Talk:Ripsaw

Is is not rather superfluous to have this article (stub) as well as the one titled rip cut? I think they could be usefully combined into one article.

Also, the image of a rip saw shown here is so similar to the one shown at crosscut saw, it's impossible to see any meaningful difference. It would be nicer to see e.g. a black & white diagram of the teeth demonstrating the differences between the two... Maybe even the same diagram on both pages, to save resources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozaru (talk • contribs) 19:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Statistics
I added the section on technical information (TPI, weight, length, etc). However, I've had no success in finding out the weight, length, and other such things. Can anyone help with this? - Two-Sixteen.11.222.21 18:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 8 February 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Rip saw → Ripsaw – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Webster's Dictionary, Dictionary.com, and thefreedictionary.com all list it as "ripsaw" and Britannica also titles their article as "ripsaw". Additionally, the Google Ngrams stow that "ripsaw" is the more common spelling. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nom as the more commonly used name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)