Talk:Bitting (key)

	Housing portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home-related articles 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.Home LivingWikipedia:WikiProject Home LivingTemplate:WikiProject Home Livinghome articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Metalworking

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Either all bitting formats get a section or none of them do[edit]

I agree that angular cuts are clever, but there are dozens of clever bitting patterns and locking mechanisms. Just to name a few there's dimple locks (bitting on the blade), pin-in-pin (bitting within bitting), unevenly spaced pins, sliders (bitting track), and disk tumbler locks (another type of angular bitting). Either there should be a section on all the different bitting styles or the angular cut bitting section should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.8.78.71 (talk) 04:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is the subject of this article bit keys, key bits, or bitting? Suggest splitting into 2 or 3 articles.[edit]

The title and URL say "Bit (key)," the article displays an image of a bit key but confusingly labels it "a warded lock type key," after 2 sentences about a key bits the article changes to the entirely different subject of bitting, bitting is not labeled in the bit key diagram yet the bit key's bit (key) is, then roughly half of the article is on bitting by code which does not exist for the bit key shown in the diagram, nor does it exist for any keys with bits as far as I know.

I find this confusing, and I'm familiar with the subject.

It's also a weird mash-up of subjects because - except for occasional antique restoration jobs - bitting will never be done to any bit key nor bit (key). Also confusing is the name "bit (key)" when a far more common subject is a "bit key." Especially since right now if you google for "bit key" you see this article's picture of a bit key but the article is really key bits (bit (key)) and bitting.

Suggestion: Make one article about bitting, one article about bit keys, and (optionally) one article about key bits.

Can URLs be renamed? If so, I suggest rename this article to bitting and delete the diagram and the first 2 sentences. If not, start a new one and move all but the first 2 sentences and diagram to it.

I can start a new article about bit keys

Start a new article titled key bits and copy the first 2 sentences to it. Or just delete it, because I'm not sure what more you can say about a bit key's or barrel key's bit than those 2 sentences, and that can just be mentioned in the article on bit keys.

If no one complains, I might start doing this on my own. Skintigh (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support a move to Bitting and agree with much of what @Skintigh: says above. Could the arguments for 2 additional pages be clarified? Would both such articles be wp:noteworthy? Key bits could arguably go as a section on one page, perhaps even Lock and key. Chumpih. (talk) 22:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed there is a Glossary_of_locksmithing_terms. The 2 sentences on what a bit is could be moved there. Then this bit_(key) url deleted or changed so it's not so confused with bit key.

As for an article on bitting, I don't think this info is particularly noteworthy, but this isn't my field of expertise so perhaps an expert can weigh in? Another option is it could be split into entries in Glossary_of_locksmithing_terms. Bitting is already there, but specific types of bitting, or bitting by code could be added as their own entries perhaps.

Personally I find bit keys fascinating so an article on them would be noteworthy to me, I hope to add a lot of info to one. It would also be helpful because bit keys are a strangely hard subject to research online -- there are so many terms used to refer to them (bit key, "skeleton" key, mortice key, mortise lock key, rim lock key, a locksmith referred to one as a flag or flag key, vintage or antique key, prison or post office key, cast or castle key, etc.) then some modern cryptography terms like "key bits" and "key flag" overlap with those terms. Skintigh (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Putting useful words in the Glossary_of_locksmithing_terms sounds sensible. So what is the plan for this page? Mark for deletion? Perhaps replace with a redirect to Keys by code or the glossary? I wouldn't mind a Move to Bitting (key), but that's not a strongly-held opinion. Chumpih. (talk) 15:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Skintigh: The deed is done. Great, but would it make sense to move again to get the capitalization in the standard format? Bitting (key) ? Chumpih. (talk) 03:46, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

and I've done that now; updated the links. I see your new page on bit key, and it's looking rather elegant! Nice one. A suggestion is on talk:bit key. Chumpih. (talk) 07:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chumpih: I was in the process of filling out the form on moving the page, and then suddenly it was moved. Did I complete the move and not realize it, or did you? Anyway, thanks for your work on that! And thank you for the compliment! After I started the bit key page I realized I should probably make one one barrel keys, or maybe include it on that page, but I've been super bogged down with work lately and haven't done much. I'll check out the suggestion, thanks :) --Skintigh (talk) 16:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Skintigh: The page history tells all, and I think we're in a good place now, with references patched up appropriately, I hope. All the best with your work; as the mantra goes: "there are no deadlines on Wikipedia", or something like that. Chumpih. (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]