Talk:Mining

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mining article.
Article policies
WikiProject Mining This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining,
a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to Mining.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of Top-importance within Mining articles.

This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
This article is within the scope of the Technology WikiProject, a group related to the the study of Technology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs of Handcar or other rail systems used in mining to transport miners and goods be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
The introduction of this article is too short.
To comply with Wikipedia's lead section guidelines, it should be expanded to summarize the article.

Contents

[edit] Iron mining

How is Iron mined?

You may be able to find your answer at iron. HereToHelp 21:17, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

--- <rant> This rampant page consolidation has got to be stopped. Iron mining is a DISTINCT activity, different from mining in general. While you're at it, each and every type of mining is distinct. </rant>

-swelke

12000 km of tunnels under Banská Štiavnica seems an awful lot of tunnelling, even if it's been going on for centuries. Sure there isn't a decimal point mislaid somewhere? -- Hongooi 09:54, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

What problems do mine owners have to deal with?—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:User:456.789.123|User:456.789.123]] ([[User talk:User:456.789.123|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/User:456.789.123|contribs]])

I'd like to see discussion of native sub-Saharan African mining (pre-European contact). —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:User:69.232.105.130|User:69.232.105.130]] ([[User talk:User:69.232.105.130|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/User:69.232.105.130|contribs]])

REVISION NEEDED: environmental section, "Several million dollars annually are spent on the environmental effects of these tailing ponds at Climax, Colorado, even though the molybdenum mine has been closed for decades." The mine closed in 1995, and will probably reopen next year. And I seriously doubt the "several million dollars" part. Pete Tillman 18:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Every time moly prices spike they say that they'll re-open the Climax mine. Usually before they make the final go-ahead decision moly prices go back down, or there's a threat that they will, and they end up not doing it. I wouldn't expect Climax to re-open until I actually saw concentrate on a truck leaving the place. That said, they ought to be making good money over at the Henderson these days. BSMet94 19:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Miner's strikes

I came to this article looking for a link to the mining strikes that took place in the UK in the 1970s and 1980s, but can find nothing even in the "See also" section. The economic impact of mining, and the effect of removing this economy from an area is a very important issue that should at least have a mention, I feel. -- Francs2000 23:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Very U.S centric article here. Interesting info but there is so much more happening worldwide. What about some of the current global geo-political mining issues? Coltan, diamonds etc. and the current situation in Congo? Environmental issues such as those happening in Eastern Europe etc.?

[edit] "sub-surface" mining

The section discussing "sub-surface" mining should be edited as noone in the industry refers to any of those "types". It would be better to distinguish being captive and non captive methods, or conventional vs mechanize methods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.112.214 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 10 January 2007

I added correct terms, I think they suit the subject better than the ones above it, I would recommend removing everything above Borehole mining IMO... Further the shaft mining makes no sense, it could be modified into shaft sinking... Suggestions? Djoeyd114 18:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
This Video depicts a extreamly short bit on Undercut mining. Is it worth a mention? Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 02:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Historical techniques

I'd be very interested to see this article's history section expanded with a discussion of historical techniques of mining, how pre-industrial or even ancient cultures mined without the aid of modern equipment or mass production.--Primal Chaos 15:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Records

The line about the deepest open pit copper mine being Chuquicamata in Chile is inaccurate or needs clarification. The Bingham Canyon Mine (listed at 300 meters deeper) is an open pit copper mine.

Kennecott Utah Copper

WXAggie 16:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam?

Which link would be considered spam? --Remi0o 22:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Since the article is a general article on mining I would expect the links to cover most of what is in the article, not be country specific and not require the reader to go searching for the specific information that only cover part of the article (leave those links to more specific article pages ie Mining in the American West).
Journals have specific articles, not a general article on what mining is (although this one has - see below)-
  • Mining Journal [1]
Commercial sites that don't easily add to the information in the article (more focused on company and products - save these links for other pages) -
Association pages add nothing to the article except links to other pages or phone numbers to ring to get more information-
These links are too specific and should be moved to their respective pages
So that would make these links (more) relevant-

Which I have updated. Remi0o see the commercial sites above - they are just promoting their websites, they don't add extra info to the article in a simple fashion. - Ctbolt 02:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Good call(s). Thanks for doing that. Cheers Geologyguy 03:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gallery

Gallery links to this page but this page doesn't talk about Gallery 72.66.204.188 17:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed merger proposal

I removed the merger proposal {Mergefrom|abandoned mines|date=June 2007}. The article 'abandoned mines' doesn't exist. Calamarain 08:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some work done

I took to work on citing reliable sources. The history is kind of a fragmented collection of facts, but at least it is now an accurate and reliably cited random collection of facts. However, I was never able to confirm the Neanderthals in Hungary. If ever a more coherent and comprehensive history is of interest, I might suggest A concise history of mining by Cedric E. Gregory. I may do more work in the future. --Kenneth M Burke 03:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ha! Sorry, that's what I get for trying to hunt and gather information in a history book on Hungary. There are some websites that might do fine. --Kenneth M Burke 04:05, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Mining

There is an attempt to get mining, and its derivative articles, listed as an official topic; please sign up if you are interested. Rolinator 06:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I enjoyed working on this page. While I know little about mining, ever since reading The Road to Wigan Pier . . . . I think I would be around to help a project. I am good in the library, can follow a "to do" list and am good at getting done and done well what's asked of me (as long as people aren't too rude in asking). I would be particularly interested in working on a history page. --Kenneth M Burke 17:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger

I think the merger suggested for abandoned mines is a good idea as long as the article can be expanded, adding info to make it less U.S. centric would be a good step in expanding it. --Kenneth M Burke 22:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


The 3774 metres depth quoted for the "deepest mine in the world" is actually the deepest part of Savuka Mine measured below the government mine datum (mbd) and not below surface. The deepest part of the old Western Deep Levels below surface, defined as the shaft collar elevation, is Tau Tona at 3,581 metres (mbc - metres below collar). Savuka is one blast (3 metres) deeper than Tau Tona below datum only. However its shaft collar is 4-5 metres lower than Tau Tona's so it is actually one metre shallower below surface. If the depth of ERPM in Boksburg was measured below collar, that mine probably still has the record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.160.215 (talk) 19:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The merge template has no direction - is it being proposed that the info here be merged there, or the other way around? Of course, if the latter, a summary should probably appear here regardless. Richard001 (talk) 09:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Records: deepest mine in Europe

According to http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergwerk_Ibbenb%C3%BCren (under "Statistische Daten"), the coal mine in Ibbenbüren, Germany, is up to 1.545m deep, making it deeper than the one listed. I personally recall that they claimed it was Europe's deepest when I visited the mine... can anyone clarify this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.231.55.63 (talk) 03:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)