Talk:Metalworking

Metalworking Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking 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.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Craft Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Craft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of craft 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.CraftWikipedia:WikiProject CraftTemplate:WikiProject CraftCraft articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Archives

Archive 1

Too many stub articles

The metalworking area has too many tiny stub articles like Slack tub which are nothing but a dictionary definition. These should be expanded, or if that is not possible, merged into some larger article. --Xyzzyplugh 15:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's still true. I recently created Four slide machine, and nobody has touched it since. --John Nagle (talk) 04:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dating system

This is a stupid thing to be warring over, but to set the record straight the BCE/CE was first chosen on this edit: [1]. Per WP:MOS the dating system should stick with that one. Now please stop warring over it. Wizard191 (talk) 13:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

doesn't make sense

The first paragraph states "The earliest substantiated and dated evidence of metalworking was processing of copper in Wisconsin, near Lake Michigan. Copper was hammered until brittle then heated so it could be worked some more. This technology is dated to about 4000-5000 BCE" then subsequent paragraphs describe use of metalworking earlier than 5000 BCE. What gives? This article contradicts itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.13 (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Home Hobbyist

Which of these methods are most common to the home hobbyist wishing to get into metalworking?

Not all of us have entire factories at our disposal.

The main article could be improved by explaining which methods of metalworking are common to home hobbyists. Also, it would be helpful if there were an exploration into the prices of metalworking hand tools. Which methods meet with more wear and tear, and breakage, either of the metal products, or the tools themselves? Are some tools subject to very short lifespans because they break more often than others? I am on the verge of buying a bunch of sheet metal, rolling it up so it fits in my car, and then having at it. The main article would be more informative if it dealt with home hobbyists, and their attempts to do what can also be done with large factories, but with a much smaller volume of product output. 216.99.201.214 (talk) 22:22, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia not the consumers report. We don't address prices or which models break down faster. Wizard191 (talk) 22:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Point of View

"Today modern mining practices are more efficient, but more damaging to the earth and to the workers that are engaged in the industry."

This statement appears to violate the neutral point of view requirement, and does not appear to be substantiated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.236.128.41 (talk) 21:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up...I've removed it. Wizard191 (talk) 22:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brass and Bronze in working techniques chart?

Seems like brass and bronze (being part of the historic ladder of metals) should be included in the "can you mold/grind/forge/etc" chart. Only I don't know enough to fill in the blanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riventree (talk • contribs) 07:59, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Biblical References References Unnecessary and Irrelevant

The detailed biblical account of the origin of metalworking at the top has no place in a pragmatic/scientific article such as this. Note especially the reference to "the Bible" as if everyone should know that we're talking about the Judeo/Christian Bible and the fairly charged wording like "revealed in Genesis" being used to make statements of fact. This entire section should be removed or moved to an article on biblical history. DS8193 (talk) 14:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree (I just did not have time/energy for a strong enough opposition to the editor who was adding it). Materialscientist (talk) 04:40, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Machining section

The Machining section in this article described, exclusively, milling. So I'm renaming it to Milling, and I'll try to figure out where a heading for Machining might need to go. —Kierkkadon^{talk/contribs} 22:08, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Machining needs a hell of a lot more coverage than it currently enjoys in this article. It's sort of mentioned at the beginning of the Cutting section as one of two main categories of cutting, but in the field of modern metalworking Machining is a large, important subject. I would almost say it needs to have pride of place in this section of the article, and I nearly just replaced "Cutting" with "Machining" and put oxy-acetylene cutting in its own section. —Kierkkadon^{talk/contribs} 22:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Continuous casting

Should there not be a suitable section on Continuous casting in here somewhere ? Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose that Metal Testing be merged into Metalworking. I think that the content in the Metal Testing article can easily be explained in the context of Metalworking, and the Metalworking article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Metal Testing will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. ► LowLevel ^(talk) 12:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

oppose -- this is clearly a separate & sub-discipline, see metallurgical assay. the goal of wikipedia is not "let's lump everything together in one big page" Lx 121 (talk) 04:01, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

Forgive this newbie for not knowing the etiquet, but it can't be right that a reference appended to the text "The oldest archaeological evidence of copper mining and working was the discovery of a copper pendant in northern Iraq from 8,700 BCE" should lead to a website about public hangings in Iran. I have no idea how to re-reference the sentence, only to suggest that the existing reference should be removed, until a more appropriate one is found.

LeighForbes (talk) 22:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Metalworking. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC) ×[reply]

missing topics and poor wording

I just found this article from the Wikiproject Metalworking page and I feel it needs a good buffing up and some topics added, or linked to

Smithing in its various forms
Surface Finishing, Restoration, and Preservation
Metallurgy as it applies to forming, cutting, and joining processes

I will add to this list as I think of things

— vulcan_ (talk contrib) 21:46, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

× ×

Metal cutout (art): fully missing on Wikipedia

Artwork from metal sheet consisting of cutouts (2D from single sheets, 3D from multiple sheets) is left out, as far as I can tell. Metal sheet article doesn't even mention art of any kind, and this one here doesn't even contain the word "cutout", let alone a wikilink to a dedicated article or paragraph. Arminden (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No Art in metal article!

Even worse (see above): there is no Art in metal article! Just a "category Ancient art in metal". A "metal art" search only leads to topics on metal rock music. Arminden (talk) 11:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]