Architecture B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Home Living B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Home LivingWikipedia:WikiProject Home LivingTemplate:WikiProject Home Livinghome B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of North America B‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Are there austrailian sand igloos still around? 169.231.11.70 20:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently some igloos were/are a lot bigger than what a lot of people picture them as being.

Gringo300 07:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I seen pictures of groups of igloos were most are the usual "family" size but one is MUCH larger, looking kind of like a "town hall" or so. Seemed to be big enough for the people from all the other igloos to meet in. However I have no idea if that is usual. Although, since that is how people all over the world have built and still build their villages / tent groups / whatever it seems to be part of human nature and it wouldn't surprise me if the inuits often did the same. But I guess we have to wait until some inuit surfs in here and tells us the facts. :)) --David Göthberg 17:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

64.231.26.84 wrote: "After the snow is piled up it must sit for a couple of hours for the snow flakes to interlock."

I sort of disagree. When me and my friends build our snowhouses we simply compact the snow by banging our spades or hands on it which takes a minute or so. Then it is compacted enough to start digging out the interior imediately. (Or in our case cutting out the door and pulling out the cardboard boxes.) We should perhaps add that to the text in some way. And note, when you build an emergency shelter you don't have the time to sit and wait some hours for the snow to compact...

The trick with sticks to indicate wall thickness is new to me but seems nice, I sure will try it next time I build a snow house. We usually use our "intuition" and sometimes if we fail and cause a hole in the wall or roof we simply repair it and add some snow on the outside to make the wall thicker again. But since we usually use cardboard boxes we only round of the walls from the inside, we don't really dig out the interior so we mostly have no problem with missjudging wall thickness. Oh, and a note about sturdiness: Our snowhouses usually survive all winter (several months) even when the kids climb on them etc. So they are usually sturdy enough if we leave the walls thick enough or if we "cheat" and pour water over the house. --David Göthberg 06:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"In some cases a single block of ice was inserted to allow light into the igloo."

Should this not read a block of ice is omitted to allow light in? catParade 03:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the sentence is correct. Note that igloos are mainly built from blocks of snow, not from blocks of ice. However, ice lets light through, snow does not. So if you instead of one of the blocks of snow use a block of ice it lets light in. The effect usually becomes similar to bathroom windows that lets light through but that aren't really transparent. The reason that usually only one block of ice is used (only one window) is that ice does not heat isolate as good as snow does. So building mostly from ice would make the igloo a very cold place to live in. --David Göthberg 08:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did/do inuits use igloos as regular homes or only on travel or when surprized by a blizzard? Had they other types of buildings/tents for other purposes? 130.225.127.185 08:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Today there are no Inuit that would use an igloo as a regular home, it's hard to mount the satellite dish to snow. All Inuit live in a house of some sort, the same as any other people in North America or the western world. Not all Inuit built igloos but those that did had different types (see the article under "Types of igloo") and some were used as semi-permanent dwellings. Yes they did have other types of dwellings. For some reason a lot of people don't realise that the snow does melt in the Arctic summer. For those Inuit who did use igloos they would also have some sort of tent for the summer. This would be constructed using wood (if found) or whalebone/antlers covered in caribou. Good picture here and the google search for inuit tents. Today very few Inuit would even bother making an igloo at all, too much work and not always easy to find the correct type of snow. Most would use a canvas tent with home made wooden poles. There would be a small one (sleeps 2 or 3) for use when it's cold or out hunting and only needed for a night or two. A larger one for the spring fishing trips when it's only -20C and you go with the whole family, could sleep up to 6. Both types of tent would have some sort of extra cover that could be put over the outside to help retain heat. Caribou skins or a longer lasting cover made from thick blankets. The tent is heated with the 4th item on this page, running one on a slow burn keep a small tent warm all night at -35C. By the way the word is Inuk - singular and Inuit - plural not Inuits. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was searching for snow cave and got redirected here. But in my understanding they are two completely different. Snow caves are excavated out of a pile of snow, while igloos are built.

Picture: http://www.traditionalmountaineering.org/images/snow_cave2.jpg

TommyMoullet 18:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, snow caves and igloos are two different things. Although many of the design principles are the same. Among other things, to keep in heat we prefer to have an entrance that is lower than the living area, and we often also make a "sleeping platform" to make the height difference even bigger. (The picture you linked to is a good example of the height trick.) Oh, by the way, this is the way I am used to use the terms: A "snow house" is dug out of a man made pile of snow, while a "snow cave" is dug into existing deep snow or into a snow covered slope.

And yes, eventually there should be a separate article about snow caves. But as you might have noted we already have a section in this igloo article about "Other kinds of snowhouses". So I suggest that we start by adding a section called "Snow caves". And when/if the "Snow caves" section grows big we cut it out and make it into a separate snow cave article.

--David Göthberg 05:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the plural of igloo? Is it igloos or igli?--Lerdthenerd 08:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Oxford Dictionary states that plural of igloo is igloos. And the Google test confirms that. --David Göthberg 20:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks--Lerdthenerd 10:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

someone has changed it to iglooit in the main article--Lerdthenerd 14:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yupik:

Englu 'a house' (sing) Engluk 'a two houses' (dual) Englut '(many) houses' (plural)

In Inupiatun/Inuktitut for singular/dual/plural

Iglu 'a house' (sing) Igluk 'a two houses' (dual) Iglut/Igluit '(many) houeses' (plural)

As in Kalaallisut has only singular and plural but no dual:

Illu 'a house' (sing) Illut 'houeses' (plural)

Other East Greenlandic Tunumiisut:

Ittiq 'a house' (sing) Ittit 'houses' (plural) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haqqalikitaaq (talk • contribs) 19:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems to use an unusual amount of past tense for a structure that can be built by nearly anyone. Is this meant to imply that igloos are now somehow rare? --Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 07:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a special reason why this has {{lowercase}} applied to it? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 21:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as you can see through out the article igloo is used instead of Igloo, so I decided to lowercase it.-- iDosh!  talk? 13:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that is correct though. There are many articles which are capitalised only when used at the start of a sentence but do not include {{lowercase}}. See Home, House, Elephant and Pig for some examples. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that since igloo is not a proper noun but just a noun it should capitalized ? I'm not sure what do you guys think? -- iDosh!  talk? 03:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, although "igloo" is not a proper noun, it should be capitalized for the name of the article. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)#Lower case first letter for examples of when it should be used. I'll change it now. --pbroks13^talk? 22:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the title of an articel I expected it to use title case... 68.39.174.238 (talk) 23:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have been trying to keep the images size at a non-default size because the diagram needs to be bigger than the image above it, the provisional igloo; while this one does not require as much image size. In addition the MOS clearly states that If an image displays satisfactorily at the default size, it is recommended that no explicit size be specified. Of course since in this case the images does not display satisfactory they should have specific sizes. I'm sorry for the delay but I had an emergency and I had to go. Thank you for your understanding, -- iDosh!  talk? 15:47, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with the diagram being larger to make it clearer. However the Quinzhee is not a real igloo and is now the main image on opening the page. It's displays quite well at the default size. In fact I'm not even sure that it adds to the page but might be better off in the gallery. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 23:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

need to put how to build one . not just pictures —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.250.195.144 (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a manual. The article should certainly have more than photographs, but details of construction steps probably don't belong. --skew-t (talk) 02:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]