Talk:Ripsaw
inactive . |
Technology | ||||
|
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? -
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)
- 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)