Talk:Quartz reef mining

Mining High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reef in "Quartz reef"

Quartz reef redirects here. The article would benefit from some explanation as to what is meant by the term "reef" in "quartz reef". Does it have anything to do with the underwater structures made by corals? -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 18:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quartz reef is an archaic mining term for a quartz vein which contained gold. The reef has nothing to do with coral reef, but rather a resistant layer of hard quartz. I think the terminology originated in the Australian gold fields, but is also used in mining reports from South Africa (the Merensky Reef) and elsewhere. Quartz reef mining or lode mining won gold from in situ hard rock veins as opposed to placer mining of gold from streambed sediments. The above is off the top of my head so proceed with caution :-) Also the associated article needs a bunch of work. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amen, and I'm not sure what to do with it, and it's late...

But I do have a nice picture of high-grade gold-quartz ore:

Pete Tillman (talk) 06:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

High-grade gold-quartz ore from Alma, Colorado

strange

Why is everything in this article in the past tense? --137.195.250.2 (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect numbers?

Consider this from sub section Quartz mines:

60,000 tonnes of quartz was brought to the surface but only 1 tonne of gold extracted.

60,000 tonnes does not seem to be a lot when it comes to mining. And a ratio of 1:60,000 would seem to be extremely good when it comes to gold.

Are these numbers really correct?

--Mortense (talk) 12:04, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]