Talk:Boring (earth)

Why Boring not Drilling

WP "Drilling" deals almost exclusively with workshop practice, while making a deep cylindrical hole in the earth is classified as "boring". The roughnecks I encountered in my youth would have called the operation of a rig "drilling" not "boring". Is this just another case of an editor trying insouciantly to lay down the law?--SilasW (talk) 20:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The german word for drilling is "bohren". Its sounds very simular. In swiss, where most of the people speaks german, is drilling in mountains a often situation. perhabs the word is from swiss. It can be also from german engeneers, which was work global or went to america.

91.66.147.116 (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About Problem with SPT

There was a huge discussion about this involving STP's talk page as well as ANI a while ago. It was settled byUser:ｊim.ｈenderson's intervention. In what sense is it POV issue? I'd like to know. I feel odd that User:Beyond My Ken bringing up the issue now again. SPT problems have been discussed extensively in SPT talk page and ANI, and the SPT cannot be done without the boring machine. The issue is very neutral. Yoshi123Yoshi (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing was "settled", and you're doing the same thing you did before, disrupting the article with your personal views. Please stop, and do not restore your POV edit. BMK (talk) 05:37, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are not answering my question. Why is it POV?? All you say is POV, POV, and never say why? SPT is conducted by the boring machine. This is a undeniable truth. When User:Jim.henderson intervened, it was in July, three months ago. Nobody had claimed a complain. If you would like to remove the link, there better be very very good reason. SPT problems are backed by a reliable source. It is not my bluff at all.Yoshi123Yoshi (talk) 06:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just saying that it's been settled elsewhere, doesn't mean anything here, You need to explain why information on problems with SPT should be included in this article. Mikenorton (talk) 11:31, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This issue was talked extensively in SPT talk and ANI as I mentioned above. If it was just within SPT talk you might have a point, but it was brought to ANI, and the issue was discussed there as well. This is when User:Jim.henderson intervened. I am not just saying, go ahead and take a look at SPT talk and ANI; you can find the evidence. And I do not like you, User:William M. Connolley, User: Beyond My Ken work as a team just to make me look bad. Yoshi123Yoshi (talk) 23:03, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fear I am being taken as some sort of authority or arbiter, with my past opinion being offered as relevant to the present article. Alas, this week is far too busy for me to study the present question properly and form a balanced and precise opinion about it. However, having taken a quick look, I get the impression our friend User:Yoshi123Yoshi is weakening his case by saying bad things about thoughtful fellow editors who have a longer record of fair-mindedness on diverse questions. Jim.henderson (talk) 13:24, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]