Talk:Hand scraper

Status

Nice Article.....Jjdon (talk) 22:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not, unfortunately. It makes a lot of claims, but has provided zero supporting evidence for any of those claims. Gcronau (talk) 03:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yes , has nice information here , even if not verified . some workers never tell their tricks . meh ,Konfressor (talk) 19:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Gcronau is correct above, because this article to date reflects only the pseudoscientific folk wisdom of the scraping–versus–grinding-and-lapping question, from the 1920s (with zero adequate reference citations), but not the scientifically balanced reality (which is that scraping is not always necessary but is still used in various contexts because it is not always superfluous). Colvin 1947 covers both this misapprehension and its correction, and Modern Machine Shop and its sister publications have good articles on the modern state of the question in the 21st century. I had sworn I had already fixed this, with references, but I just found by looking at the article history that evidently what I was misremembering was how I was planning to fix it when I got some time to do so. I hope to get around to it; it is an important topic worth covering correctly at Wikipedia. The contributors to the current version were not at fault, because they were simply entering into Wikipedia what they had read in 100-year-old textbooks, which contained solely the pseudoscientific folk wisdom. I know because that's what I, too, learned first, before I read widely enough to learn the modern reality. By the way, Colvin 1947 explained that there have been machine tools over the decades on which the only scraping done was to frost the ways, partly for oil retention but mostly just to assuage the superstitions of buyers who assumed that it signaled that fully dimensional scraping, which they thought was indispensable, had been done. But that is not to say that scraping is never anything but a hoax, either. It is still needed in some contexts, and, of course, it is what allowed people like Whitworth to create the modern surface plate in the first place. — ¾-10 02:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Buggy whip

It reminds me of the guys that tried to protect the buggy whip industry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Longinus876 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Buggies fell out of use but precision slideways are fundamental to modern machine tools; accurate surface plates are the literal foundation of physical metrology to this day. Of course labour costs have tipped the balance against manual scraping where it is possible to achieve the required accuracy and surface properties by machine.--Murdomck (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:48, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misused Picture

I think that the last picture in the article here isn't the right picture. Would I be correct? R. A. Simmons ^Talk 05:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hand scraper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070330133310/http://gfish.livejournal.com/187606.html to http://gfish.livejournal.com/187606.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]