Talk:Plug and feather

A fact from Plug and feather appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 July 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that plug and feather, still used today, was the method used by the Egyptians to cut stone?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/July.

Wikipedia

Mining High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section order[edit]

This is most interesting. (Found link through Haytor Granite Tramway edit.) Make sure you do a DYK for it!

Having not heard of the technique previously, and having read the article thus far, I would suggest that the "Technique" section should come before "History", since the latter discusses variances which effectively assume the reader is already aware of how the basic method works. I had to skip the History section, read Technique and then jump back. I think in this case that a logical rather than chronological order would be best.

Cheers -- EdJogg (talk) 11:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the Haytor article when fixing links to this page. Very interesting.

I have already nominated this article for DKY. I hope it makes it.

I took your good suggestion and swapped the sections. Thank you.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wise move :o)

I would think it has a high chance of selection for DYK. As far as I can tell it meets all criteria for inclusion, plus it's an interesting article, but most of all it's an unusual topic. You may find that they adjust your hook slightly, but there's little wrong with it as it is now. Best of luck.

EdJogg (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German article[edit]

The German article (de:Steinspaltwerkzeuge)contains a lot of additional information. Worth reading, if you know any German, that is. The Germans are very thorough in their schooling and in the theoretical background of stonemasonry, and way ahead in putting this information on Wikipedia.--Satrughna (talk) 18:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My German is almost as good as my Swahili. I'm up to around 4 words. I will check out the article there and see if I can grab some photos. I found it strange that nobody had made this article. I guess the Germans appreciate this kind of thing more. I think it is an interesting topic. Thanks for the tip.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History needs expansion or cross referencing[edit]

Article[1] linked from Haytor_Granite_Tramway#cite_note-5 mentions a technique known as "wedge and groove". From the illustrations in the linked article, it's plain the technique is related to "plug and feather" (or "feather and tare", as it's called there). Does the sentence "Variations of the plug and feather method have been used since ancient Egyptian times." cover this? I'm not sure it does, because it's not a variation of "feather and tare" -- actually the more modern technique seems to be an iteration on the older one. Maybe the sentence should read "The plug and feather method is a development of earlier techniques used since ancient Egyptian times."?--Rfsmit (talk) 23:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]