Talk:Westinghouse Time Capsules

"Cupaloy"

I believe the name of the project was actually "(the) Time Capsule" (which was a neologism in 1938), and "Cupaloy" was simply the name of the alloy. This article should probably be at Westinghouse Time Capsules.--Pharos (talk) 05:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You are correct! I renamed the article accordingly plus rewrote the article to reflect "Time Capsule I" (1939) and "Time Capsule II" (1965).--Doug ^talk 12:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Unclear distinction in markers

A part of the article presently reads: "A small stone plaque today marks the position where both these time capsules are buried at a depth of 50 feet, however this marker has been vandalized many times and it is unlikely one will exist in 5000 years. The permanent sentinel granite monument memorial made by Rock of Ages says..." Two problems here. First, the passage contains speculation which should either be attributed and cited to a source, replaced, or removed. Second, it's not clear if the "small stone plaque" and the "permanent sentinel granite monument" are the same thing or different things, and if different, what makes the granite monument less vulnerable to defacement/damage/destruction. Are they located in the same space or at different spots? Robert K S (talk) 12:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out and have removed wording on speculation. I made clearer the wording of the current monument that should be clear it is only one large stone with an inscription on it. Also included picture of previous marker of 1943 which was replaced by this much larger monument. Also included inline external link references for this. --Doug ^talk 23:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

4/5th's the earth's atmosphere

This wording was felt to be most significant to Westinghouse and was put in the Book of Record (a document intended to be around in 5000 years) on page 8. Their wording was:

The spaces left between the objects in the crypt have been filled with an inert gas, nitrogen, the inactive element which makes up four-fifths of our atmosphere.

Also Nitrogen was brought up in Westinghouse's Story of the Time Capsule of cupaloy on page 11 saying the air was, evacuated and filled with humid nitrogen, an inert, preservative gas and on page 17 with, The air was then drawn out through a small tube, the contents washed with inert gas, and the crypt filled with nitrogen, to which just enough moisture was added to equal the humidity of an ordinary room. Protected from oxygen and excess moisture by this inert, humid atmosphere, the contents are expected to remain in their present condition indefinitely. When archaeologists of the future open the Time Capsule they will probably find the film, fabrics, metals and other materials as fresh and "new" as the day they were put in. Westinghouse was showing the importance of the gas Nitrogen as a preservative and that it was even more important because it made up four-fifths of our atmosphere. --Doug ^talk 22:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Filling it with pure nitrogen would be a pretty standard way to avoid decay, like how nitrogen is used in food packaging. I don't think it was meant to be symbolic, or that they had any expectation that the Earth's atmosphere would substantially change in 5,000 years. Possibly mentioning that it "makes up four-fifths of our atmosphere" was just one way of explaining the identity of this gas to people of the future who might no longer use the term nitrogen.--Pharos (talk) 00:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite tag

Removed the "Article needs to be rewritten to meet Wikipedia quality standards" tag since it was featured as a Did You Know article on 8 January 2008. This then shows it already met the "quality standards", especially since there has not been any basic edits since this time except for a few minor edits. Looking at the article I don't see what parts need to be rewritten. There has not been any other editors that have made any edits since the DYK except for minor edits. I did make the one image smaller and moved to the right. Perhaps you can make the edits you feel are necessary or be specific. Since the tag was designated a "Minor Edit" then I am removing it since apparently it was a mistake or the "minor edit" I did by moving the picture and making it smaller. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text or pictures should be flagged as a 'minor edit'.--Doug ^talk 11:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

You shouldn't have removed the tag. Sentences like the following are baroque to the point of distraction:

     The tubes were made with electrical properties in mind that enhanced the characteristics of each tube's unique metal chemical make-up. 
        Each was formulated to resist corrosion over time, rather than being allowed to waste away to dust.

Does the fact that it was once featured as a Did You Know article permanently preserve it from all later improvement? I think not. This article can certainly benefit from a substantial stylistic rewrite. --73.36.62.119 (talk) 00:44, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Your point about "all later improvement" is a complete non-sequitur. The fact that it was chosen as a Did You Know article and, as mentioned, shows only minor edits since, makes it unambiguously clear that it meets Wikipedia's quality standards. The tag in question is a baseline only, intended for "spelling, grammar, typographical errors, tone, and other similar, non-content-focused changes." Of course you're perfectly free to continue to improve the article. Global Cerebral Ischemia (talk) 01:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Inscription

The correct inscription is "let him not wantonly disturb it." Wantonly-  : merciless, inhumane <wanton cruelty> b : having no just foundation or provocation : malicious <a wanton attack>. "Want only" (two words) makes no sense in context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.111.161.34 (talk) 17:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, now I get it!--Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

The geographic coordinates given in this article are those contained in the time capsule's "Book of Record".

They are quoted using the NAD27 coordinate datum, which was in use at the time of the capsules' burial.

Since conversion to the WGS84 coordinate system that is used for online maps and GPS, the original stated coordinates now point to a location 37 meters west-southwest of where the capsules are actually buried.

Coordinates converted to WGS84 and expressed in four decimal places should be: 40.7429, -73.8451

If you plug these coordinates into Yahoo maps -- whose imagery of the area was taken in winter with barren trees -- and zoom all the way in, you'll see the cursor's crosshairs landing right on that big marker stone.

Normally, such a small coordinate error wouldn't be too big a deal, but given the nature of what we're dealing with, this correction should make its way into the knowledge of the event.

Perhaps someone living in the area could take a GPS unit out the site, stick it on top of the center of the monument, and record what it says!

Consider it an act of cooperation with the "Book of Record"'s request to keep things updated! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.81.192.114 (talk) 11:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest editing the "Location of the two time capsules" section to delete the unnecessary technical specifications. "The time capsule will likely move vertically or horizontally for geological reasons, [14] so the Book of Record includes instructions on how to build a crude metal detector." The info about alternating current and hertz and watts isn't really necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.50.254.210 (talk) 15:44, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits to the article

These galleries should be put together; the styling of the galleries look extremely bad because all the pictures seem to be squished together. Other Wikipedia editors almost never put references in the bibliography section, so they ashould be replaced as well. "Messages" should be a subsection of "Book of Record". "Footnotes" is a subsection of "References". The gallery should not be at the bottom, if at all. Epicgenius (talk) 02:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Pictures

Pictures I took when I was at the World's Fair in 1964--Doug Coldwell (talk) 17:31, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Removed email source

I removed the following text:

<!-- per e-mail 9 Jan 2008 from Ed Reis Westinghouse Historian, John Heinz Pittsburgh Regional History Center. -->

Emails cannot be used as sources because they are not freely accessible. I added a reference to the page in the Heinz History Center website that mentions the time capsule. Not a great reference but it will do until a better one is found. Leschnei (talk) 20:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I found a very nice article at Business Insider and used it instead. Leschnei (talk) 20:47, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

In a history museum

"Duplicates of the contents of the objects held for these people of the future are currently held in a history museum of the United States."

I'd love to know which museum! 71.218.191.35 (talk) 21:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• 1965 Time Capsule II interior.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)