Talk:Rastra

As a registered architect in California I have designed and completed projects using RASTRA as the primary construction material. The product has excellent properties but also some drawbacks that should be made clear to any potential user. The RASTRA product is produced in limited quantities and shipping to the construction site is costly. The need for a large area for storage can also be a problem. Sealing the joints between the modular sections is very important because of the potential of water penetration. The need for experienced laborers and sub-contractors is important for the proper completion of the project. Fire rating and structural properties of the product are excellent and especially important in areas where high seismic or wind is an issue.

Dansarch (talk) 20:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Daniel Seagondollar Architect Lic. # C-24432Dansarch (talk) 20:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC) I think this is a good start for an introduction to rastra, it's sounds really neat. But it seems like you've only scratched to surface. Are there any examples of how it's used? QueenMonarch 07:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Reads like an advertisement
Needs: 3rd party sources, independent tests and info that comes from independent investigations Doesn't anyone have available images, particularly showing cut-up pieces? What is actual content? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.171.250 (talk) 06:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

RASTRA
I am interested in the product. It was recently discussed in Sunset Magazine. Go to the site called RASTRA. There you can find photos and a discussion of the product. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasme (talk • contribs) 18:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:16, 5 July 2013 (UTC)