Talk:Bed size

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Home Living High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home-related articles 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.Home LivingWikipedia:WikiProject Home LivingTemplate:WikiProject Home Livinghome articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

In the Scandinavian countries the queen is larger then the king? Could someone double check this please? -- 116.49.224.47 (talk) 12:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Southwestern scandinavia dont use the terms king or queen just single(90cm) 1½(140cm) or double(180cm) or in terms of widthxlenght eg. 90x210.94.145.236.194 (talk) 19:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Tempura: http://www.tempurmed.se/print208.asp (But in Europe shops tend to sell beds from different countries and the customer has to be on guard as to whether the sizes sold are UK, Continental or other.) Andygx (talk) 09:45, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The chart is a little confusing ... it shows UK Queen as being bigger than UK King. According to the text, perhaps "Queen" should be replaced by "Super King" ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.210.41.170 (talk) 10:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before I change the size of a UK 'standard double' to 135 centimetres (53.1 in) [as given by John Lewis at http://www.johnlewis.com/230737497/Product.aspx ], can anyone justify the figure of 140 centimetres (55.1 in)? Specifically, do 135cm mattresses go on 140cm frames? I know the UK did a nominal metrication from 4'6" [54 inches (137.2 cm)] but I'm unclear what the exact outcome was. 135 and 140 seem to be neither. --Red King (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to http://www.johnlewis.com/230638343/Product.aspx, divan bases are 135cm wide too. Metal and wood bed frames can be any size but it is clear that the matress area is 135. Looks conclusive enough for a change to me. Especiallt as IKEA's 140cm fitted sheets are too wide for a 'standard' UK/IE (135cm!) mattress. --Red King (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at http://www.bedfed.org.uk/guidelines_standard_bed_sizes.cfm [UK Bed federation], I see that the metrication is only representational, that the beds are still made in imperial, so I've changed the article accordingly. --Red King (talk) 12:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that UK sizes are still in imperial and converted to metric. For example a King is 152 x 198 and not 150 x 200. The 150 x 200 size is the European sizing and NOT the UK sizing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.149.87.14 (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the soft and flexible nature of a mattress it is never a perfect rectangle and dimensions are necessarily approximate. An accuracy around 1cm or 1/2" may be expected in practice. 90.199.193.176 (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's an anomaly in the table of UK/Ireland sizes. Small-single is given as 75 cm wide with a note saying two can be combined to make a superking bed. However a superking is given as 180cm wide which would leave a 30cm gap in the middle! Should this say King-sized rather than superking? 90.199.193.176 (talk) 22:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although the article says "older beds" are 190cm long, the 200cm length is actually rather uncommon: most beds for sale outside Ikea stores is 190cm long. -- 82.238.217.133 (talk) 15:50, 29 August 2010

I couldn't find any official specified Australian standards, but there appears to be agreement between the following web sites:

• http://pages.ebay.com.au/buy/guides/bedding-buying-guide/
• http://www.snooze.com.au/Mattresses-Bases/Mattress-Buying-Guide
• http://www.harveynorman.com.au/page/1256967108422/mattress-buyers-guide
• https://www.stiebel.com.au/hot-water-heat-pumps
• http://www.the-pillow.com.au/resources/bed_sizes.php
• http://www.bedshed.com.au/53-what-size-mattress-should-i-choose.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobfred2456 (talk • contribs) 06:23, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Within the same topic/chapter: Australia does sell California King sized beds. There is one company that sells them: Californiakingbeds.com.au. Suggest editing table(s) to reflect the US California King "cell". 27.253.65.88 (talk) 03:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't meet Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sources, and is indistinguishable from spam. At a glance, it doesn't look like any of these meet those guidelines, actually. If you can find a manufacturer's guideline, or a reputable consumer guide, that might work, but shopping sites are too commercial and too hard to verify. Grayfell (talk) 03:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that a commercial site (http://www.the-pillow.com.au/resources/bed_sizes.php) gives different sizes for Asia (Thailand) - probably not suitable as a primary source but if accurate then apparently they have different conventions to everyone else

There are also child sizes for beds; these could be documented. m.e. (talk) 12:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the United States, there doesn't seem to be a standard for Crib and Toddler mattresses. They come in all sorts of sizes. But you're right, their existence should be mentioned. 71.13.147.17 (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no standard sizes for baby and child mattresses, how do you Americans ever buy sheets for these mattresses? :-) Here in Israel there definitely are standard sizes for these, 4 standard sizes actually: a very small crib size (for babies up to 3 months old), a small baby bed (for babies up to, say, 2 years old, who still need to be "caged" in), a baby playpen (square mattress), and a child bed (for children around ages 3-5) which are smaller and usually not as tall as normal "twin" beds which are used by older children. All 4 sizes are standardized, and it's fairly easy to get sheets for these sizes. 46.121.71.138 (talk) 11:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are two common toddler bed sizes in the UK - 140 x 70 cm (termed cotbed), and less commonly 120 x 60 cm (termed cot). There are a number of other sizes that are specific to a brand (e.g. Boori and Stokke).Wikipediun2000 (talk) 21:10, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that the Twin bed width is 39", and then goes on to say that a king is narrower then two Twin XLs, however consulting several US mattress manufacturers websites, it seems that the standard twin width is 38": Sealy Simmons Serta. Also, the Better Sleep Council says 38". Of course, there is also the link cited on the article, and 1800mattress also says 39", but it seems that the manufacturers would be the ones actually specifying the size. - NavillusOne (talk) 13:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TO ALL: the metric measurements off ALL the bed sizes throughout this artice are incorrect! There is no such thing as a bed 140xwhatever CENTIMETRES! Suggest changing all the measurements to metres or the correct centimetres-i'm not sure what is the industry standard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.8.208 (talk) 05:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem with centimetres? We have a bed that is 200x200cm, which is not even listed here. Centimetres are an acceptable measuring unit. The fact that some people prefer using millimetres doesn't change that. Lifeboy (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Funny. I'm the owner of a 140 centimetre bed. And they are quite common here in Germany. 93.208.185.28 (talk) 21:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I own an Italian purchased "Piazza e Mezza Francese" which is clearly labled (and measures) 140 x 190 cm. Original comment is incorrect. Sheets are hard to find! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nsartor (talk • contribs) 06:45, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They appear just to be a group who promotes buying bigger beds, more often. Referring to them as a source of information seems misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.248.68 (talk) 18:05, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently there is a "matrimonial" bed size in Latin America that compares to a full. I didn't add it to the page because I can't find a good source. I will come back to it later when I have more time, but if anyone knows a good source, please add. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akritenbrink (talk • contribs) 15:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On the American King size bed dimensions, I'm not sure why the converter says 84" is 210 cm, it's actually 213.36 cm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.128.132 (talk) 03:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason it says Pineapple under Japan on the bed size table? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.127.112.215 (talk) 07:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Bed size which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.canterburyoakstore.co.uk/blog/bed-size-guide/

  Triggered by \bcanterburyoakstore\.co\.uk\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:14, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Japan sizes are completely incorrect. The source for Japan is not describing Japanese bed sizes; it describes bed sizes in general internationally. The choice of source is entirely inappropriate. Looking at the other bed size comments, my suspicion is that many of the sources for other countries may have a similar issue with the blind use of sources.

Numerous complaints re accuracy are noted above, as are the dubious nature of some citations. Since 2012 there has been a notice on the page about the quality / lack of references. This is Wikipedia - you are *allowed* to edit the article. REMOVE the stuff you know to be false. If it's not supported by citation, out it goes! Paul Beardsell (talk) 11:34, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's a size missing, which is common for waterbeds, sometimes referred to as "California Queen" which is the width of a queen bed (60") but the length of a California King (84"). We have one, actually a Cal Queen waterbed frame with an air mattress insert. Unfortunately the sources I can find are all marketey "buy it here" sorts of sources, but it's easily verified by going to any waterbed store. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:31, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know why the industry arrived at the standards in this article? Hypershock (talk) 13:20, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This table is unsourced and I would say goes against WP:INDISCRIMINATE as its size means it is unreadable to the average user. I would propose it should be deleted and the information it holds should be in the sections for each relevant country or area (if references can be found). --Voello _talk 14:30, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Considering it has been some months since I have proposed this and nothing has changed, I am going to be bold and remove the table. I am happy for this to be reverted if people want to discuss keeping it. --Voello _talk 12:26, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Single bed. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hildeoc (talk) 16:51, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 20:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Twin bed. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hildeoc (talk) 16:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 20:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All the unit convertions.. I say we should only include dual units when a bed size standard is inch based. Including inch conversions on purely metric bed size standards are redundant and makes the article hard to read. Remember that SI units are the preferred units on Wikipedia. It can be excessive to provide conversions every time a unit occur. Sauer202 (talk) 18:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, a separate matter is that the precision when converting 150 cm should be 59.1 inches, not 59 inches. Otherwise, it implies that the standard is actually inch based, which is misleading. However, dual units should go away, and has nothing to do in this article, except for the bed size standards of USA, Britain, and otherwise where the standard is clearly originally inch based, which in the article so far are Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Singapore and Malaysia. In the other countries, any historically inch-defined bed sizes may even have used other definitions of the inch! Sauer202 (talk) 18:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the manual of style, for unit conversions, it states that when "English-speaking countries use different units for the same quantity, provide a conversion in parentheses" and this applies to both systems. Conversions are generally used for almost all measurements on Wikipedia, including international lists of sizes like this (e.g. in List of tallest people or Paper size). Having a conversion does not signify a standard is based on that unit; it is only for the use by readers. There can be exceptions in articles where it may be "excessive to provide conversions every time a unit occurs". But, I would not say this is the case for this article, as the point of the article is to compare the different sizes of beds thought the world. As some countries, like the U.S. use inches, we need both throughout. If an American user who wants to see what size a double bed is in Germany or Spain, they can easily find it out if both units are present (the same is true the other way around too). The usefulness of an article should always come before looks and not including conversions for most beds would make it harder for some users to find their desired information. Too, there have generally been conversions throughout the page since it was created from a redirect a decade ago.

There has been a clean up of some the conversions on the page to make them more uniform and less cluttered (e.g. not 300 cm (120 in) by 300 cm (120 in) it's 300 cm × 300 cm (120 in × 120 in) or using convert for lists). Anyone should feel free to help declutter and include the presentation of the article, as long as it doesn't detract from the content, but personly I don't think it's hard to read as it is (and it certainly better than a few weeks back when there was the "table of common sizes").

As to the precision, most conversions have been rounded to zero decimal places in the convert template as beds are designed to the around the nearest cm or inch due to manufacturing tolerances. Having conversions to a tenth of an inch would give undue precision. --Voello _talk 21:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Tags added 10:18, 8 April 2021 by Voello

Adding issues templates to North America section: needs many more references and has excessive detail in the "less common sizes" and "specific use cases" tables, see WP:INDISCRIMINATE

I agree there are too many uncommon sizes, but I caution against going to the opposite extreme & indiscriminately deleting sizes unfamiliar, non-standard, or not in current commercial use, as these may be important historically. While WP shouldn't be an indiscriminate collection of data, it should IMHO preserve history that may be lost from the Web. Case in point, I came to the article looking for info on the three-qaurter size, which used to be quite common & has some history. The following pages have a little history on North American bed sizes and current tweaks by manufacturers; I don't particularly recommend them as WP:RS, but the info may be useful to editors.

http://amgvintagehouse.com/furniture-facts/standard-bed-sizes/

https://www.thesleepshop.com/store/pc/Standard-Bed-Sizes-d3.htm

Please discuss here before deleting. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 21:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to add that I found the rare dimensions section valuable and would not have found some of these sizes without them being listed here. The only good alternative to deleting would be to spinoff a separate page for esoteric North American bed sizes. 63.135.56.111 (talk) 19:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• 3399 - Fiescheralp - Hotel Eggishorn.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]