Talk:Saw chain

I know there's loads missing, I need to photograph some chains and do a bit more writing. Plenty left to come. Nailgunner (talk) 22:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added links in and links out; feel free to add more. Nailgunner (talk) 22:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, images found, permissions granted, emails sent, etc. I'm not sure how it comes to read like a how-to guide, since a certain amount of practical information is, I feel, necessary, although I've so far avoided actually giving anything like the amount of information that could be dragged up on saw chains. Some pointers would be good instead of just bombing the page with tags. Anyone?

As it is, if anyone wants to sort out my lousy formatting, crack on - the pictures are all over the place and I've no clear idea on how to sort it. Nailgunner (talk) 23:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your efforts in improving the article. I hate to be a "drive-by tagger" and try to demonstrate what the tag meant by doing some of the work myself, but I had trouble untangling the writing here. It's not that it is bad writing, but it is not encyclopedic writing. If you read about lead paragraphs, you'll see that first of all this article needs to start out with a (sometimes obvious but necessary) statement of fact. For example: "A saw chain is a component of chainsaws, etc., etc. Saw chains were invented by So-and-so, and came into wide use in the ???-Century." What would help me with to help you with the writing is if this article had citations to reliable sources. It's sometimes hard to figure out how to add citations, but do your best and someone else will come along and clean them up. Without citations, the information in the article reads like original research. Unfortunately, as knowledgeable as a Wikipedia writer may be about a topic, we can't take his or her word for it, we need citations. This is what helps us maintain the integrity and quality of the project, vs. it being a mishmash of half-truths and speculation, so I hope you understand. BTW, I found this article because it popped up on a list of new articles that mention "Oregon". I added the name of the founder of the Oregon chainsaw company to your addition to Oregon (disambiguation). It would be great to have an article on the company and tie all the articles together. Happy editing! Katr67 (talk) 15:50, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, some fair points. I'll try to get some quick amendments in over the next few days. I'd really considered the article as it was to be very much a first draft, and I'm sure there's still a lot more that needs to be added or at least tarted up. Adding citations - I've seen the citation tags in use so I get that, finding reliable sources will involve some legwork but it'll come together. Article on Oregon Co.? Nice idea, it would sit well with the others. Certainly Oregon are a major - if not predominant - supplier of commercial/professional cutting attachments and consumables/replaceables for forestry work and chainsaws in particular, so they're an important part of that world. I'll tidy up saw chain first, and try the Oregon co. article later - Unless someone else pitches in? :) Nailgunner (talk) 18:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]