Talk:Corsi–Rosenthal Box

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Corsi-Rosenthal Box

• ... that the Corsi-Rosenthal Box is a homemade device designed to remove particles from the air such as wildfire smoke and COVID-19? Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-air-purifiers-particles/
  • ALT1:... that the Corsi-Rosenthal Box is a homemade air purifier that was designed during the COVID-19 pandemic as an alternative to more expensive air purification systems?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tomba! 2: The Evil Swine Return

Created by Festucarubra (talk) and GorillaWarfare (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 21:57, 9 October 2021 (UTC).

• Added ALT1. The wildfire thing is perhaps a bit misleading, since that was more used to validate that it could remove COVID-19 particles; it wasn't really designed for that purpose so much as it's similar to something else that was used for wildfires. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 23:39, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

• That is a fair point - reviewers take note. Same source can apply. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good to go! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 01:53, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

• @GorillaWarfare and Casliber: any chance the first two non-lead paragraphs could be cited inline before I promote? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:52, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

• @Theleekycauldron:  Done GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 18:29, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

• I'll promote in a bit, then theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Promoting ALT1 to Prep 4, with image. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

test by 3M scientists

https://news.3m.com/2022-02-24-3M-scientists-This-Corsi-Rosenthal-box-movement-is-legit?utm_term=corp-brd-en_us-ba-corsirosenthalbox-osm-mtpl-na-learn-is-feb22-na — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurinjp (talk • contribs) 00:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Really?

No HEPA filter catches COVID19. LOL 79.106.209.255 (talk) 00:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Of course not. What isn't alive can't catch a viral disease. LOL --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Including information on CRB Build Programs

I'm compiling a list//map of educational programs that build CRB units for use in K-12 public schools -- can we add a section on this for public reference? Thanks! 156.68.97.75 (talk) 17:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Maybe, but I'd suggest you present it here first. Any bugs can be worked out, thus ensuring it doesn't just get deleted. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Surprised that Richard Corsi is still a Red Link

I was surprised to see that an editor removed the Wikipedia red link for Richard Corsi and was glad that it was re-instated by @Ahecht. Thank you!

(1) Being a Dean at UC-Davis, which is a large university (in the large University of California system) is holding a high level leadership position.

(2) Richard Corsi has also had substantial impact outside of Academia.

Therefore, he meets two of the Wikipedia notability criteria for Academics and really ought to have a Wikipedia page by now.

I will recommend to courses enrolled at WikiEdu that this be considered as an assignment.

As part of that assignment, it might be instructive to show students how un-named Wikipedia editors can sign in from (anonymous) IP addresses and make changes without references, in which they dispute the accuracy and validity of the page.

I noted some edits where in the "what was done and why" box, anonymous editors accused Corsi and Rosenthal of falsely claiming to have invented the boxes. All researchers and inventors know that no discovery EVER comes out the blue and and is 100% original: it is always informed consciously or unconsciously by previous research. Thus, it is important to document the earlier versions of home-made air filters but I did not see any of this information added to the page with appropriate referencing, which WOULD be a helpful contribution.

At the end of the day, Prof. Corsi invested a lot of time doing Public Science engagement and outreach, for the greater good, which is also part of notability for academics. Festucarubra (talk) 13:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Airflow vs. clean air delivery rate

@InnisFree987, allow me to explain a clean air delivery rate. It's the airflow multiplied by the filtration efficiency for the particle sizes of concern. Both are measured in cubic feet per minute. For an air purifier, the clean air delivery rate is the statistic that actually matters and is the one that should be quoted. Airflow by itself tells you nothing because the filters might have poor efficiency. The UC Davis 2021 study didn't list the units of the clean air delivery rate, but cubic feet per minute was implicit, and you can verify that by repeating their math: 306 CFM airflow times 54% efficiency gives a clean air delivery rate of 165 CFM, and 443 CFM airflow times 54% efficiency gives a clean air delivery rate of 239 CFM. The Wikipedia article should list the clean air delivery rate range and the unit, cubic feet per minute. Listing the airflow is not important. Balazer (talk) 21:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. Got it. Innisfree987 (talk) 21:51, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

5-filter Corsi–Rosenthal design vs. related designs

We should strive to more clearly distinguish between the 5-filter design created by Jim Rosenthal, and similar designs, e.g. Neil Comparetto's 4-filter design, and other designs from before and since. Corsi and Rosenthal certainly did not invent the idea of arranging HVAC filters in a cube with a box fan, and arguably, these different designs should not be lumped under the Corsi–Rosenthal name. For example, the instructions graphic added by Shiventaneja is describing the Comparetto design (plus a shroud), but incorrectly titles itself as instructions for building a Corsi–Rosenthal box. That should be corrected. Balazer (talk) 01:49, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

You need to find reliable secondary sources if you’d like to add this. Innisfree987 (talk) 02:10, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Innisfree987, there already was a reliable secondary source for Comparetto Cube, Jim Rosenthal's page, which you deleted. I'll try to find more sources. Balazer (talk) 04:43, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Balazer: that is a primary source. Innisfree987 (talk) 06:05, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Innisfree987, I'm not seeing how Jim Rosenthal's page would be a primary source for the Comparetto cube. Jim Rosenthal was writing about someone else's independent design, Neil Comparetto's, which Rosenthal had no involvement in. Jim was relying on Comparetto's and Semmelback's Twitter posts and Comparetto's videos as primary sources. Moreover, the Wikipedia article section on related designs made no analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claims about the other designs. It merely stated that these other designs exist, and the number of filters they used, which are "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge", and thus secondary sources should not be necessary. I will try to dig up more sources, but I disagree that they should be necessary in the absence of analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claims in the article. I didn't write the bit about the Comparetto cube. That was already in the article. I just moved it, and you deleted it. Balazer (talk) 06:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I removed it when I noticed the problem. A personal blog is generally not an acceptable source: we’re looking for fact-checked coverage. Generally exceptions are only made if the person has a substantial body of peer-reviewed science on the subject in question. Innisfree987 (talk) 07:43, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

This is weird. I came here trying to remember the guy who made a cube out of air filters. Corsi-Rosenthal? No that's not it. Comparetto Cube video on YouTube... yeah that came first.

The independent/peer-reviewed stuff is what you're looking for... which is not going to happen since the reality is not always in college research papers simply serving to give credit to UC Berkeley when it was some HVAC dude in Maryland who at least started the fad. Even so, Comparetto probably didn't invent taping air filters to a box fan but it would be nice to referene his work in the pedigree of this novel idea in the main page's entry versus demoting it to the talk section. Sometimes the Talk section on Wikipedia is just as valuable as the intentionally tailored Wikipedia page. Jawz101 (talk) 10:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

It doesn’t have to be a research paper. Any fact-checked secondary source will do. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

This wasn't invented in 2020. I had two of these in my closet BEFORE Covid-19.

Leave it to NYC to think they invented the wheel. This contraption has been popular in areas dealing with wildfire smoke for decades. Genghiscrom (talk) 21:30, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Corsi and Rosenthal are based in California and Texas, respectively. But if you have secondary sources about earlier models and how they relate to this one, we could add that. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:33, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

The Corsi-Rosenthal Box should be a subsection of a "Do-It-Yourself Air Purifier" article, which one or more filter examples can be stated, such as 1 filter, 2 filters, ... • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:58, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Given the extent of the news coverage of this term, I would not support renaming this page. I see two alternatives: if there’s enough material, making a separate page about DIY filters in general that would link to this and vice versa; or if material is limited, then making a subsection on this page about related designs. Innisfree987 (talk) 23:28, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Wide range of prices for HEPA air cleaners

Air purification units (room or multi-room) with HEPA filtration range widely in price from under $50 to considerably more than US$500.

References

Quality HEPA air cleaners are cheap nowadays. I have them in every room in my house. Several in the basement. I rarely pay over $100 for one. Eliminated my sinus problems and ibuprofen use. No allergies anymore. No wildfire smoke. No ozone since they all have carbon filters too. And since any ionizers on the air cleaners are turned off. No ozone-producing electronic air cleaning at all.

All are rated over 4 stars in 5 star rating systems. Why pay more? Let's not oversell the $80 Corsi–Rosenthal Box. This is a Wikipedia article, not an ad. And MERV 13 filters are not as good as true HEPA filters for filtering out the smallest particles like mold spores, and smoke. Mold spores cause sinus problems, sinusitis, headaches, pressure, etc.. The smallest particulates of all kinds carry viruses like COVID.

And a box fan motor will crap out over time pulling air through a true HEPA filter. HEPA filters are very hard on motors. Due to the tiny pore sizes in HEPA filters. That's why they can't directly replace furnace filters. HEPA whole-house systems are required for that. They usually have their own motor, and plug into the existing duct system. And they are on 24/7 at a lower motor speed than a furnace motor. Stopping serious allergy and sinus problems requires 24/7 use. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:50, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

I made one before covid

I saw this design in a woodworking magazine before covid and made it myself to clean air of sawdust in my garage. Very obvious design in my opinion. 68.13.150.194 (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I've been making a variation of this for well over a decade, and seen other iterations of it as well. I got the idea from somebody else back before YouTube existed. Giving credit to these guys is a pretty huge stretch. It's been a word-of-mouth things probably as long as the components have existed. I once even saw one that was made with some brackets attached so you could quickly replace the filters by sliding them in and out, all years before Covid, specifically for use in a house with pet cats. 2601:245:4780:4C00:8364:BC0F:7E57:711D (talk) 21:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)