Talk:List of uranium projects

message: where are Polish mines??
 
:Added the names of 15 abandoned mines of Poland. More data has to be compiled and added.
:*Tharikrish 14:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Data

message: To be in conformity with international reporting standards, I think it will be better to change over to tU and %U instead of tU3O8 and %U3O8. I am affecting the changes immediately; however the conversion of the values will done over the next few days.
 Tharikrish  07:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Uranium tonnage and grade

message: I am proposing a major clean-up of this section, as it is my contention that exploration properties do not qualify as "Prospective" mines.  There should be some "significant" uranium mineralization on the property in one drill hole, preferably more, to even make this list.  Turgan Talk 14:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree.  There may be an argument for a much less detailed "Reserves" section, assuming a reliable source is found. –Moondyne 14:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree (belated). Will try to define the criteria based on UNFC-2009: Commercial projects (Operational mines + Planned), Potential Commercial Projects (prospective mines).  Tharikrish  20:20, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prospective uranium mines 

message: I think that this page needs to be merged with the list at uranium mining which is in a list instead of a table giving the reader a more global overview -- eiland (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Uranium mining article is a general descriptive article. We need a list that tracks all operational, closed and planned uranium mines. This is factual data with real metrics for each mine - a living database. Uranium mining article is not a list. Both serves different purposes. This is a list, as well as a table (as most WP list are). So let us keep this (and improve it!)  Tharikrish  20:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Tharikrish, that this list is better kept as a separate article.  Plazak (talk) 21:40, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

text:  Keep Separate and do not clutter the main article with this list Gioto (talk) 21:59, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

text:  Keep separate.  As has been stated, the need for a separate listing of mines at various staged of development/closure is a great resource, and would clutter up the general article.  Turgan Talk 00:44, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Uranium mining 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of uranium projects. 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/20040603085718/http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheets/doeymp0010.shtml to http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheets/doeymp0010.shtml
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) 00:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified