Talk:Stamp mill

message: Initial article text lifted from comments left by Apwoolrich at my talk page:  Hammermill section. ++Lar: t/c 19:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: basis for article start

message: I tried (and failed) to remove the excess white space in this article.  Perhaps someone else should fix it. Thanks. Iepeulas
:Full stop outside image brackets.  Fixed.  Noisy | Talk 21:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the problem is too many images or their location, but I forget how to place them on the left.  Perhpas some should be at the bottom however.  Peterkingiron 22:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Excess White space

message: In the Usage section, we see "The heads normally weighed between 4 and 8 cwt[vague] each[...]" — is there a particular reason that the unit of measurement is marked with a [vague] notation linking to the manual of style?  The unit of measurement, the Hundredweight (abbreviated cwt) is properly linked to the article on Hundredweight, so I am not clear if the person who added this notation was concerned about the unit of measure itself (which varies by country) or about the qualifier "normally", or the fact that a range of weights is given.  Regardless, the passage doesn't seem particularly vague to me, as it describes a range of possible weights using units appropriate to the industry of application, so I propose the removal of the [vague] tag/notation unless someone can explain what would be a suitable substitute or improvement.204.17.26.4 (talk) 23:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason it is there is because it doesn't state if the unit is a long hundredweight or a short hundredweight. Wizard191 (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sure that the cwt of 112 lb would be meant: that is the standard meaning of hundredweight in imperial weights.  I suspect that the tagger's objection was to the range 4-8 cwt.  However the range no doubt reflects that different weight heads were used in different places or at differnet times.  I would welcome the removal of the tag.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Vagueness of Units?

message: There's an interesting woodcut illustration of martinet stamp mills available (which I posted about at wt:MILLS#disambiguation in 22 wp:Mills articles, what follows is modified with corrections/clarifications from that):
:*"Osmund" is the reported location of a "martinet" stamp mill, in the first known illustration of such (quote from this current Stamp mill article):
:*I figured out that the actual illustration, a woodcut, is available within the online "category 10" of http://www.avrosys.nu/prints/index.htm website, which seeks to make all the woodcuts of the Scandinavian "historia" available for use.
:*Browsing I found this woodcut image (with description RE: powering "tilt-hammers" here.  It has threefour watermills], and is the woodcut mentioned.  I would describe it as four watermills powering a bellows and three "tilt-hammers", rather than implying there is just one waterwheel.
:It would be great if anyone skilled with uploading to commons would grab that image and put it into this article.  I believe it is offered under wikipedia-compatible terms. --doncram 17:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: martinet stamp mill historic illustration

message: Japanese do have Waterwheels and Mills - However for this article the Usu-link  and the Interwiki-link "Kine"/杵 refers to what we would call a "Mortar & Pestle", albeit a large form - We would not term this as a "Stamp mill". 'Usu' is the Mortar and Interwiki-link"Kine"/杵 goes to the Pestle used in combination. The kanji-character for 'Usu'/臼 may be combined with other characters to make a type of Mill, however, there apparently is no Japanese article for the Karausu / 唐臼 currently. 80.5.219.60 (talk) 10:53, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese Link and Interwiki... 

message: concurring with above unsigned in "merge" comment, IMHO this article currently is too focused on stampers used for ore, leaving all other uses, well said, "orphaned". As I am embarked on an effort to improve a bit articles related to paper making, stampers are essential to understand the development and success of early European papermaking, and so far are almost unknown to WP.
Might be appropriate, at some moment, to make sections, where the ore stampers have primacy, certainly the "older brother" of them all and also the ones still widely in use, but others are suitably represented, without the article appearing to be about ore stampers...
YamaPlos talk 02:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. I think it's just that the main contributors to this article have been those who are interested in ore processing. I'd suggest you add what you can, and if the article then looks too diverse, we could leave this title as a short overview of the topic and split out the ore-processing and papermaking (and oil seed processing?) aspects as child articles, per WP:CONSPLIT.  —SMALLJIM  11:30, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paper pulp stamping mill