelly Kettle, since it appears to be the most genericized name. -kotra (talk) 17:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

It appears we have 4 in favour of Kelly kettle, 2 opposing and 1 not saying either way (me). I guess we need to let this stay an open discussion a wee while longer. This appears to be "the kettle only known by brandnames"! Yup, we wll need redirects, and maybe an openning sentence with some listing or statement about this. --Fremte (talk) 18:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea. If this discussion lasts until then, it will be closed by an admin in about 6 days. -kotra (talk) 19:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

(humor) Playing with the Internet Anagram Machine, I found (from "storm kelly boiler kettle") several things, among them "My Troll Kettle boil reeks." htom (talk) 20:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

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.

Additional links

• Kettle/Chimney/Volcano Stoves part way down the page.
• Ned kettle --Fremte (talk) 19:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Created redirects: Kelly stove, Chimney stove, Volcano stove, Ned Kettle. -kotra (talk) 20:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Rocket stove mention is disconnected

Mention of the Rocket stove seems completely unrelated to the rest of the article. A rocket stove does not use a water jacket

• Earlier examples of water heaters using a water jacket include heavier samovar tea urns from Eastern, Central, and Southeastern Europe, as well as the Middle East. The rocket stove, used to heat a cooking pot was created in the 1980s and are available as light-weight portable units.

And a rocket stove is not based in any way on the kelly-kettle

• A modified version of the idea was created by the Eydon Kettle Company in the early 1970s and sold as the 'Storm Kettle'.[6] Fixed (and portable) rocket stoves used for cooking were developed in 1980s;[7] with variants for heating water[8] and for space heating.[9]

Rocket stoves are great, but replace rocket stoves with Franklin stoves or propane stoves and you'll see how out of place those sentences are.

It either needs to be deleted or reworded to not imply a rocket-stove is water-jacket/derivative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.149.61 (talk) 05:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

retitle article Chimney kettle

this forum posting claims volcano is the generic term for this type of kettle, and that it was trademarked in 2007 by the company that makes the Kelly Kettle. Another posted proposed 'for encyclopedic purposes, is "chimney kettle." Rather than relying on brand names or even the metaphorical "volcano" or "storm,"

I think this is a capital idea :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.139.49.13 (talk) 05:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Another purely-descriptive name might be "stack-effect kettle". This (so far) has zero hits on Google, but is possibly better than even the previous generic suggestion of "chimney kettle". —Sladen (talk) 10:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Dubious ownership of the Volcano Kettle trademark

It's understandable to consider the rights of an IP owner who attempts to assert their ownership of a trademarked name. However, it also appears that the legitimacy of the trademarked name in question is dubious due to prior art (Specifically, The Sirram Volcano Quick Boil Kettle, Regd Td Mk, Registered Design No 731794', registered in 1928) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.99.100 (talk) 06:52, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find an original copy of the Design Registration. Has anyone had success in finding it (eg. British Library). —Sladen (talk) 10:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Some observations:

The first true Volcano Kettle was made by George Marris & Sons Ltd of Birmingham, England in the 1920's. These are known as the Sirram Volcano Kettle.

The Marris Co acknowledged that the original concept came from a New Zealander (probably John Ashley Hart who started the Thermette Co in New Zealand in 1929).

The Volcano Kettles were intially made from brass and copper and were marked: 'The Sirram Volcano Quick Boil Kettle, Regd Td Mk, Registered Design No 731794'. The records held by the British Library and British Public Record Office show that this Design Number was issued in 1928. In the 1930's Marris switched to aluminium.

The claim by Kelly Kettles on their website that the original Volcano Kettle was made in a little farm on the shores of Lough Conn, County Mayo in the 1890's is interesting but with no evidence. Yes they were in wide use by fishermen in Ireland from the 1930's but these were most likely the Sirram Volcano Kettle which was sent to Ireland in large numbers. If Kellys have been made for so long why are there no old ones? Has anyone ever seen one? Why is one not shown on the Kelly website? Surely if they were so popular and mnade in such numbers there should be a plethora of old examples. The image on the Kelly website "Pictured above, the late Jim Kelly (grandfather of Patrick and Seamus, seated center) enjoys lunch on Lough Conn with a party of Welsh angler in 1964", clearly shows a Sirram Volcano Kettle. Even the unique Sirram inner conical flask can be clearly seen. The current Kelly Kettle that is so vigorously protected by Kellys is, apart from size, 99% identical to the 1930's aluminium Sirram.

The US Trade Mark for 'Volcano Kettle' was not applied for by Kellys until 14th April 2007. Even if Kellys were able to argue that they possess a Trademark, they would probably lose any legal battle due to the fact that the term 'Volcano Kettle' has been in wide public use since 1928 as a general term for this type of kettle. This is known in legal parlance as 'genericide' - the process by which trademark rights are diminished or lost as a result of common use. The fact that this term has been in documented common use and registered as a trade name in 1928 blows the Kelly arguement out of the water.

The title in Wikipedia should be 'Volcano Kettle'. Pilgrimhat (talk) 11:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Request to revisit page name

I note that there has been significant discussion regarding the name of this article. It is currently listed as Kelly Kettle. When searching for 'Ghillie Kettle', one of the top listings shows 'Kelly Kettle' within the results via Wikipedia. This offers a huge advantage to Kelly Kettles and a significant disadvantage to the other manufactures.

The Ghillie Kettle history page provides proof that the kettles were originally called ‘Sirram Volcano Kettles’. A more generic name is “chimney kettle” (details here: https://www.ghillie-kettle.co.uk/history).

I note in a previous discussion, Kelley states they have the highest rankings, etc. If we are arguing what the page should be called based on ‘clout’ the Ghillie Kettle company has recently been aired on the Discovery Channel (UK and overseas) and ITV’s ‘How it’s Made’. However, it is my (admittedly limited) understanding that is not how this site should work.

It seems wholly unfair that the kettles are all labelled under the brand of Kelly Kettle. Could this please be reviewed?

Kez2231camping (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Lies, damned lies.

This article talks of the kettle being invented in england in the late 1920’s despite opening with the fact that the Kelly Kettle was invented in Ireland in the early 1900’s. 2A01:B340:63:1400:41B:2927:FD37:A657 (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2023 (UTC)