Talk:Iron ore

message: I miss mention of pyrite and other sulfidic iron ores which have been used in iron processing in history.
:Sulphur compounds are generally the worst ores to refine.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simba541chui (talk • contribs) 16:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Pyrite

message: magnetite (Fe3O4), hematite (Fe2O3), limonite or siderite, all of which are iron oxides.
Siderite isn't oxide, it's iron carbonate. Siim 15:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Siderite

message: Take a look at the ratings. How can the US (#6 with 54 mln tonnes) be ahead of Ukraine (#7 with 66 mln tonnes). Also look at Mauritania (#14 with 10 mln tonnes) and Mexico (#15 with 12 mln tonnes). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.44.148.10 (talk • contribs) 
just what i needed i finaly got my assiment done affer looking for ages this website had every thing thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.115.251 (talk • contribs) 
Also about the survey, China is listed at number one, Australia and Brazil are tied for second, but this contradicts what is written in the statement directly above the table, which says that Brazil is the largest producer then Australia. Which is correct? --Colourblind 02:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... It does say the Brazilian company is the worlds largest producer - doesn't mean china's production is smaller - just many more smaller players involved!TheErrorEliminator 04:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Geological Survey 2004 

message: The layout of the section on mining seems a bit awkward, my suggestion is:
•the paragraph on world production
•the US geological survey table
•the paragraph about production in Australia - it is more significant than production in the US or Canada
•the section on mining in US and Canada
Also, more could be added about Brazil and China since they are both major producers.
If no one has any objections, I would do this myself, however I am a wiki-novice so help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, --Colourblind 02:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mining section 

message: I have read the article and the discussion.
I have some reservations.
I will try in the coming months to complete the article.
My reservations are that the article is very biased to todays situation, only really concerns two areas (USA and Australia), contains some facts that may be correct just now but was not correct 50 years ago, and is partly not Iron Ore but iron making.
I confess that my wiewpont is biased to Kiruna mine competition.
Seniorsag 14:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failings and bias. 

message: One of the most basic question that children ask has been left largely unanswered on the mineral resource wiki's. How many kids want to do a school assignment and answer the question, "How much is there?"  Now adults might ask further questions, such as "How long will it last at current rates of consumption?" and "How long will it last at exponentially increasing rates of consumption?" and then "What are we going to do as this resource peaks and starts to become ever more expensive to extract?" These issues have largely been ignored. For quality control issues it is time to ask some experts in the various mineral resources the answers to these questions, especially how long a resource has against a low exponential increase (of say 2% a year) against a higher increase (say 10% a year).
Eclipsenow (talk) 09:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know the exact answer to these questions world wide, however speaking with mining engineers on Minnesotans Iron Range, they consider the Mesabi Range to be a nearly endless supply, certainly cost will go up as material is extracted from deeper and deeper sources.  I guess that as deep as they sample they find material.  Of course this information is original research because I'm able to directly communicate with the mining engineers, and has no place in the article. It would be interesting to see something published about this... Zath42 (talk) 09:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No discussion of depletion? 

message: Was wondering what the author(s) opinion is on the iron ore mineral Maghemite. There is little information on the web about this mineral.
I do not want to turn this in a 'stock tip' dicussion so a very brief reason why I am asking. 
There is a company in Australia (soon to list) that is currently espousing that they believe they may be able to commercially develop a maghemite resource in New South Wales, despite the ore being very low grade...typically 15%.
The core reason they believe it is feasible is due to maghemite being 'very easily' beneficiated to over 50% by magnetic separation. The other reasons given is that:
1. It is all from surface
2. Rail infrastructure and ports are a non-issue
3. The resource they eventually prove up will be VERY large (billion + tonnes)
They didn't even use the excuse 'higher iron ore prices'.
As far as I know, no maghemite deposits have ever been developed...and this maghemite resource has been known for a very long time (I believe BHP had but then they found the Pilbara...or could have been RIO, cant remember)...which begs the question why no one has ever done anything about it.
Would appreciate your thoughts.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.11.24 (talk) 09:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maghemite - thoughts on commerciality 

message: In an effort to group related information together, I've unilaterally rearranged some of the content, and have renamed a couple of the sections. – Wdfarmer (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me, but I wonder whether the smelting section would not be better being shorter, the remainder of the material being merged with blast furnace.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rearrangement

message: The article says that banded iron formations are composed of magnetite and silica, yet the article on Banded iron formation correctly notes that they can be either magnetite or hematite.  This should be corrected.  Plazak (talk) 20:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Magnetite ores

message: Should this article not mention: 
*Limonite - iron carbonate.  Historically this was referred to as ironstone or iron mine (rather than iron ore), but argillaceous ironstone from coalfields was an important source of iron in the Industrial Revolution and before, though perhpas not today.  
*Iron pyrites - iron sulphide.  This is useless as an ore for the production of iron, but was formerly important as a source for iron compounds?  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Limonite certainly. The last commercial use of limonite as ore in my neck of the woods was...*clickety-click*...1915 or thereabouts. And limonite beds were responsible for the Lehigh Valley's establishment as a seat of the American iron industry. As for pyrites, I'm not aware of any instance where a pure sulfide ore was mined solely for its iron content. However, pyrites cinder (the residue remaining after burning pyrites as a source of sulfur in sulfuric acid production) was frequently extracted for its content of copper and other metals, and the remaining powdered material, known as "purple ore" or "blue billy" (principally Fe2O3) has been used as an ore. I have some notes stashed away somewhere about the processing of pyrites cinder (Rio Tinto set up an American subsidary, The Pyrites Co., to do this c. 1912), and it seems I'll have to write an article about it sometime. Choess (talk) 01:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I look forward to the article.  Pyrites will not make good iron, as any significant sulphur content in iron makes it redshort hence unworkable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The roast to make acid, followed by livixiation to extract copper, precious metals, zinc, etc., seems to remove all the sulfur from the material. The problems with "purple ore" seem to have been, first, the presence of lead in the material, which, unless extracted by a second leaching, would damage furnace linings, and second, the fine consistency of the substance. A high ratio of surface area to weight is necessary for efficient leaching, but the residual iron oxide dust has to be sintered into briquettes to make it suitable for use in ironmaking. I suspect but cannot verify that the latter was the principal problem with purple ore; the Steel Company of Scotland was founded based on Siemens' misplaced assurance that he could smelt steel from purple ore alone. Edison's experiments with magnetic concentration encountered similar problems; the lean magnetite ores had to be ground very fine, and the initial shipments of concentrate blew out of the railcars, and what was left blew out of the stack when the furnace was charged. Anyway, after an extensive stoping operation, I have found my notes on the Pyrites Co. in the piles on my desk, so I'll be plotting out an article. Choess (talk) 03:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other iron minerals 

message: Iron content
I can see that there all authors have different types of iron content for Goethite, Magnetite, Hematite and Siderite. Do anyone know about any international classification standards on the different types? Or do anyone know about a book that has stated what the most common iron content is for the different types? Krosgaard (talk) 07:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iron content 

message: These details were only recently added; prior, the article was stable as it was. Not that we shouldn't attempt to improve, but if the changes were objected to twice, the status quo should stand while the proposed changes are discussed. Here, at talk.
Most of the material has already been incorporated to "Iron ore market". To put it in the lede gives this topic undue weight. Iron ore may indeed be very important as a commodity to be traded. But we should not distract readers from what it is, what it is used for, where we get it from, etc. That information is definitely desirable, but is not worth more than a passing remark in the lede. The lede, afterall, is used to summarize key points in the article, not to discuss issues in detail. The proposed change to the lede is as long as the lede currently is. A good sign that it is being given more attention than it deserves. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 21:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iron ore as a commodity 

message: It seems the recently added and unsourced section titled Future Pilbara production capacity is rather undue weight for this general article. It would be better used in an article on Pilbara#Iron ore section on iron mines rather than here. Vsmith (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Pilbara production capacity 

message: Someone recently changed a couple of ore contents from 60% Fe to 70% Fe. Correction or vandalism? I have no way of knowing because much of this article lacks any citations. All I can do is tag a couple of sections. RockMagnetist (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  60% or 70%? 

message: The article states "With the chemical formula Fe3O4, magnetite ore has much lower iron content than hematite ore" (Fe2O3). Based on the formula, my maths has magnetite having the higher percentage of iron vs oxygen, and indeed this is what is stated in the introduction also. My guess is this sentence is supposed to mean something other than what is written, but I'm not sure what that might be. 218.185.0.10 (talk) 02:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed that recently added, unsourced, redundant and error filled bit. Vsmith (talk) 04:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hematite vs Magnetite concentrations 

message: In the sixth paragraph of the Production and consumption section starts with the following
"In Australia iron ore is won from three main sources"
I presume that "won" should be "one". I do not like changing pages that are not mine. Like tampering with someones hard work.
Peer Review
Lots of useful information, great flow— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommytb05 (talk • contribs) 
 Hi. The phrase you point out is correct in its current form. "Iron ore is won" means "iron ore is extracted". If you changed it to "iron ore is one" it would mean "iron ore is singular" which is incorrect. As a side note, please sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks. Railfan23 (talk) 05:18, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling/grammar error found in Production and consumption 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iron ore. 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/20110322231042/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b0580bf6-c220-11de-be3a-00144feab49a%2Cs01%3D1.html to http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b0580bf6-c220-11de-be3a-00144feab49a%2Cs01%3D1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:03, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm trying to find out if Spanish iron ore was historically manganese-rich. The article begins to hint that it might have been, but where can I find out more? Vince Calegon 11:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spain and manganese 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Iron ore. 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/20060417160321/http://www.mii.org/Minerals/photoiron.html to http://www.mii.org/Minerals/photoiron.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20121230204529/http://www.qrnational.com.au/MediaCentre/MediaReleases/Pages/QRNationalevaluatesindependentraillineforPilbara.aspx to http://www.qrnational.com.au/MediaCentre/MediaReleases/Pages/QRNationalevaluatesindependentraillineforPilbara.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have added a section called Mine tailings that is about the reclamation and production of iron from iron ore tailings. I have also added information about iron ore mining in the United States, Canada and Brazil. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to leave me a message. Joey Stephenson 98 (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Mine Tailings

message: Clearly the production numbers in the Brazil section are off. The.alex.orange (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: What seems clear to you is less so to me. Do you have a more reliable source than the one cited in the current version of the article? --Kent G. Budge (talk) 03:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No, but the two statements "In 2015 Brazil exported 397 million tons of usable iron ore" and "from December 2007 to May 2018 they exported a monthly average of 139,299 metric tons" are incompatible. It's like if I said that the average number of deaths per day to COVID from Jan 1 2020 - 2029 was 10. I don't know what the right answer is, but it's certainly not 10. Do NOT remove this tag until you have determined which source is incorrect (or has been incorrectly interpreted).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.36.146.99 (talk) 20:28, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

text: To make this even more clear "There are reliable sources supporting two or more different claims."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.36.146.99 (talk) 20:44, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Brazil Section

message: I added several edits  from this article to the Mary River Mine article.Oceanflynn (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Content from Iron ore article used in Mary River Mine article

message: What is iron ore 2401:4900:50A6:3711:9018:E440:F934:1123 (talk) 14:40, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social science 

message: The link in citation no. 19 does not work. Is it just me or can someone replicate the issue and remove the now-dead link? (For reference: No. 19 is: "Graphic from The "Limits to Growth" and 'Finite' Mineral Resources, p. 5, Gavin M. Mudd") 
Thanks, Thelas Timpe Rathor (talk) 14:44, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations not working