Talk:Utility knife

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Blades (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Blades, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of knives, swords, and blades 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 

Rest of the world?[edit]

I thought that a box cutter is just like a pair of scissors: An office tool that can be purchased by anyone who has enough age to go to a store alone and be considered "normal". Around here, in Chile, at least, it isn't considered "special". The view presented in this article (of the box cutter as a weapon) reflects more or less all the rest of the world? Or just USA and some other countries affected by terrorism? Of course it is used for crime sometimes, but so could be a scissor or a kitchen knife, yet I guess any 14-year old could purchase a scissor, no? --user:guruclef

In the US, anyone can purchase a boxcutter, but their use as weapons hits close to home due to (false, I think) rumors that they were used on the September 11 attacks. The EU is more cautious; I think even kitchen knives have a minimum age. It's much sharper than scissors, though, or even kitchen knives, and lends itself much better to use on flesh. Twin Bird (talk) 05:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Use as Weapons[edit]

I don't have this from a reliable source, more the notion on the street. Hence I'll put it here, and if someone can find research or statistics on the matter, that'd be great. Among teenagers on the clubbing scene in the UK, carrying a 'Segmented type' Stanley knife as a weapon has a specific purpose. You can extend it to four or five notches, stab someone a couple of times, and leave them for dead. BUT, people on the club scence are carrying knives because they think it's a good way to defend themself. They don't want to stab someone to death. A Stanley knife, on one 'notch', will cause pretty nasty damage, but nothing permanent.

In retrospect, this entry (or at least the phrasing) will seem a bit topical, I think. --Pinkunicorn

Yes, I think you're right. I created this because someone wikied the word on the main terrorist attack page, and I thought that might mean that some people might not know what a box cutter knife is. I used to work in a grocery store, so I knew. I suppose that we could remove the topical comment. -- Jimbo Wales

In fact, I didn't know. I changed it to be explicitly topicalm, which seemed more honest to me - this entry would never have existed without the attacks. --Fuzzrock

(Also, these remarks should be removed when someone decides what to do. :-))

I had no idea how this type of knife was created, so it was a useful entry, it was the bit about "carry-on luggage" that felt a bit too specialized. --Pinkunicorn

About self defending, if the guy who approaches you is way bigger and tougher than you are, he might seize the knife and stab you to death instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.119.111 (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I clicked this because I did not know what a 'Box-cutter'-knife is; usefull entry

Sounds like what we in Australia would call a 'Stanley Knife', although I suspect 'Stanley' is probably a tradename. --Peter Jones

I believe Stanley Tools is based in New Britain, Connecticut, so in the U.S. we also often call such knives Stanley knives. Tho' my parents lived in Australia in the early 1960s and may have brought that name with them --Belltower
Peter is right, this is what Australians call a "stanley knife". This is a case where a trade name has become a generic phrase, like the verb "hoovering the carpet". Does this generification process have a name? I guess this subject belongs under one of the language pages, but I have no idea where. Manning
The process is called trademark dillution. Some products (Kleenex, Xerox copiers, Weed Eaters) have entered into common parlance, sometimes to the chagrin of the companies that own the marks. -- ansible
The actual Stanley Knives are of a slightly different design than the plastic-handled knives we are discussing, I think. An actual stanley knife (or faithful copy) has a different retraction mechanism, and rather than the multi-segment blades designed to be broken off and discarded segment by segment as they fail, stanley knife blades do not have multiple segments, but are simply reversible when one end of the blade gets blunt). --Robert Merkel

Not that it really matters but i have a metal Stanley knife with a mult-segment snap-off blade. Made in England. Letstalk 14:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

There are so many types of box cutter knifes in the market. According to the news, the hijacker use one with plastic handle, and the razor blade probably were put on after they have boarded.

The hijackers were said to have concealed such knives somehow, perhaps in carry-on luggage, made invisible by lying them flat next to some common metal object, such as a can of hair spray.

This is more hassle than needed at the time, non-serrated knives up to four inches long were allowed. I used to personally carry a Gerber multi-tool with a three-inch blade on flights. One time while in a rush I forgot to empty my pockets into my carry-on and triggered the metal detector. After I emptied my pockets into the dish, a security person picked up the tool and opened the blade halfway to check it. She then closed it, handed it to me and waved me on. ---Jagged

I heard on a talk show on KGO radio yesterday. The host said he has a friend who is a knife collector often carry knifes in hand carried bags. He only needs to show them to the security and they passed thru.

I moved the Attack-relevant discussion to September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack/Airport security, though I think some of it needs to go in September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack/Hijackers. --The Cunctator

IMHO *very* good article on this by Michael Moore at

http://www.michaelmoore.com/2001_0919.html

Does anybody think it would be appropriate to link to this on the page Box-cutter knife? Comments appreciated.

He only touches on the knife issue for about two paragraphs and the much of the rest of the article does not provide Neutral point of view. In my opinion the article is not appropriate for this entry. --- Jagged

Is a box cutter the same thing as a utility knife? Does anybody have a link to an actual photo of a box cutter? I'm still trying to be sure I know what a box cutter really is. chouwalker

There's an image of one here. --Koyaanis Qatsi

Box cutter = Stanley knife = utility knife = Exacto knife. Any other names people use? --Stephen Gilbert

Actually, X-Acto is a registered trademark of the Hunt Corporation and, while the trademark actually covers a range of products, usually refers to a small knife about the size of a pen, with a short (approximately 1"), pointed blade used for arts and crafts work. It is a samller device than a box cutter knife, designed for lighter-weight and higher-precision work. See this page for more on X-Acto brand products.

No doubt, but in Fredericton, New Brunswick many people use the term "exacto knife" to refer to utility knives. I don't know how common it is anywhere else; I had never heard it before I moved here. --Stephen Gilbert

People use it in North Florida. --Koyaanis Qatsi

Another company that makes them is Olfa (Japanese company, I think). They are available at most hardware and department stores in Canada. They have two common sizes: a thin one, black enamel metal handle, about the size of a flat pen. I used to use them in the newspaper business for cutting up copy for pasting onto big proof sheets. Handy, since they were relatively safe to use and the blade can be retracted quickly. The other model is larger, often in a yellow plastic handle and fills a closed fist. These are commonly used as box cutters and for cutting carpet, tiles and other materials. Both knives have replaceable blades that snap off. The larger one, with about 1.5 in. of blade exposed would be an intimidating weapon. People inherently fear razor sharp knives like these. Amazing what the New York terrorist attackers did with about $50 in knives. One thing it did, though, is diminish George Bush's interest in the new flavor of Star Wars anti-missile program. Who gives a damn about the North Koreans now? Looks like George Bush needs an anti-box cutter program instead :-) --Coasting

External link to Olfa's site: http://www.olfacutters.thomasregister.com/olc/olfacutters/

Their heavy duty cutters are here: http://www.olfacutters.thomasregister.com/olc/olfacutters/hd.htm

Not that it matters, but on the West Coast (of the US) I grew up using X-Acto knives for arts and crafts -- little and held like a pen, blade screws in, and utility knives or box cutters for breaking down boxes. I only started calling the things Stanley knives after my Brit husband refused to refer to them as anything else! JHK

In Israel these knives are called Japanese knives. I don't know why; presumably the first knives where imported to Israel from Japan.

Box-cutter knife → utility knife or craft knife[edit]

September 11 notwithstanding, AFAIK box-cutter knife isn't a commonly used term. In Britain the term box-cutter knife was unknown before Sept 11 and they are commonly called Stanley knives (after one of the most common manufacturers) and if not then craft knives. I don't know whether craft knife or utility knife is more common elsewhere, but I am assuming that utility knife is more common in the USA given that it is mentioned on the page. Jooler 13:11, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Agree, I'd never heard the word box-cutter before 2001/09/11. --fvw* 13:51, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
  • This is, as far as I've been able to determine, a dialect variant which, as others point out, was not widely known or used prior to 9/11. No tradesman I've ever met has called it anything but a "razor knife" or a "utility knife" (the latter being strictly more accurate); to suggest that the tool with which they strip 000-gauge copper wire is a "box cutter" would surely seem rather silly to them. Support. ADH (t&m) 17:44, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support move to utility knife. Neutralitytalk 21:14, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Neutral. In the Southern US they are commonly referred to as "box cutters". I've never heard anyone refer to them as anything else, but I assume this is a colloqualism. Kaldari 22:39, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • I worked with electricians in Texas for a number of years, and never once heard this. At any rate, I'm sure a more generic name is preferable. ADH (t&m) 22:51, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: Google has 300,000+ hits on "utility knife" but just over 1,600 for "box-cutter knife" and "box cutter" at just over 50,000 hits. I think there's little question to what the common name is. Move to "utility knife" and redirect others to it. Cburnett 22:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. violet/riga (t) 22:58, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support rename to utility knife -- Netoholic @ 03:04, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  • Support - Solipsist 10:57, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support to ‘utility knife’, with a corresponding rewrite of the article. — Ford 23:12, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  • Never heard of "utility knife" (is there such a thing this side of the Pond?) - don't move it there - "Stanley knife" would be best, if not there "craft knife". jguk 23:16, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • And I've never heard of a "Stanley knife," but I assume it's akin to calling sidecutting pliers "Kleins"—inaccurate at best, and we have a convention against furthering genericized trademarks. I don't like "craft knife" either, as the heavier-duty versions of this tool are used for anything but crafting. ADH (t&m) 23:51, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
Stanley knives are made in the USA :http://www.contractorstools.com/stanley1.html — Perhapse "Retractable knife" would be better? In the UK "stanley knife" is used for a knife with the blade as shown in the link (and described in the article requested to be moved). The lighter ones with segmented blades that can be snap off as the leading edge gets blunt are called craft or modelling knives. "Stanley knife" like hover is a brand name which has become a generic name in the UK. Here is another use for such a knife which has been around since the 70s or before in Britian (note the dule blade upgrade) http://www.twochapstalking.com/dictarchive/000153.html because in court it is a GBH offence not attempted murder to have been nicked (arrested) while using one on a person. --PBS
  • Support To me a craft knife or hobby knife is the generic term for an X-acto knife, the pencil-shaped metal handle with small replacable blades. Utility knife is the right name for the heavy-duty, plastic-handled, break-off blade knife. Although colloquially, here in Canada, it's just as often called by the brand name Olfa knife. —Michael Z. 16:43, 2005 Jan 14 (UTC)
  • Support a move to utility knife. There IS something that is specifically a box-cutter knife, but what is described on this page is a utility knife, not that. A box cutter, as I've seen them, is a thin, flat knife back designed to hold single-edged razor blades. The handle part of it slides down to cover the blade when not in use. I used them as a teenage supermarket employee. —Morven 17:00, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It looks as if I am a bit late in the day to come in with an oppose vote, but I think there may be room for separate articles. Like Morven, I used them on my Saturday job at Sainsburys and – although box-cutter is new terminology to me – I can see that there might be a distinction. It seems there's quite a lot to say about knives, and there may be room for separate articles in the fullness of time. I would have thought that a box-cutter knife would be a Stanley knife with a hooked blade, but there doesn't seem to be a clear opinion in the minimal research I've done so far. Noisy | Talk 20:11, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Either move it to Stanley knife or leave it where it is. The most famous reference to this kind of knife was its conjectured use as an offensive weapon in some fairly recent hijacking incidents. The phrase used was "box-cutter knife". A Brit who needs to know what that phrase means needs to be able to find out that it's just a Stanley knife. So leave it where it is. -Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:38, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • If that is the argument, can anyone verify that the supposed weapon of September 11 was one of the items pictured on the page? — Ford 19:28, 2005 Jan 15 (UTC)
    • I don't believe the weapons in question were recovered; presumably descriptions came from some of the passengers who used airphones or even cellphones to communicate with the ground. The phrase was "box-cutter knife" and sometimes "plastic knife". Apparently Ashcroft used both phrases in a September 15, 2001 interview with ABC News. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:28, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • You are arguing against your own point, I’m afraid. Since we don’t know that the knives used were the knives pictured, we are not helping inform our British friends by directing them to a page that may but probably does not depict them. — Ford 00:30, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
      • The actual knives used, if any, are irrelevant. The knives that were claimed to have been used were box-cutter knives. Thus it makes sense to keep the article where it is, because this kind of knife was made famous by the claim that knives of this type had been used to hijack a jet. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:11, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
        • Missed the point again. I have lived all over the US, and have never heard the things in the article called “box-cutter knives”. The one on the left is a mat knife, if anything. The one on the right is a utility knife. If the people on the plane said that the hijackers used “box-cutter knives”, they were probably referring to the razor-blade devices that Morven describes, because otherwise the passengers (Kaldari’s comments notwithstanding) would probably have called them something else. The passengers, in all probability, were not even claiming that the hijackers were using one of the knives in the article, because they would not have made a claim, true or false, using such unusual language. The article is misleading. — Ford 01:51, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
  • Support move to utility knife. Jonathunder 03:50, 2005 Jan 15 (UTC)
  • Support move to utility knife. Never heard "box cutter" before 9/11, never heard "Stanley knife" before reading this discussion. -- Cyrius|✎ 01:44, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Reinstated "box cutter" in the text[edit]

The move has happened, but in eliminating the term box cutter from the text we violate the principle of least astonishment. So I've put it back as an alternative name.

If this isn't what is meant by a box cutter, then we should change the redirect. Andrewa 03:02, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've used a box cutter, long ago when I was a night stocker at Safeway. This was a special device that exposed a razor blade at a fixed length and had a guard to prevent the blade from cutting too deeply. It was very different from a utility knife as it was specifically designed for cutting boxes without damaging the contents. Peter (Cactus Pete) (talk) 20:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Self Injury[edit]

Anybody think we should put in a paragraph how it is commonly used (and very succesfully might I add) for self injuring? I personally use it all the time and I know many others who love using it too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.244.187.65 (talk) 00:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

Ok, I added a little bit of info on it...any of yall can go ahead edit it or whatever.

Who invented this in the first place?[edit]

After reading this part:

"In Israel and Switzerland, these knives are known as Japanese knives."

I just remembered that the boxcutter was invented by a Japanese person who was trying to figure out a way to keep using blades without making them dull and without having to import more expensive quality knives overseas. Didn't want to add that in because for the life of me I can't remember who invented it or where I read that from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.139.192 (talk) 00:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Stanley knife in the lead[edit]

Given that Stanley knife is the name used in the UK and Ireland, and on the other side of the planet in Australia and New Zealand, it shoudl be mentioned in the first sentence of the lead "A utility knife or Stanley knife ... " as at the moment the only way a native of those countries knows what the article is about is by the picture. -- PBS (talk) 09:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Take another look at the opening sentence, and click on "names"—it jumps you down to the section that covers various synonyms in various global regions. This is fine, and it's best left as-is. If you don't handle it this way, it becomes a listcruft-adding pissing contest in the lede. Other examples that evolved in this direction are hex key and RTFM. Before they evolved to this pattern, their ledes were stuffed full of distraction. — ¾-10 22:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I would support the above suggestion: the wording of the lead sentence is important as it is what is seen in search results, so this key alternative name ought to be in the opening line. A link is not the same. Also consider accessibility issues. Also perhaps "boxcutter", as used in news reports but previously unknown to me and probably many people this side of the Atlantic (OK, there's a "redirect" hatnote, but we can't rely on that for the content of the article). The "names" section covers names in many other languages: "Stanley knife" is the name in British and other variants of English. There's a difference. PamD (talk) 09:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Looking at your Hex key example, yes, I'm surprised not to see "Allen key" in the lead sentence because that is the British English name for the item. RTFM isn't the same sort of issue. PamD (talk) 09:52, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. Good points about various functional reasons why a jump-link down to the nomenclature section is not ideal in all respects (search, emphasis/weight, etc). This also came up at Talk:Punched card#Discussion recently, where it was pointed out that when one synonym is hotly prized or guarded by one community of speakers (regional or otherwise), it may represent a perceived slight to have it not be in the lede (like it's a "less-valuable" variant maybe). So in light of those considerations, let me modify my comments here to say that whatever y'all want to do here with this lede is fine with me. I would just add a caveat that only the top 2 or 3 "most important" synonyms should occur in the opening sentence, with the "whole long list of other, less common ones" still being handled via a jump-down link to a nomenclature section. (I realize that "most important" can depend on the person judging, but a reasonable consensus may emerge nevertheless.) It keeps the lede unclunky with a high layperson-readability value. Regards, — ¾-10 17:58, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Punched card is a bit different again, in that the terms are recognisably similar. The problem is for someone who searches on "Stanley knife", the most common UK term for this kind of knife, and is silently redirected to an article "Utility knife" which doesn't mention "Stanley knife" in the first paragraph. Targets of redirects are bolded to explain to the redirected person why they've got where they've got to, but this is less effective if the term isn't used near the top of the article. I'd like to put "or Stanley knife" in the lead sentence: should we make that ", Stanley knife or Box-cutter"? PamD (talk) 19:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Ah, I was watching the talk page more than the article: I see you've already done the edit, 3/4-10: thanks. PamD (talk) 19:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Odd line in lead (not any more)[edit]

"They are also commonly used as jean distressers." (cut after copyediting). This surely does not belong in the lead, if in the article at all. Huw Powell (talk) 21:19, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

"Carpet cutter" inaccurate[edit]

(Diff): This is not a carpet cutter. This is a carpet knife. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 20:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Inaccurate[edit]

I hardly know where to begin. Looking at this page, any knife ever invented is a utility knife. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louiorio (talk • contribs) 20:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The problem isn't inaccuracy but rather the variation in natural usage. There are no narrow, mutually exclusive classifications handed down from God, like a one true taxonomy or ontology. Many a knife that you could point to, people will call it different names around the anglophone world; and for many a name you might say, it means different things to different listeners around the world. In my opinion hobby knives are a "different thing" than utility knives; but they're both "razor knives", and really, where is the dividing line between the large 1"-DIA-handle hobby knife, which comes in retractable versions, and the utility knife? The etic classification is harder than the emic one. "X-Acto" in my region means a hobby knife, but it means (what we here call a utility knife) in other places. You could play around with reorganizing the content and pagenaming if you want, but I'm not sure there's value in it, because what you're up against isn't inaccuracy but rather natural variations. — ¾-10 21:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
BTW, another example—in my region, boxcutters are a "different thing" from utility knives, but the problem is that in other regions, the name "boxcutter" covers utility knives, too, and the flat cheap knives are apparently not mentally classified as a "different thing" in some places. — ¾-10 21:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Part of the problem is that a history merge brought in a lot of stuff on "box cutters" even though a "dedicated" box cutter is quite different in design to the knives that most of the article discusses. Personally I'd think about splitting this up three ways, dealing with Stanley-style knives, X-Acto knives and box cutters. It's just how to name the articles that's problematic then, what with the mess of genericised or overly-broad classifications used. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 22:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree completely. Here's a thought not at all fully pondered, but just throwing it out there: One thing that all these knives have in common is that they use removable razor blades (not necessarily literal shaving razor, but that style of blade). We could name this article "razor knife", then have sections for the different types, say, utility, hobby, boxcutter. A nomenclature section could explain that the name usages overlap around the world. Food for thought. — ¾-10 01:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I favor caution in moving articles around to different names. Who will come looking for "Razor knife" anyway? In my brand of US English, a "razor knife" is the cheap little flat thing that holds one single-edged blade.
I do suggest adding an image of the Stanley-type knife to the intro for a quick indication of the primary topic, and perhaps renaming the subsections of the "Design" heading. As it now stands, those subheadings seem ponderous and cumbersome. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
The names of the specific articles is far less important than the quality of our content. Right now this article is a rambling mess which combines three random sharp pointy things into one subject. It's quite possible that we have other articles on subsets of knives with the same problems. If we don't want to split them then we could make this a list article and call it list of utility knives or the like, which collects them without implying they're really the same thing. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 18:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Valid thoughts overall, but I disagree about "ponderous and cumbersome" and "rambling mess" and "random". What's here may not be the best scheme, but it simply reflects the natural problem that occurs in the ontology of a worldwide-scope encyclopedia: You can't create an etic ontology using emic nomenclature, and encyclopedias require emic pagenames (both by unconscious [non-self-aware] convention and to a large extent by pedagogical necessity). The "pedagogical necessity", admittedly, lends some weight to the "cumbersome" observation. But unfortunately what that means is that covering the whole truth and teaching it to other people are not always compatible pursuits, based on the constraints of human cognition. So the content we see here so far is not horrible in the sense of "written by idiots" (I realize that no one here alleged that, but I'm just explicating generally). The problem comes from the universe handing us a double bind type of task. There are no solutions except imperfect ones, and no matter what is done here (reorg, pagenaming, heading wording, cross-ref links), one person will think it's the least of the evils while another person will think it's not the least of them. Human culture would need enforceable retronymy in order to circumvent this problem by renaming whole classes of knives as new variants are invented (just like biological classification, such as binomial nomenclature, occasionally revises existing genus and species names as new species are discovered). But I don't even believe in, ethically speaking, non-voluntary retronymy for natural language. For technical standards and specifications, yes, but not natural language overall. So we are stuck in a world we never made and can't perfect. Not the fault of the good-faith contributors, just the fault of Universe! — ¾-10 23:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
It is easiest for me to suggest an emic arrangement (from where I sit) such as the following:
  • Utility knife (i.e. most knives (not scalpels) with replacable blade(s))
  • Stanley type
  • Snap-off type
  • Hobby or craft type
  • Boxcutter (i.e. simplest flat handle with retractable single-edged blade)
  • Other types (e.g. non-retractable knives using a blade similar to the one used in the pictured Stanley 99E)
That pretty much corresponds to the present subheadings that I accused of excess verbosity. "Discrete" is an example of an extra word in those headings, a word that I don't yet see adding anything. Easy perfect solutions to the dilemma have I none. I think your explication helped a bit... with the universe and Wikipedia being what they are, we are fortunate that we are not working to a deadline. I will be thinking about this, and keeping an eye on this page, of course. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 01:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed re deadline. And also that your version of the heading tree is similar in content as mine, but in different words. I think you're right that it's an improvement. Most people will find it more absorbable through the emic lens. As for "discrete", that was my (probably failed) attempt to label the blades that come as already-separate pieces, as opposed to the snap-off style, where the blades can be viewed as coming "all attached to one another", that is, nondiscrete. I think you are right that it's not clear enough unless one is the writer saying "well, *I* know what I mean." I like your heading scheme better. Will change to that tomorrow, unless you beat me to it. Agreed re continued pondering over time. — ¾-10 04:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Japanese Knife[edit]

The Hebrew/Israeli term for "Japanese knife" refers specifically to a retractable blade knife, and not just to any utility knife. I suppose it's also named after Olfa but I have no reliable source for that. Tzafrir (talk) 11:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Knife[edit]

I'm in Australia.

I don't think all of these kinds of knives belong under any specific heading. When Paul Hogan in 'Crocidile Dundee' responded to the mugger, he said 'That's not a knife, This is a knife', brandishing a large fixed-blade knife. The first knife in the page is simply a knife, such as a bushman might have.

Stanley knives only refer to the ones with the screw-up case and perhaps retractable blades (i have some that don't retract). The american 'utility knife' was glossed as 'stanley knife' here, but this does not lend weight to the notion that they used this style of knife in the attack, but rather what source was consulted.

The xacto knife is a scalpel, perhaps 'blade'. However, if you have an operation, you 'go under the knife'.

The ones with snap-off blades are 'cutters' rather than knives, since it is the point, not the blade, used to cut.

58.174.35.139 (talk) 08:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes I agree, they are just knives, Utility knife is a modern definition/invention Unibond (talk) 12:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
What the article seems to miss completely is that Stanley knives use the Stanley knife system of replaceable blades. These aren't razor blades or anything similar but a tough short blade which was originally only made by Stanley. There were/are other blades that will fit the handle such as a plasterboard saw. The original knives weren't retractable and you changed or reversed the blade by undoing a handle screw with a coin. A Stanley knife is a utility knife, but a utility knife isn't a Stanley knife unless it uses Stanley type blades. This article's American origins are very obvious. --Ef80 (talk) 15:04, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
What you are saying is true in a literal or exact sense, but the term "stanley knife" has been popularized in the construction trades to refer to any knife with retractable blade made the way the (originally) patented, registered Stanley Works knife was made. Stanley Corporation (of New Britain, Connecticut) is still one of the largest manufacturers of such knives, and makes a large variety of styles and designs, including miniatures which are hardly useful for anything other than boxcutters. I, also, was concerned that this was primarily a North American usage. The disambiguation page indicates that this is not the case, that the vernacular use, uncapitslized and genericized, is common in the UK and some English-speaking former UK colonies. More inline references are certainly needed, and this is a perfect illustration of why they are so critical to a good article. One person living in Australia may be unaware of the generic use of the name, just as most North Americans may be unaware, but there are millions in the trades, especially older workers, who use the term generically.
All of our information, mine included, falls under WP:OR, however, until secondary-source references are provided. I will see what I can find. Rags (talk) 09:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Dead links[edit]

Footnotes 5 and 6 srem now to be dead links (at least to a mobile browser). Rags (talk) 08:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Reference for "In the United Kingdom, the law was changed[when?]"[edit]

The age restriction was changed by Section 43(2) of the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006, which amended Section 141A(1) of The Criminal Justice Act 1988, and was brought into force 8th November 2006

Here's a reference from the UK government website https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/38/section/43

I've never edited before so I thought it best to leave it to someone who knows what they're doing 86.29.114.192 (talk) 19:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Generic Name[edit]

Re recent anon edit, much like the word hoover is more common then vacuum cleaner stanley knife is the common name for a utility knife in the UK and many of it's ex colonies [1][2] Unibond (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Utility_knife&oldid=949566295"