Talk:Beam compass

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Orienteering, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OrienteeringWikipedia:WikiProject OrienteeringTemplate:WikiProject OrienteeringOrienteering articles

Transport: Maritime

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Metalworking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Message by article creator

Hi, I just finished this article recently. After I finished another article on the scribe-compass, I noticed a section on beam-compass. This is all under the article Compass (drafting). I discovered that the trammel points are just another version of the beam-compass. However there is just limited information on the beam-compass in the article. I am not sure about whether this article shoud remain here or merge with the compass-drafting. The problem I have with the merge is if ie John Doe is searching for info on the Trammel points he is sent to scribe compass and has to scroll down a ways to actually see Trammel points. The problem is that the bigger the article becomes it is like looking for a needle in a haystack for someone unfamiliar with Wiki. This is also true with redirects. Eventually I can see a person searching for something and just giving up. I am admitedly am new to this and maybe missing something but am open to advise. --Johnalden 22:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit, actually merge

I just merged the article Trammel_(engineers) here and copyedited it, including the following:

Removed the following sentence, because it is too vague to provide any useful information:
There are several different types of Trammel points but they all work on a similar principle.
Removed the following sentence with its footnote for the following reasons (1) the description is very vague; (2) it is possible to use trammels (as described here) with a string to draw ellipses, (3) I could not find any such tool on http://www.mcmaster.com/. It is possible, however, that this tool is what was meant by Trammel_(engineers).
There is also a trammel[2]not to be confused with trammel points.

2. The trammel is a mechanical device for circumscribing ellipses. This consists of a metal cross with grooves in it to allow one part of the compass to slide up and down and sideways and the other end of the compass draws the ellipse.
I kept the metalworking template and category, not because this is primarily a metalworking tool, but because I didn't want to interfer with the organization of metalworking articles. — Sebastian 16:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the point of copyeditting, is the proper term plural or singular? The other article was singular, and if that is correct then it takes precedent over the plural form. Wizard191 (talk) 17:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move to beam compass?

The more I think about it, the more I realize that trammels are better described as a part of a beam compass than by themselves. Since beam compass currently only is a redirect to Compass (drafting), which only contains one sentence about the tool, I think this current article would make a great basis for a good beam compass article. — Sebastian 17:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trammel engineers merge

Sebastian, I am almost two months behind on watching this article. The trammel engineers merge is fine. There is more specificity and organization in your merger. My input was from a narrow carpentry point of view and was hoping that someone would improve the article. --Johnalden^talk 03:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks! (For others reading this: I had asked Johnalden about his message above, which I labelled #Message by article creator.) — Sebastian 19:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]