Talk:Two-liter bottle

Two images

Mentos with Perrier, classic Coke, Sprite & Diet Coke: From left to right: Reaction of five drops of Mentos with Perrier, classic Coke, Sprite and Diet Coke.

• Mentos and soft drink reaction redirected to Diet Coke and Mentos eruption.

---

That, my summary: I've added the other version. It's only about placing the two pictures inside the section or just outside ( above the section ). Gonna placing here (talk) this fifth section at the 1st place, to make use of the space of the discussion better. Ok?

--PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 18:14, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

So the invented uses section...

Pretty much makes ma' life

The greenhouse/terrarium use sounds like original research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.139.207 (talk) 04:04, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Spelling

I think this article should be named "Two-litre bottle", it's a French unit, so we should use the French spelling. Plus, it hurts my eyes trying to read "liter" and it feels really weird to try to pronounce it, when I see "liter" instead of of the more correct "litre", I almost instinctively say it as "lighter." Stuart Morrow 17:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd question the validity of the article even existing. I've got 1.25 litre, two litre, and three litre bottles in my fridge now, there's 750 ml, 600 ml et al.. nothing special about any of them.

On the other hand, this article primarily refers to the two liter bottle in US culture. US spelling for US terms. Calwatch 11:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The correctness of a current spelling shouldn't have anything to do with what country or language the original word comes from. (And, in fact, the "original" was the Latin litra, or, wait, was it Greek? Mycenaean? Phoenician?.... You get the point: there is no original.) This is particularly true in WP. (See WP:MOS. What counts is which of the contemporary spellings was used in the first substantial version of the article. In this case, it was liter, so that's what we should stick with. --PeterH2 19:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

In the late 1970's the two-liter bottle was a novelty in grocery stores. I know because in 1979 I was a 15 year old kid whose job it was to stack the glass returnables in wooden crates. When did the two-liter bottle first dominate shelves in the USA?

When & why did bottlers transition from the old glued on opaque bottom to the single piece molded bottle? I seem to remember the two part bottles being around into the 90s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.157.168 (talk) 19:48, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The spelling 'liter' is a curiosity of American orthography: most words ending in -re in English are spelt ending -er in American English, part of the spelling reforms which took place in American English but not in English. I would agree that it is not best to argue orthography purely on etymological grounds, however, SI states that spelling should, as far as possible, be litre so that it can be understood internationally. So, it is also a curiosity of the American implementation of the Metric System. Since, though, that this article is about a specific cultural phenomenon, it makes sense to call this thing by its name ie "Two-liter bottle". 60.240.207.146 (talk) 10:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Dimensions

I've been searching the web for half an hour trying to find the diameter of a two liter bottle, with no luck. Then I thought "Wikipedia has an article on every silly thing!" and so I came here, found the article, but it doesn't list the dimenstions of the bottle. I guess I've no choice but to go buy one and measure it. -- 24.209.110.27 (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

30 liter Bottle

Two liters is nothing. I could urinate two liters for you right now. But 30 liters? That's untouchable —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.157.218 (talk) 02:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

That's a bit disterbing..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.62.190.201 (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Litre vs liter

This article seems to consistently use the 'litre' spelling. So why on earth is this article *titled* with the 'liter' spelling, with the 'litre' variant redirecting here?

Consistency.

166.137.242.108 (talk) 06:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Ahh... Because of this edit:

(cur | prev) 16:28, 28 January 2014‎ Simplicity rules (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (5,470 bytes) (-43)‎ . . (Why should this use the american modified spelling? The spelling used by BIPM is used everywhere else across Wikipedia. Title should be changed too.) (undo)

I've restored the original article 'liter' spelling variant.

WP:SPELLING is absolutely clear on this.

166.137.242.108 (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

And there are other spelling reverts needed. Unfortunately User:Simplicity rules's sole contributions to Wikipedia have been disruptive spelling changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.242.108 (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Dimensions

Would it be worth it to include dimensions of these bottles, outside diameter, wall thickness, length, thread dimensions, etc?

Why a liter anyway?

What I was hoping to find here, and came away disappointed, is why the bottle was created using a metric standard when generally every other thing sold for consumer use in the USA (especially going back before massive globalization of commerce) is in non-metric units? Cans of soda pop were (and still are!) sold in fluid ounces. Why not have had a half-gallon bottle? Why this one aberration?

(Excluding, of course, medicines that often have their active ingredients measured in grams or portions thereof - but consumers generally don't pay attention that that, right? Just get their aspirin, anti-histamine, laxative, etc by brand name and modifiers (such as "non-drowsy" or "extra-strength"). 2602:302:D1E3:A1A0:8572:704:C723:F460 (talk) 03:32, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Two-liter bottle. 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/20060905151144/http://v2.cba.ua.edu/about/news/press_releases/news093098.html to http://v2.cba.ua.edu/about/news/press_releases/news093098.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060620015301/http://napcor.com/Master.pdf to http://www.napcor.com/Master.pdf

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) 03:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)