Mine exploration, photographs and mining history for mine explorers, industrial archaeologists, researchers and historians Mine explorer and mining history videos on YouTube Connect with other mine explorers on Facebook
Tip: do not include 'mine' or 'quarry', search by name e.g. 'cwmorthin', use 'Sounds like search' if unsure of spelling

Advanced Search
'Sounds like search'
Quick a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
Tip: narrow down your search by typing more than one word and selecting 'Search for all words' or 'Exact search'

Search for any word
Search for all words
Exact search
Tip: narrow down your search by typing more than one word and selecting 'Search for all words' or 'Exact search'

Search for any word
Search for all words
Exact search

Mine Exploration Forum

Jump to page << < 1 2 3 4 > >>
Author Opinions please, mine type.
JohnnearCfon

Avatar of JohnnearCfon

Joined: 22/12/2005
Location: Sir Caernarfon

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 21:41:03
Reply |  Quote
As regards "clay", surely, if they were classified as "Ball Clay", "Fire Clay" etc is, as Simon states the fact that mostly people would only search for "clay" and would thus not be able to find all the others. The only one that might be an exception (there is always one! doh!) is China Clay.

You could apply the same rule to slate. There are some mines/quarries that were exclusively slab mines/quarries, should they be seperated? I think not!
IP: 92.26.187.241
Peter Burgess

Joined: 01/07/2008
Location: Merstham. Or is it Godstone ...... ?

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 21:44:25
Reply |  Quote
I am not proposing lots of different clay types.

I would like to see "Other Rock" not used in displaying a mine name because it allows mine names to be displayed as they were known, and does not really affect the classification much as they will all be "other rock" with or without the ommission from the name.

I agree that too diverse a list might make the site more prone to duplicates, but honestly I don't think it would affect many sites.

Not knowing the spelling of a name, or the perennial problem of "Wheal Dingbats South", "South Wheal Dingbats", South Wheal Dingbats United" etc etc ad nauseam are more likely reasons for duplicates appearing!



--

Hé ! Ki kapcsolva le a villanyt ?
IP: 92.20.130.141 Edited: 16/02/2011 21:45:08 by Peter Burgess
derrickman

Avatar of derrickman

Joined: 18/02/2009

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 21:45:49
Reply |  Quote
I'd tend to feel that anyone who knows enough about the subject to be interested in the question, will probably be able to work it out from the available information

--

He knew the magic monotony of existence between sky and water: the criticism of men, the exactions of the sea, the prosaic severity of the daily task, because there is nothing more enticing, disenchanting, and enslaving than the life at sea.
IP: 86.30.241.199
Peter Burgess

Joined: 01/07/2008
Location: Merstham. Or is it Godstone ...... ?

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 21:49:31
Reply |  Quote
JohnnearCfon wrote:

You could apply the same rule to slate. There are some mines/quarries that were exclusively slab mines/quarries, should they be seperated? I think not!


There is a difference though. You are describing the different USES of slate, I am considering the wide variation in TYPES of clay.

I acknowledge that variations in the type of slate lead to it being used for different things, but I don't think anybody would think china clay, fullers earth and fireclay are remotely similar to each other, either in physical characteristics or use.

Oh, and what about Stonesfield "slates"? Smile

--

Hé ! Ki kapcsolva le a villanyt ?
IP: 92.20.130.141 Edited: 16/02/2011 21:50:42 by Peter Burgess
Vanoord

Avatar of Vanoord

Joined: 28/11/2005
Location: North Wales

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 21:53:55
Reply |  Quote
I suspect that to 95% of users of the site, the exact nature of the product extracted (eg what sort of clay) is not going to be any enough significance to have it exactly specified in the mine name.

If it's considered important to know that a certain mine/quarry was used for fireclay rather than Fullers clay, then that's what the description can be used for.

Similarly, if a mine produced a few ounces of silver for every tonne of lead it produced, that can go in the description.

Admittedly something like Parc Slab Slate Mine will sneak in under the radar, but there will be exceptions whichever way it's done.

--

Filling space until a new signature comes along...
IP: 86.133.203.214
Peter Burgess

Joined: 01/07/2008
Location: Merstham. Or is it Godstone ...... ?

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 22:02:59
Reply |  Quote
Vanoord wrote:

I suspect that to 95% of users of the site, the exact nature of the product extracted (eg what sort of clay) is not going to be any enough significance to have it exactly specified in the mine name.

If it's considered important to know that a certain mine/quarry was used for fireclay rather than Fullers clay, then that's what the description can be used for.


So why not drop the idea of combining the name of the mine and its mineral entirely for ALL mineral types?

Snailbeach Mine is fine. Why does it have to be displayed as Snailbeach Lead mine, or Geevor Tin Mine?

Perhaps (definitely) there are two distinct issues here. How should a mine be categorised, and should the category be included in the displayed name of the mine? For the second issue, I say it shouldn't, unless the specific mine is better known that way, in which case it should be entered as part of the name in the first instance..

--

Hé ! Ki kapcsolva le a villanyt ?
IP: 92.20.130.141 Edited: 16/02/2011 22:07:09 by Peter Burgess
SimonRL

Avatar of SimonRL

Joined: 27/11/2005
Location: North Wales

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 22:12:12
Reply |  Quote
I've just had a scan through my mine books shelf and, nearly all of them are called Mine Product Mine/Quarry. Cwmorthin Slate Quarry for example; and, er, Snailbeach Lead Mine published by the SMT Laugh

--

Keep Calm And Carry On
IP: 95.148.12.82
Peter Burgess

Joined: 01/07/2008
Location: Merstham. Or is it Godstone ...... ?

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 22:20:41
Reply |  Quote
simonrl wrote:

..... and, er, Snailbeach Lead Mine published by the SMT Laugh


.... Published by yours truly..... Laugh

--

Hé ! Ki kapcsolva le a villanyt ?
IP: 92.20.130.141
Jimbo

Avatar of Jimbo

Joined: 30/03/2007
Location: Ooop North

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 22:33:13
Reply |  Quote
Peter Burgess wrote:

re Hiding "Other Rock"

Yes, I suppose that would have the same effect! In which case, if you wanted to put the rock type in the name, you could do so and it would look good when displayed in composite stylee.

We could have, for example, "Fullers Earth" mines set up as

"Copyhold Fullers Earth"

Mineral type "Other rock" instead of "clay"

which would be displayed as "Copyhold Fullers Earth Mine" which is excellent. Thumbs Up


That's how it's done on ME which hides the 'other mine/quarry' business quite well & allows the user to input a specific mineral as part of the title Smile
IP: 92.17.85.208
SimonRL

Avatar of SimonRL

Joined: 27/11/2005
Location: North Wales

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 22:45:44
Reply |  Quote
If that's a plan people are happy with it would be pretty easy to implement something simple like that.

--

Keep Calm And Carry On
IP: 95.148.12.82
Jimbo

Avatar of Jimbo

Joined: 30/03/2007
Location: Ooop North

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 16/02/2011 23:19:14
Reply |  Quote
simonrl wrote:

If that's a plan people are happy with it would be pretty easy to implement something simple like that.


You can please all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot please all the people all the time Wink
IP: 92.17.85.208
derrickman

Avatar of derrickman

Joined: 18/02/2009

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 07:04:15
Reply |  Quote
since Geevor has been mentioned, Geevor Tin Mine would be a correct form since it was specifically called by that name

--

He knew the magic monotony of existence between sky and water: the criticism of men, the exactions of the sea, the prosaic severity of the daily task, because there is nothing more enticing, disenchanting, and enslaving than the life at sea.
IP: 86.30.241.199
royfellows

Avatar of royfellows

Joined: 13/06/2007
Location: Great Wyrley near Walsall

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 11:38:15
Reply |  Quote
Peter Burgess wrote:


So why not drop the idea of combining the name of the mine and its mineral entirely for ALL mineral types?


Yes Peter, I am with you 100% on this, its actually what I was saying if understood with my way of putting things.

It does seen to me that we may have a concensus on one point at least which is a definite step in the right direction.

EDIT
Another thought, lets put it to the vote.....

Anybody against?

--

''the stopes soared beyond the range of our caplamps' - David Bick...... How times change
IP: 78.150.194.69 Edited: 17/02/2011 11:39:13 by royfellows
SimonRL

Avatar of SimonRL

Joined: 27/11/2005
Location: North Wales

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 11:41:37
Reply |  Quote
royfellows wrote:

Peter Burgess wrote:


So why not drop the idea of combining the name of the mine and its mineral entirely for ALL mineral types?


Yes Peter, I am with you 100% on this, its actually what I was saying if understood with my way of putting things.

It does seen to me that we may have a concensus on one point at least which is a definite step in the right direction.

EDIT
Another thought, lets put it to the vote.....

Anybody against?


I really dislike the idea

I'd far rather see

Cwmorthin Slate Mine
Rhosydd Slate Mine
Llanberis Copper Mine
Boulby Potash Mine
Geevor Tin Mine

Than

Cwmorthin Mine
Rhosydd Mine
Llanberis Mine
Boulby Mine
Geevor Mine

For people who don't a mine well having the main product in the full descriptive name is, I suspect, rather handy.

--

Keep Calm And Carry On
IP: 95.148.12.82
JohnnearCfon

Avatar of JohnnearCfon

Joined: 22/12/2005
Location: Sir Caernarfon

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 12:02:38
Reply |  Quote
I vote for the first option. The second option just does not "sound" right. I realise it will show up a view oddities now and again but I am certain they will be a very small minority. IP: 78.150.249.44
Vanoord

Avatar of Vanoord

Joined: 28/11/2005
Location: North Wales

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 12:23:20
Reply |  Quote
I similarly think that mines need to be identified with the mineral type included (wherever possible).

For one, there are a few cases where there are mines with the same name located near to each other, mining different minerals.

Plus, as Simon points out, it's also handy for people who aren't sure what they're looking for.

The problem with the nomenclature is one of deciding which was the primary mineral extracted.

If there is some doubt about it, it makes some sense to have a 'various'/'leave blank'/'other' option (possibly both) which doesn't show.

The minerals extracted can be put into the description, unless at some point in the future it was possible to select more than one mineral type (which I suspect would require a big re-write).

The way I see it...

Choosing:

Mine name: {Cwmorthin}
Mineral type: {Slate}
Site: {Quarry}

Would generate: {Cwmorthin Slate Quarry}

Whereas:

Mine name: {Snailbeach}
Mineral type: {Various}
Site: {Mine}

Would generate: {Snailbeach Mine}

And:

Mine name: {Betchworth Hearthstone}
Mineral type: {Other} or {Blank}
Site: {Mine}

Would generate: {Betchworth Hearthstone Mine}


That does give some possibility for people to enter weird and wonderful mineral types (as part of the name), so the drop-down list can be kept shorter.

Makes sense to me, although there may still be some possibility for some problems to be caused: people can be very inventive when it comes to filling forms out!
Laugh

--

Filling space until a new signature comes along...
IP: 81.134.74.176 Edited: 17/02/2011 12:28:21 by Vanoord
royfellows

Avatar of royfellows

Joined: 13/06/2007
Location: Great Wyrley near Walsall

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 12:33:42
Reply |  Quote
Vanoord wrote:

I similarly think that mines need to be identified with the mineral type included (wherever possible).

For one, there are a few cases where there are mines with the same name located near to each other, mining different minerals.

Plus, as Simon points out, it's also handy for people who aren't sure what they're looking for.

The problem with the nomenclature is one of deciding which was the primary mineral extracted.

If there is some doubt about it, it makes some sense to have a 'various'/'leave blank'/'other' option (possibly both) which doesn't show.

The minerals extracted can be put into the description, unless at some point in the future it was possible to select more than one mineral type (which I suspect would require a big re-write).

The way I see it...

Choosing:

Mine name: {Cwmorthin}
Mineral type: {Slate}
Site: {Quarry}

Would generate: {Cwmorthin Slate Quarry}

Whereas:

Mine name: {Snailbeach}
Mineral type: {Various}
Site: {Mine}

Would generate: {Snailbeach Mine}

And:

Mine name: {Betchworth Hearthstone}
Mineral type: {Other} or {Blank}
Site: {Mine}

Would generate: {Betchworth Hearthstone Mine}


That does give some possibility for people to enter weird and wonderful mineral types (as part of the name), so the drop-down list can be kept shorter.

Makes sense to me, although there may still be some possibility for some problems to be caused: people can be very inventive when it comes to filling forms out!
Laugh


Bingo!
I think that you have cracked it
Thumbs Up

What say the rest?

Afterthought

"Weird and wonderful" can be corrected by regional editors, I would think that is what they are for.

--

''the stopes soared beyond the range of our caplamps' - David Bick...... How times change
IP: 78.150.194.69 Edited: 17/02/2011 12:35:45 by royfellows
RockChick

Avatar of RockChick

Joined: 12/08/2008
Location: Chester

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 12:45:02
Reply |  Quote
That sounds like the best option to me Thumb Up

--

I have many faults, but all of them are normal!!
IP: 91.195.113.10
JohnnearCfon

Avatar of JohnnearCfon

Joined: 22/12/2005
Location: Sir Caernarfon

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 13:01:53
Reply |  Quote
That seems reasonable other than the fact that "searching by mineral" will be less efficient. IP: 78.150.249.44
Vanoord

Avatar of Vanoord

Joined: 28/11/2005
Location: North Wales

View Profile
View Posts
View Personal Album
View Personal Files
View all Photos
Send Private Message
Opinions please, mine type.
Posted: 17/02/2011 13:09:37
Reply |  Quote
Indeed, but given that this would apply to mines which are generally currently "Mixed" and "Other Rock", they're not really searchable for at the moment anyway Wink

I might put the cat amongst the pigeons at this stage and suggest that this could coincide with the removal of a couple of the least-used options in the database ('Talc' springs to mind as an example, there being only the one) and those mines then being renamed using the new format.



--

Filling space until a new signature comes along...
IP: 81.134.74.176 Edited: 17/02/2011 13:25:35 by Vanoord
Jump to page << < 1 2 3 4 > >>
Safety LED Miners Caplamps Moore Books: Specialist Books I.A. Recordings: Mining and Industrial History DVDs Starless River - Caving Store Explore a Disused Welsh Slate Mine
Disclaimer: Mine exploring can be quite dangerous, but then again it can be alright, it all depends on the weather. Please read the proper disclaimer.
© 2005 to 2015 AditNow.co.uk
Top of Page