Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a23050866e11ea0a

Jump to content

Talk:Witch window

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by JingleJim in topic Page views

Page views

[edit]

{{Graph:PageViews}}

Well, at least the story has changed from "temporarily unavailable" (April 2023). JingleJim (talk) 12:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Other names

[edit]

It's good to see someone was able to write an article about this. I've intended to for a while now but hadn't gotten around to it. Anyway... I've also heard these referred to as "lazy windows" but don't have a reliable source for it. Maybe someone else can dig one up. Dismas|(talk) 10:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

What happened?

[edit]

What happened on or just before November 23, 2011, that caused this page to get more than 6,000 hits???--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 21:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Or early March 2016 (close to 15,000)? --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Or October 19, 2016 (about 800,000)! --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 16:29, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ha! Ok that's bizarre. Brycehughes (talk) 17:02, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

It seems that a single sentence, late in the article and almost a throw-away, has taken over. This article has been classified under "superstitions", which may be the cause of its popularity, despite the caveat that the broomstick explanation—if real—was probably not taken seriously. Go figure. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Other reasons: the page was mentioned (and linked) on Reddit, and Buzzfeed named this page as one of the "24 Of The Strangest Wikipedia Pages That'll Send You Deep Into A Wiki-Hole". That likely sent a lot of traffic this way in the next day or two. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 15:08, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Missing section on operation

[edit]

This article needs a section on operation. Normal sash window counterweights hang adjacent to the sash. For a diagonal sash, how would this work? It would seem that the weights drag against the framing; wouldn't the friction be a problem, as well as cause wear and tear? Or, if these windows do not open, the article should say so. —Anomalocaris (talk) 03:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

In my experience, windows in Vermont don't tend to have sash-weights. On those occasions when vertical windows are open, they are often held open with a short piece of wood. Some houses' windows are notorious guillotines. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 01:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Article needs a serious revamping

[edit]

I just happened to come here in response to a Facebook post with some information I doubted. Just a short amount of digging quickly revealed a bunch of dead reference links, some unreliable references, and eventually one good reference not used here that refutes some of the information here. I don't have time right now to work on any of this but if someone else decides to move in, they might find this article very helpful. https://www.vpr.org/post/whats-history-vermonts-witch-windows#stream/0 SentientParadox (talk) 04:40, 26 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

So I just noticed today that the link I provided is already referenced. Which makes me think perhaps nobody's really gone over the article with a fine tooth comb because that reference actually does refute other claims in the article. If I have time sometime in the near future I'll see what I can do to clean it up. SentientParadox (talk) 19:42, 26 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
The linked source actually agrees with this article that the explanations for the names are far-fetched, etc. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Have sources been removed? I can go through and rescue dead links with IAbot, if the old links are still there. jp×g 19:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Reply