Talk:HHO

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

This page was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion on Auust 23, 2008. The result of the discussion was disambiguate.

HHO REDIRECT[edit]

1. How is it possible the redirect wasn't removed following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HHO gas (2nd nomination)
2. HHO is a trademark, and we NEVER make redirects for manufacturers or trademarks to a product or in this case a gas mixture. WP:SPAM and Wikipedia:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory.

I think it should be deleted. Cheers. Mion (talk) 19:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second. To be specific I'm not quite sure of the HHO acronynm. It is indeed a trademark, but not necessarily owned by HTA. I think it fits the category of a brand name for a product. In either case Mion's points above are appropriate. Noah Seidman (talk) 19:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thirded. I was about to request an admin to place a {{rfd}} tag so that its deletion could be discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion. But I then read the section "When should we delete a redirect?" which has two possible counter reasons. Now, I first noticed this by following "HHO" to the oxyhydrogen article but not finding any explanation of HHO. I have since found from Google that it is a term mainly used as for simple scams. Are there not sufficient reliable sources for an article on "HHO gas" explaining this and that it uses a nonstandard notation? This site seems informative enough: Scientific proof debunking the "run your car on water" scams. Actually, I will request an rfd in any case. -84user (talk) 00:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Object to removing oxyhydrogen from the disambiguation page just because HHO is a trademark. Viagra, for example, is a trademark of Pfizer that redirects to the generic name sildenafil citrate. Or would you RFD that one too? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 02:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A search on uspto.gov indicates that there are no active trademarks of the acronym "HHO" itself, only logos based on the acronym. Also, take a look at www.almeo-research.com. They have only started collecting data but will be sure to send you a note when something appears in peer-reviewed literature or maybe an SAE standard for evaluation of performance of HHO injection on Diesel engines.. In the meantime, please do refer to it as fringe science since that may discourage competitors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:249:601:AF00:B926:D322:B88:B635 (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request editing : please place rfd tag[edit]

{{editprotected}} Please add {{rfd}} to the top of the redirect page and use this line as the edit summary: "Nominated for RFD: see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion". Thank you. Alternatively, please unprotect the redirect so that others can do it. -84user (talk) 00:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done (with a summary pointing here - the template already links to the discussion) - Nabla (talk) 04:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Draft version[edit]

Consensus appears to be forming at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 August 23 to convert the redirect into a disambiguation page. I'll work on Talk:HHO/temp. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 15:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Home heating oil[edit]

An editor removed the home heating oil link even though the acronym is obvious. Here's a source, though, to head off any further doubt: http://www.acronymfinder.com/Home-Heating-Oil-(HHO).html Rklawton (talk) 02:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has removed it again without discussion. Further reversions without discussion will constitute edit warring. Rklawton (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your reference is from very poor source. Also, references are not added to ddisambig pages. They serve for navigation between wikipedia articles. Please add a good reference, from respectable technical source, into the home heating oil article, and then add it here. Last Lost (talk) 23:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HHO as home heating oil has numerous Google hits - all if which clearly indicate that HHO is used as a common abbreviation. This makes my assertion non-controversial - thereby not requiring a source. Please look up and read WP:RS Rklawton (talk) 01:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyhydrogen[edit]

Please provide a reference and mention in the oxyhydrogen article that oxyhydrogen is called HHO by reputable sources. Last Lost (talk) 23:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please take this up on the HHO gas redirect page. But before you do, please do a quick Google search on Oxyhydrogen and HHO - and keep in mind that sources are not required for uncontroversial assertions. Rklawton (talk) 23:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think that references like this one are acceptable. Therefore I think that the assertion is controversial, i.e., it is quedtionalbe from my point of view. In any case, like I've just said, if you claim A is called B, then you must present this in the article about "A". Last Lost (talk) 23:46, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim regarding A & B requiring sources is only applicable to controversial assertions. There is no controversy here as there are no reputable scientists claiming that electrolysis of water produces anything other than hydrogen and oxygen. This is basic, no-brainer chemistry. Rklawton (talk) 01:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreed. A see a controversy here. This article is not about electrolysis of water. I am questioning the statement that oxyhydrogen is called "HHO" by reputable scientists you mention. Please provide a proof and done with this. Last Lost (talk) 16:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if "reputable scientists" use these terms interchangeably, I haven't checked. However, that's irrelevant. What we're concerned here with is common usage (or proof that HHO is not Oxyhydrogen). Use Google. Tell me what you found. It'll take you ten seconds to see you have no case and that you're wasting your time here. I'm also guessing that you haven't looked at the HHO gas discussion page where this has already been hashed out. Rklawton (talk) 16:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Making the case that HHO, HYDROXY, BROWN'S GAS and OXYHYDROGEN are commonly used synonyms included in published scientific papers Electrolysis of water produces this mixed gas known as either oxyhydrogen, HHO, browns gas or hydroxy These are not product names as incorrectly argued before. All of the synonyms should be directed to each other as and when mentioned in pages

Performance and Exhaust Gas Analysis Of A Single Cylinder Diesel Engine Using HHO Gas (Brown’s Gas) C.Naresh, Y.Sureshbabu, S.Bhargavi Devi

http://www.ijer.in/ijer/index.php/explore/layout/issue-archive/volume-3/volume-3-issue-special1 NeiallsWheel (talk) 03:41, 19 October 2015 (UTC)NeiallsWheel[reply]

Further evidence of the same issue Effect of hydroxy (HHO)gas on performance and exhaust emissions

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319910013595 NeiallsWheel (talk) 03:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)NeiallsWheel[reply]