Talk:Mount Isa Mines

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Boscaswell in topic Tonnes or tons?

Technology section edit

Considering that the mining technology is detailed throughout the article does it need a technology section of its own? - Shiftchange (talk) 07:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I was considering changing the 1973-2003 section to group the technologies within it. At the moment I am still browsing through historical papers digging up bits and pieces. It is all still a work in progress. Separately, I have prepared an article outlining the development of the Isasamelt process and am thinking of doing the same for the others. The Isasmelt article is still awaiting approval by the reviewers. It has managed to work its way to about position 100 on the list. - (CRF talk). ChrisFountain (talk) 02:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page edit

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.mining-technology.com/projects/mount_isa_copper/mount_isa_copper3.html
    Triggered by \bmining-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

  Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 21:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (February 2018) edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mount Isa Mines. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:12, 6 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Tonnes or tons? edit

Both are used, throughout the history section. It looks a bit messy like that… Also, t/y is used a lot. Yay or nay? I’ve replaced this by tons per year in the the 1946-1963 subsection, but not beyond there.Boscaswell talk 04:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)Reply