Talk:Three-prong adaptor

Globalize

This adapter is only relevant to the USA or countries with electrical systems based on the US norms. The article should make this clearer. (IMHO that is) It could just be that I am having a bad day, and my view is clouded by this. Yendor1958 (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

If this article helps amateurs survive tinkering with the electrical system, that's fine. I don't care if it deals with US electrical systems or US electrical code; if it helps save lives, that's a good thing. Someone who knows about non-US electrical systems might add more information about those systems, but what is here is just fine.Timothy Perper (talk) 10:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Is this tag really necessary? If the reference to NEMA in the first sentence doesn't tip you off, the picture surely will. What do they do in Europe/China/ etc? If you know, put it in...don't just tag. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The tag wasn't necessary. Timothy Perper (talk) 17:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Cheater plugs are universal yet this article seems to only talk about the USA and Canada especially in the Use in residences section. If articles that apply to the whole world can't explain their subject and detail outside of the field of the USA then they should be deleted. Such articles are a waste of space for the rest of the world. Anyone writing any Wikipedia article should only do so if they are prepared to write the article in such a way as to address the whole world rather than just US readers. This is an encyclopaedia after all (even if we can't spell encyclopaedia correctly).--ЗAНИA ^{talk WB talk}] 21:36, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

So you don't know anything about them either? Could you research cheater plugs in whatever far-flung part of the Earth you find yourself, and put some facts here? Either that or take it to AfD. Whinging on talk pages does little except attracting crabby replies such as this. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

People die when they are killed

"Removing the grounding pin of the appliance's plug leaves the appliance without proper grounding even when relocated and plugged into a properly grounded three-prong receptacle.[2]"

Why on earth did this get a cite? Its like saying people kill when killed! 174.0.171.197 (talk) 10:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

No, it's useful, since the emphasis is on PROPER grounding, that is, proper use of the ground prong. I know people who remove the ground prong routinely, when, for example, before plugging a microwave oven into a wall socket. Then you can get killed. The sentence and reference are very useful. Timothy Perper (talk) 10:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Dangerous use in audio electronics

Here are two possible references that can be used:

• "Keeping quiet", by Eddie Ciletti in 2000. Discussion of keeping audio free from hums and buzzes. Ciletti says "Using a ground adapter as a ground lifter is, by code, illegal. No matter whether the gear, the signal wiring or the power distribution is at fault, every temporary fix will eventually become an intermittent noise problem while also creating a potentially life-threatening situation." Later, he adds "adding ground lifters to all the gear ...is both time consuming and illegal." Note that by "ground lifters" he means two things: AC ground lifters (cheater plugs) and XLR ground lifters, the latter indicating the three wires of an XLR connector that have been trimmed back to just the two essential balanced audio signal wires. An XLR ground lifter lifts the shield connection, and does not create a life-threatening situation, nor does it violate electrical code.
• The Ultimate Live Sound Operator's Handbook, by Bill Gibson. Gibson apparently wants to be sued for wrongful death, as he initiates a serious discussion of casual usage of the cheater plug, failing to point out the negative aspects. It is only on the next page that he partially backtracks in his section entitled "Danger, Danger". There, he says "proper grounding can be the single most important factor"... etc. Binksternet (talk) 17:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Name of this article

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. I can discern no consensus for any proposed title. It's an interesting debate, though with far too much WP:IKNOWIT and WP:IDONTKNOWIT. Both Ground lift plug and Three-prong adapter had some support, but so does Cheater plug, despite its potential ambiguity and people disliking it as a slang term. Redirects and hatnotes seem to be the way forward. Fences&Windows 17:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Cheater plug → Three-to-two-prong adapter — NPOV reasons, although "Cheater plug" is more common in colloquial speech. Re-relisted. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 11:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC) PleaseStand ^(talk) 18:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be called something else? "Cheater plug" has a negative connotation & isn't what an adapter is called. Maybe something like "Grounding plug adapter" or "3-to-2 prong adapter" would be more appropriate. "Cheater plug" just sounds like someone's snide description of the device in question not to mention this is the only place that seems to call an adapter such a thing.Stereorock (talk) 17:27, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

In common speech, I have always heard it called the "cheater plug", and Wiring a House also calls it that. That is why I created the article under the title "Cheater plug" (WP:UCN). It seems though, that "Three-to-two-prong adapter" is another commonly used name that would avoid problems with NPOV, actually describes the device, and is general enough to apply to the adapters of other countries if they exist. I am listing this on RM for outside opinion. PleaseStand ^(talk) 18:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Also alerted Binksternet, the other major contributor, to this discussion. PleaseStand ^(talk) 18:10, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Moving it Three-to-two-prong adapter is merely selecting one of the possible names. Depending on your point of view, the other, similar name is Two-to-three-prong adapter for the people thinking they need an adapter for their old two-prong outlet. AC ground lifter (usually shortened to "ground lifter" when context is clear) and Cheater plug are the most common usages I hear in the U.S. People who sell these things call them AC ground adapter, AC polarized grounding adapter, Three-wire to two-wire AC grounding adapter, AC three-prong grounding plug adapter, Polarized grounding adapter, Grounded AC plug adapter, and AC ground-lift adapter. Why would we select one of these equally neutral names to move it to, while not moving it to another? Clearly, the retailers and manufacturers all call it a grounding adapter (as that is the safe usage, free from legal problems), but the authors who write about the subject often call it a ground lifter, the common and dangerous usage. If we were trying to be as neutral as possible, we would call it the NEMA 5-15 receptacle to 1-15 plug (considering what it is alone) or the NEMA 1-15 receptacle to 5-15 plug adapter (considering what its role is, in facilitating the connection between a 5-15P and a 1-15R.)

Regarding NPOV, the first paragraph and the article body says that a common usage has been condemned for ignoring electrical safety. We have established that the connector is often used in a dangerous fashion, so keeping a POV article title such as "cheater" is not such a horrible decision. The demonstrably accurate POV is that the connector can be dangerous. My take on the proposed move is a weak "keep it where it is." Weak, because any of the names would be appropriate. Keep, because no name strikes me as supreme. Binksternet (talk) 19:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC) (Edited to reflect changing opinion.) Binksternet (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

MOVE. I've only ever seen it written as a "cheater plug" in Rex Caldwell's book and have never heard it called that. Maybe it's a regional thing to call it a cheater plug. I've heard it called an adapter & only that. I can only think the closest accurate NPOV name would be "grounding plug adapter" as that is the closest to common vernacular that comes without it being inaccurate. Again, I've never heard ANYONE call it a "cheater plug" and think that average person on the street would have no idea what one is when called such.Stereorock (talk) 19:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment: I agree there isn't a POV issue, just a decision over the commonest term. I've never had a good name for this (three prong adapter?) and never heard it called a cheater plug, but knew what it meant before I looked. --Pnm (talk) 06:46, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment Three prong adapter is what I've always called them; to me, a cheater plug is a variant of cheater cord, both devices used to defeat safety interlocks within electrical equipment while doing repairs. While the three prong adapter is, in a way, such a device, it's used outside of the equipment, and for normal use. htom (talk) 15:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

• Move to three prong adapter. This is the more accurate name. These adapters not not just used to cheat, but are actually used to correctly connect a three prong device to an older wiring system that uses armored cables where you can have a fairly reliable ground connection. The adapter removes the need to completely rewire older installations. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose move. Cheater plug appears to be the most common name for these devices. The argument that the title supports a POV is spurious; It does, just as to use the less common name supports the opposite POV, and far more blatantly. Andrewa (talk) 02:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

This discussion and article are the only places I've seen the name "cheater plug" used for this particular device; it may be common in your part of the world, but not mine. There's a long list of other folk's names above; "cheater plug" is just not one of them. htom (talk) 03:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, here are more than 70,000 places unrelated to Wikipedia that it's used (your ghit tally may vary from mine depending on your location). Andrewa (talk) 04:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

My Google search for "3-prong adapter" yielded approximately 645,000 hits; "cheater plug" yielded 85,300 results. Clearly, "3-prong adapter" is the more common term by about 7-8 times. As I've stated, the term I've heard is in line with htom's. Like him, I've never heard it called a "cheater plug" outside of this forum & Rex Caldwell's book. As for the neutrality of the term "cheater plug" I think it's a less neutral term than "3-prong adapter" or "3-prong grounding adapter" because the word cheat itself implies something underhanded or wrong is happening. Yes, the hazards of the device have been noted but when used properly, they do complete an electrical path to ground. Finally, to my eyes & ears, "cheater plug" rings of a slang term derived by electricians who hate the thing.Stereorock (talk) 11:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Oppose move. A number of the devices that show up under "3 prong adapter" are not designed for connecting a 3 prong 120 V device to a 2 wire 120 V outlet. The people trying to run a dryer on a 4 wire 120/240 outlet are looking for a different device - their concern is with neutral, not ground. I think "cheater plug" is a perfectly clear description of this device and more explicitly used for the case of connecting a 120 V 3 wire device to old 2 wire outlets. -Wtshymanski (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Again, disagree. "Cheater plug" is NOT a clear description of what the device is. It sounds like something used in home audio and was coined as a sneering slang for the device by people who hate the adapter. Again, "cheater plug" is not a universally-known term either as it seems to only exist in certain areas. The article needs to be headlined under something more neutral.Stereorock (talk) 13:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: "cheater plug" doesn't specify what it's used for and is more ambiguous. There's no indication in that term that the device allows a 3-prong grounding plug at 120VAC to be connected to a 2-slot outlet.Stereorock (talk) 13:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Further, over half of the image results for "cheater plug" on Google are for body modification appliances, not the electrical device. Move the article, leave a redirect or disambiguation links here.

Well, the existence of the piece of jewelry turns this into a question of primary use. One could make a strong case that there is no primary use. If that is the case, then the current article needs to be moved since the subject is ambiguous and there is no primary use. So those opposing the move need to address this issue. A quick check on Amazon offers these choices: Three-Prong Plug Adapter; 3-Prong Grounding Adapter; 3-Prong to 2-Prong Electrical Adapter and Grounded AC Plug Adapter 3 prong to 2 prong. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem at all. If it turns out that there is another primary meaning of cheater plug (for which a case would need to be made and which looks very dioubful from the evidence to date), or if there's no primary meaning (and again, a case needs to be made), then we disambiguate this meaning, and there are standard procedures for doing this. Moving this article away from the common name is not one of those procedures, however. Andrewa (talk) 03:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that counting the Google image hits tells as a lot about English usage. Actually, I'd argue that it tells us nothing at all, other than that people find pictures of human body pearcings more interesting than pictures of electrical hardware. And I think we already knew that. Andrewa (talk) 04:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Re the addendum: This is exactly the sort of advocacy that Wikipedia discourages. Essentially, what you're saying is that people should use a different name. What we're interested in is what they do use. It may be good to change the name, but Wikipedia isn't part of this process. Andrewa (talk) 04:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh? What I'm saying is that a small group of people use the term "cheater plug" and the term that more people appear to use is some variation of "adapter." I'm advocating changing the term to what MORE people use as opposed to some regional or professional derogatory slang. Electrical manufacturers don't make "cheater plugs." They make grounding adapters. If you walk in to any hardware store in the country they should know what a grounding adapter is but, & I'm guessing here, in a lot of locales they WON'T know what a "cheater plug" is! I know around here nobody calls it that. Nobody would know what you're talking about. This article's main body staying called "cheater plug" is analogous to me saying all drinking fountains should be called "bubblers" on Wikipedia because that's what they're called around here. So, to reiterate: 1. Electrical manufacturers do not MAKE "cheater plugs", they make "grounding adapters". 2. Cheater plugs are also some form of jewelry so "cheater plug" should be a disambig page for BOTH grounding adapters & the jewelry. 3. "Cheater plug" in its current form appears to be a regional slang term or a derogatory slang term devised by electricians and those who hate the device. 4. "Cheater plug" on its own is not a clear description of what the device is nor is it some sort of genericized trademark like "Kleenex".Stereorock (talk) 11:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand that Andrewa, PleaseStand, an author, and doubtless others, use this name for this device, but I don't think that it is the single common name for it. It may be that it has so many names that "Cheater Plug" has ten percent of the users, and the other ten names each have nine percent. I understand the problems and dangers of improper grounding and polarization reversal. I think that this name minimizes those dangers. I am interested in how this term came to be used for this device as a matter of language, but I sincerely doubt the claim that it is "the common name" for it. I have no objection to keeping this term as a redirect to whichever other name is chosen. I object to this name because of the dangers; it's not a cheater plug, it's a danger plug. htom (talk) 14:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I have no objection to "cheater plug" being a redirect either as well as most other terms for this device. There should be one main term and "cheater plug" doesn't seem to be the best description. I've been over here so much that I've forgotten if there's a section of the main article that describes the dangers associated with using an adapter but have no objections to that being included either if it's not already. I don't remember the fact that it's banned in Canada being mentioned either but will check it out right after I write this.Stereorock (talk) 19:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Agree about the redirect, but that's a different issue. Redirects are cheap and we tend to have lots in cases like this. See elsewhere re dangers. Andrewa (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Most of the above is still irrelevant I'm afraid. Whatever your motives, laudable or not... and having spent some years as a professional stage electrician I applaud many of them... the only question to be resolved in this section is the article title, and the main consideration is how the various candidates relate to WP:NC. Whether the name minimises the dangers for example isn't a primary consideration for us here. See below for some more answers. Andrewa (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

A good summary

From above:

1. Electrical manufacturers do not MAKE "cheater plugs", they make "grounding adapters". 2. Cheater plugs are also some form of jewelry so "cheater plug" should be a disambig page for BOTH grounding adapters & the jewelry. 3. "Cheater plug" in its current form appears to be a regional slang term or a derogatory slang term devised by electricians and those who hate the device. 4. "Cheater plug" on its own is not a clear description of what the device is nor is it some sort of genericized trademark like "Kleenex".

Replies:

1. What the manufacturers call the device is relevant, but if there's a common name that differs from the official name we prefer the common name. Or in other words, manufacturers do make cheater plugs, they just don't call them that (for understandable reasons).

2. Yes, we need to disambiguate. That's a different issue.

3. If it's regional slang, that's relevant, but there's no evidence of this. If it's a derogatory slang term devised by electricians and those who hate the device, that's irrelevant. The question is, have others adopted this usage too? The evidence is, they have.

4. Irrelevant. If there's a better name that people should use, then there are places to promote those names. But not here.

Hope this helps. I thought it was a good summary and deserved a detailed reply. Andrewa (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

1. & 3. But "cheater plug" is not a common enough name. If you were to ask anybody in my area what a cheater plug is, they'll look at you with a blank look on their face. My point is that it's not a common name or not common enough. Whereas some form of the term "grounding adapter" would, at least, give some indication to what the device is. If someone has never heard the term "cheater plug" they would ask why it's called that and for good reason. It doesn't indicate what the device does. So, in summary, cheater plug isn't a common enough name. Plus, when you say have others adopted the term for the device, what are we talking in terms of numbers? Is it a few people in a small pocket or a large group? From what I've seen, it seems to be the former.

Agree that it's not a good description. But what is common enough? Is this just your gut feeling, or have you some evidence of how common or uncommon it is, and/or some argument in terms of policy that this should be taken into consideration? Andrewa (talk) 01:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

2. Then we'd have to still do something to this page because a cheater plug could mean 2 or more things.

Agree. Again I say, there are ways to disambiguate, but moving away from the common name is not one of the ones favoured here. Andrewa (talk) 01:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

4. No, very relevant because there are people who would not know what the device is or does. The term "cheater plug" simply is not a good one. It is confusing, non-descriptive and, from what I've seen & heard, not common at all.Stereorock (talk) 10:03, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, your opinions that the term is confusing and non-descriptive aren't terribly relevant, however well-grounded they may be. But the question of how common the term is, is very relevant indeed. My Google search, above, seemed to indicate it was in common use, despite several opinions to the contrary.

One of the main problems with the discussion so far is that so much of it is based on individual experiences of particular local usage, which of course varies. Google has its limitations, but it's a good start. How about a link to a Google search for your preferred name(s), or any other evidence you might have to offer on more general usage? Andrewa (talk) 01:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

• Move from "cheater plug". A "proper" name for the device would be "NEMA 5-15P to 1-15P Polarized Grounding Adapter" (as opposed to the initially made NEMA 5-15P to 1-15R Non-polarized Grounding Adapter; I have a few of these, both purchased and home-made, put away carefully in my test gear where they won't be used by accident even then.) It's a mouthful. That someone adapted the use of the term "cheater plug" for this purpose is obvious; that they did so, and that you believe this usage common, is OR on my part (and I suspect yours as well.) Another use for "cheater plug" is to attempt to get 50 Amp service from the combination of 20 Amp and 30 Amp outlets in RV parks. /"cheater plug" ground"/ gets 60k Google hits, /"ground adapter"/ gets 43k; /ground plug adapter/ gets 487k, 50k with the double quotes. It looks to me (again, OR) that Wikipedia is promoting the use of "cheater plug" for 3-to-2 adapter (or whatever), not reflecting a common usage of that term for that item. htom (talk) 01:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Comment: Move where? NEMA 5-15P to 1-15P Polarized Grounding Adapter doesn't seem to be a candidate to me, see [1] for a very broad search which still doesn't get very many ghits compared to mine for cheater plug above. Andrewa (talk) 01:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Suggested target, google hits, move to suggestion

term, "ghits quoted", ghits unquoted, ordered by number of "ghits", then ghits.

• "ground lift plug" "367,000" 262,000
• "grounding plug" "128,000" 937,000
• ---
• "cheater plug" "81,300" 2,940,000
• ---
• "ground lift adapter" "56,300" 122,000
• "grounding adapter" "51,000" 2,540,000
• "ground adapter" "43,000" 6,110,000
• "grounding lift plug" "0" 2,130,000
• "grounding lift adapter" "0" 622,000
• "grounding 3-2 adapter" "0" 264,000

It looks to me like "ground lift plug" is used more than four times as often as "cheater plug", and I suspect that some of those "cheater plugs" are not "ground lift plugs". Someone else can extend the table, either below or with insertions above, if they want (or if they get different results, which is entirely probable, ghit count is not a precise number, it seems.) htom (talk) 03:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I suggest that we move "cheater plug" to "ground lift plug", keeping "cheater plug" (and others) as redirects.

htom (talk) 03:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support move to ground lift plug. Without knowing exactly what your searches were... and the first one seems a bit peculiar, getting more hits on the quoted string... mine showed a healthy number of hits, and significantly, nine of the first ten were for this device rather than any other sort of ground lift plug (of which I own several). Andrewa (talk) 04:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I should have mentioned the methodology, I suppose. I started with "grounding adapter", I think, and then, remembering an earlier squabble about the use of quotes, again without, and then various modifications of that string, nudged by other terms I saw in the listings Google was producing. I became curious about how "plug" was scoring higher than "adapter" and decided to stop before becoming distracted, sorted the list, inserted the cheater plug scores, and made the recommendation. That's all of the terms I searched; there may be more popular terms, I just didn't happen upon them in the minutes I spent. There are other terms in the discussion, I did not intentionally not search for those terms, just didn't think to do so, it would have saved time to use them, and they should probably searched and entered into the table. Won't be done by me today, however, real life is calling. htom (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support move to ground lift plug. Let's use the most popular name. Binksternet (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. Ground lift is ambiguous and may introduce a preference for a particular variation of English. Note that on US Google, "Ground lift" only garners 194,000 hits. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Yet another bizarreness of Google hits; I'm using usaian google, and "ground lift plug" gets twice the hits of "ground lift"!htom (talk) 22:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Google is not always the best evidence and never the full story, but it's far better than speculation or unsupported personal opinion. And it's easy to link to the searches you do, which is far better than just giving bare figures IMO. Andrewa (talk) 00:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Comment: Can you elaborate these objections? I just did a little cleanup on ground lift (much more required) but the ambiguity doesn't seem a problem to me. If the problem is WP:ENGVAR, the device described by this article is principally a US and Canada device (IANAL but a similar device could not be sold legally in Australia, and this particular one doesn't fit our connectors obviously) so the appropriate term is ground lift rather than earth lift. Andrewa (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

And now the talk page is 4 times the length of the article itself. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

This is not unusual, nor even a bad thing if we're making progress. The closing admin has quite a job to sort it out (sorry about that) but if we can get to some sort of consensus it will be worth it. Then we can archive the talk page. Andrewa (talk) 00:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, there is still the ambiguity in the term. This becomes more of an issue since ground lift for electrical service is not in common use in the US to my knowledge. So maybe for US usage the ambiguity is more of an issue since it is clearly not in common use especially for these adapters. I still think that one of the amazon.com hits from above is truly the best answer. Use the term they are sold under in the US (assuming this is OK for Canadian usage). Vegaswikian (talk) 06:36, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmm... I'm not sure what you mean by ground lift for electrical service. The only meaning I can give it is the use of these plugs and the like, which seem common enough by the Google searches cited above. See also our article on ground lift which doesn't seem to cover your meaning here. Wiktionary:earth lift and Wiktionary:ground lift don't exist so they're no help. Andrewa (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course the Google test is the ultimate arbiter of Wikiality, but do all those 650000 ghits talk about the gadget that lets you plug in a 3-wire 120 V appliance into an old fashioned 2 wire receptacle, with an extra wire or lead that you, the hapless consumer, are expected to connect to a reliable ground? The first dozen or so I saw when I typed in "cheater plug" were definitely the right gizmo. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Very funny. But what do you think we should call the article? Leave it at cheater plug? That was my first inclination too, until someone above established that ground lift plug was an even more common name for these (infernal) devices. Andrewa (talk) 01:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) I think we should call the article "cheater plug" with redirects from everyone else's favorite names. A slightly less frivolous search on Google Books gives 104 hits on "cheater plug", mostly in the context of house wiring, medical instruments, and power tools, and only 18 hits on "ground lift adapter", all as far as I could see in the context of audio production or guitar amplifiers. Maybe someone who uses a "ground lift adapter" feels it's more technical and scientific than the homeowner who knows using a "cheater plug" in his old house is wrong, but who also knows he's too cheap to rewire the place. And curse those piercing freaks who think a cheater plug is something they should have sticking through their epidermis somewhere... --Wtshymanski (talk) 03:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

There are variant spellings "adapter" and "adaptor", see this google web search which returns me 183,000 hits and the first few all seem relevant. Earth lift would give even more. I get 30 hits for ground lift adapter from Google Books [2] and none for the variant spelling adaptor, and all appear relevant, and 108 for cheater plug [3] and again all seem relevant.

It seems possible that this move request will close without consensus. That's a shame, but it happens at times. My philosophy is that if we can't get even rough consensus, it shouldn't matter which way we go! And it seems likely that this is a case in point. Andrewa (talk) 07:21, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

PS But I certainly think that the original proposed move can be closed as rejected! Andrewa (talk) 21:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

We already have an article about a 3-to-2 adapter, Blivet. htom (talk) 22:55, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Where? Not wanting to question that we do, but it would be helpful if you'd use a wikilink. Andrewa (talk) 04:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Blivet The image, 3 to 2. Yet another of my jokes misses. I'll stop. htom (talk) 01:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Is that pronounced "bliv-vit" or "bli-vay"? :p Stereorock (talk) 09:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

As liver --> bliver --> bliv'it is how I've always said it. htom (talk) 04:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll add one more ambiguity that is commonly used in the field for construction. A cheater plug is a three pin plug where the ground pin has been cut off. So there are many types of these some more legal then others. Some mass produced and others not. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

If this move doesn't proceed, it would seem logical to me to expand its scope to include all such devices (but not body piercing plugs). Depending on the exact move target, it might be a logical expansion even after a move. Andrewa (talk) 04:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking about that possibility and concluded that the lowly NEMA 5-15 receptacle to 1-15 plug has quite enough material for it to stand alone. Its association with audio and video ground problems, with the electrical system made dangerous by the adapter, deserves its own article. Binksternet (talk) 06:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Surely these issues are identical for all such devices? The main difference is that, through accidents of history, the NEMA version is commercially available. Andrewa (talk) 08:03, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I still say it should be moved from this with "Cheater plug" being a disambig page. There are apparently other uses for this term.Stereorock (talk) 09:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Where exactly do you think it should be moved? I don't think there's any argument with the claim that there are other uses for this term, but the question then becomes, is there a primary meaning and if so what is it? If this is the primary topic, then the policy is, there's no need to move the article. Andrewa (talk) 04:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Safety concern

"There are several alternatives for connecting newer appliances to two-prong receptacles without rewiring the building: removing the grounding pin of the plug, replacing the receptacle with a three-prong outlet, or replacing the receptacle with a Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter (GFCI)."

If someone comes to this article and only reads that sentence, they could think that removing the grounding pin is safe to do. It's listed as an alternative, the next paragraph then states that it is dangerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.137.37 (talk) 23:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)