Talk:Boring (manufacturing)

Metalworking High‑importance

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's 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

Verification of bold numbers[edit]

Some of the numbers from both online sources of the 1911 Britannica were garbled in the scanning process. Most were easily identified, but some were impossible to determine, so I guessed. The numbers are in bold. They should be checked against a more accurate source. -- Kjkolb 22:28, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While the 1911 Brittannica source is of great curiosity it does not do justice to modern mechanical drilling machinery. I will update this as i get time, so expect some pretty hefty changes.Rolinator 06:09, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the Britannica content. I don't think there is anything worth saving, but people can go to the history to look for themselves. If there is something to save, please consider incorporating it into the article, rather than just reverting. I also formatted the article. -- Kjkolb 00:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article has a large amount of content identical to the drilling rig article[edit]

While I would expect drilling rig to cover a lot of the same topics, the articles should not have identical content. The text below "drilling types" in both articles is mostly the same. -- Kjkolb 10:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the material. If they are very similar, the articles can be merged, but they should not have content that is largely identical. -- Kjkolb 08:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]