Talk:Bond paper

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials 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.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials 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

Moved from main article

(moved by Geoff NoNick 22:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

"It is largely made from rag pulp which produces a stronger paper than wood pulp."

It would be more correct to edit this text to:

Bond paper can sometimes contain rag fibre pulp, which produces a stronger, though rougher, sheet of paper. Nowadays, however, bond paper is currently known as being a smooth white sheet commonly made from normal eucalyptus pulp.

External link

This link has been added and deleted repeatedly. It has no additional content except advertisements. I deleted it again. Is there a justification for adding this link?

http://paper.my/Paper%20Types/Bond%20Paper.htm Bond Paper 67.170.54.178 (talk) 02:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's gone Modal Jig (talk) 16:21, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link was added again. I removed as it has no content other than a copy of the article (N.B. it doesn't appear to be the other way round i.e. a copyvio, since the development of the wikipedia article can clearly be seen from the history), advertisements and a few links to more of the same on different paper related topics. I can't see any reason to have this link and in my opinion it should not be re-added as per WP:ELNO no. 1, as it doesn't even provide a unique resource beyond the stub, let alone beyond a hypothetical featured article. Equisetum (talk | email | contributions) 21:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted the wretched thing again! Modal Jig (talk) 23:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]