Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mining
|WikiProject Mining||(Rated NA-class)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Mining page.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved.|
A quick note
I removed a reference in Underground mine ventilation; you may wish to find a new one. What was there was actually a Finnish-language edition of Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse comics. • talk 22:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Williams Creek (British Columbia) updated and spam removed
I guess it's fairly common around mining-related articles to have content "pushed" by current investors and speculators; this page had a bunch from a current mine in the area; I've moved that content to the talkpage as some of it may be useful for an eventual article on the Cariboo Mining Division, aka "Cariboo Gold Camp", Williams Creek is in the Barkerville-Wells camp of that Mining Division and the most famous and most productive of all creeks in the Cariboo; I've left some lode-exploration associated with the removed material in the article; cites and expansion for it can be found via BC MINFILE. The source I linked for the creek's total value of gold produced has tons of information that can be used to enrichen the creek article and the Cariboo Gold Rush one also. Other than notifying this group of the article's cleanup and to field the general issue of "spammy content" on mining articles, I was wondering if someone here could estimate the modern dollar-value of $19,320,000 1877 dollars; in that year those are likely to have been USD not CAD, as BC had no overland contact with Canada at that point other than via US railways and the USD was the parallel currency to the pound in pre-Confederation British Columbia (pre-1871). I recall a rate in one master's thesis I read, dated from the 1930s or '40s, who posited a 40:1 ratio for "modern" (1930s/1940s) dollar vs mid-19th Century dollar values....which would make the take for Williams Creek reported as of 1877 a whopping $780 billion by that calculation; and much more in 2014 dollars, no?Skookum1 (talk) 14:01, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
- It's a tricky topic, and the answer can vary by a huge amount depending on the assumptions you make and the relationships you want to establish. The comprehensive and scholarly Measuring Worth website has a very good discussion of the topic. As the total value of gold extracted is probably best thought of as an asset in these terms (representing a store of wealth, not as a consumer commodity) then the MW site gives 2013 values of $5.64bn as a measure of the 'prestige value', and $37.7bn as a measure of its proportion of total GDP. A simple CPI-based 'purchasing power' measure gives the much smaller total of $443m, which mostly reflects the fact that the goods and services we buy today represent a much smaller proportion of our income than they did in mid-Victorian times. That help? Pyrope 18:15, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
- Kinda; the only thing I ever saw on this was in the aforementioned thesis re that 40:1 figure, which I've got the cite data for somewhere in old course work notes. I see in news copy about this or that "so much in modern dollars" and the like but no rate of calculation. I'll see what that site has on it. The source linked on Vital Creek from nosracines.ca (the Howay & Scholefield site) addresses the purchasing power by listing prices for staples; and often only grams or ounces are given rather than in dollars; in BC MINFILE it's rarely in dollar-earnings, only in weights whether metric or imperial.Skookum1 (talk) 07:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
placer creeks categories?
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rivers#subcatting_creeks.2Frivers_with_gold_placer_history. Suggestions needed; are there any similar category hierarchies any such category should be mindful of?Skookum1 (talk) 07:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Vital Creek, Germansen River, Williams Creek placer articles
I've begun to add mining history and data to titles like those one; the first two being part of the Omineca Gold Rush, the latter the most famous of the creeks of the Cariboo Gold Rush. Vital Creek had been just a stub, I added this wikiproject after adding mining information from BC MINFILE entries and the 1914 history in the refs, which has detailed dollar amounts for each season, and for countless creeks and mining camps/areas. A list of such placer strikes/creeks will come about at some point; I have dozens to go; anyone wishing to help please let me know, or just use the cites provided to find more (BC MINFILE is easy just google "BC MINFILE [name]" and there's invariably something, ranging from takings to physical geology and claims histories.Skookum1 (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- As Vital (pronounced teh French way, by the way, vih-TAL) turns out to have produced jade, Jade mining in British Columbia is yet another title out there in need of creating someday (Vital's very minor in that capacity, just noting it because of having seen that today).Skookum1 (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Request for review
You might be be surprised about me asking for comments on Draft:IPCC consensus. The first person giving instructive comments however was affiliated with earth sciences and I would appreciate some comments from interested authors from an active portal, and mining looks like one. Glückauf Serten II (talk) 00:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Shaft construction is an absolute mess, it combines to some degree shaft sinking (which is partially covered at shaft mining) and raise (mining), which is in need of expansion. I may take this on in the near future (splitting some of it and cleaning it up), but if anyone wants to tackle it before hand, please do. I also have some recent pictures of shaft sinking I am going to add in the near future. --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Upon further inspection, it appears to be to some degree a copyright violiation of this and sourced with a masters theses from a student at the University of Alberta... oh my. --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:45, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject X is live!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Contribution to carbon dioxide in our atmosphere
Recently, The Guardian produced a report on the contribution each of the major operators has made to the CO2 in our atmosphere. As global warming, sea level rise and ocean acidification come to dominate our possible future scenarios, it seems the contribution these creatures are making to destroying our habitable environments should be emphasized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:14, 25 January 2015 (UTC)