|WikiProject Metalworking||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Visual arts||(Rated C-class)|
|This article is written in American English (labor, traveled, realize, analyze), and some terms 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.|
Define term O/
a film of gold or an amalgam containing from 13 to 16 O/ of mercury
What is meant by 16 O/ ? A quick search on Google yielded no clear answer.
Its a typo. It should read "%". I've corrected the article. - Cheviot
False claim about Act of Parliament
I deleted the unsupported phrase:
- "there is an act of Parliament (1796), yet unrepealed, which prescribes 5 grains of gold as the smallest quantity that may be used for the gilding of 12 dozen of buttons 1 inch in diameter"
I searched the UK government "UK Statute Law Database" (www.statutelaw.gov.uk) and failed to find such an Act of Parliament. Lightmouse 09:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Weird. It's been that way in the article for over a year now. It's wrong in that even if it is some obscure notation style (for example, only understood by guilders), then it's no use to the casual reader. If I were to guess, I'd say that it's supposed to mean "approximately one percent by weight of bismuth oxide", but without background knowledge or a decent source, I'm hesitant to make the change myself. -Verdatum (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Unusual, archaic how-to tone
Large sections of this article are simply lifted from a Google book, "A dictionary of mechanical science, arts, manufactures, and ..., Volume 1 By Alexander Jamieson". You can find by Googling complete sentences. Seems wrong to me: It's not copyright infringement, as any original copyright is long expired, and it's how-to rather than encyclopedic, and it seems plagiaristic to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:11, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Which parts exactly are plagarized, because I checked a few different sentences and couldn't find any matches. Wizard191 (talk) 18:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Merge of gold leaf
- oppose Why? What case has been presented as to why these two topics, a material and a technique, should be merged? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- '"also oppose'" for much the same reason and found this looking for gold leaf, not gilding Donga Nick (talk) 04:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose' ;likewise. gold leaf has many other uses. Time to remove the proposal now. Johnbod (talk) 13:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Link to Japanese Article
This page has a link to the Japanese page めっき, which discusses metallic plating in general, not the specific area of gilding. I don't know how to change other language links, so I suggest that the link with the Japanese be changed so that it links to the Plating page instead. Athomeinkobe (talk) 12:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- If those are the best articles available at present, then it sounds like the link ought to stay as it is.
- A link from plating (general) to gilding (a narrow, specific article0 is wrong, especially if a better target article exists for plating.
- A link from gilding (specific) to plating (general, but gilding is still within scope) is OK, if that's the best available. It doesn't mean that the target article should link back to it! (This is rarely realised, and why many 'bot additions of commutative links are unhelpful.) Andy Dingley (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)