Talk:CNC wood router

CNC Router EZ-Router.com is a good resource on CNC Routers
- It's a commericial link which can not be used on Wikipedia. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:13, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

CNC wood router page has to merge with CNC Router ;because CNC wood router is sub category of CNC Router other sub categories for CNC Router are: CNC Stone Router CNC Plastic Router CNC Wood Router CNC Router for aerospace applications CNC Router for Signage applications etc.... So the CNC Wood Router has to merge with CNC Router not CNC Router with CNC wood Router —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.22.241.233 (talk) 11:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about that the article CNC wood router (started October 2004) be renamed to CNC router and CNC Router (started 11 April 2009) be deleted since there are so many issues with that article. Any good material from CNC Router could then be merged into the new article CNC router. There would then just be minor edits to the new CNC router to correct it to just that pertaining to a "CNC router" with information that there are also a:

CNC wood router
CNC stone router
CNC plastic router
CNC router for aerospace applications
CNC router for signage applications
CNC router for other applications

Sound better? --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree - This article is actually mostly redundant garbage. In fact, in the photos, I didn't see one real tool, just hobby grade trash. There are dozens of manufacturers, many different axis setups, drive configurations, spindle setups, etc. Maybe this article should just be deleted. Andy Baker Brooklyn, NY Jan 8th, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.143.20 (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it best I could, CNC Router is so much more than wood working. I deleted the wood stuff and added as much as I could. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.251.99.85 (talk) 00:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External link deletion

I don't see how deleting the external link Bas relief patterns for CNC router that I placed on this article was warranted. I did thoroughly read the guidelines and I'd like to point out that the current external link on that article directs to www.youtube.com, a commercial site that generates 100s of millions of dollars for Larry Page and Sergey Brin every year in advertising revenues. The free sample files that I posted a link to are a direct example of the 3D Cartesian coordinate instruction patterns used by CAM software to generate the necessary G-code that facilitates computer numerical control as mentioned within the article. Quazga (talk) 05:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ELs are a much misunderstood topic on Wikipedia. As WP:EL makes clear, the ideal article has no ELs - articles aren't seen as a link directory and it's better to place content within an article than to link to it outside. Resources of "esoteric media" like this (i.e. they can't be added directly to wiki articles) are some of the rare examples that do pass this test, but our primary goal is still to write articles, and to write articles without needing ELs.

Some factors are not an issue for ELs. WP:OSE illustrates that presence of one bad EL doesn't justify a better EL, "because the article already has much worse ELs than this". Many articles have become a bit "link farm", and often need a clean-out of the dross. Also commercial aspects are not a bar to ELs - if the link is justified because of what it offers, it's still justified if this is offered by a commercial site. ELs to "purely sales sites" fail, not because they're commercial, but because they're not offering any valued content besides this.

As to this EL. First off, it's a great link - those are nice models, they obviously represent a lot of effort, and I'm grateful to the creator for publishing them. One note - things might be clearer if their licensing status was more clearly stated. Are these published under an open source licence? (Try reading up on Creative Commons for guidance) If they are the unlicensed copyright of the creator, then am I allowed to use them at all? I can see articles on WP where I think theyd be valuable, on 3D modeling, on 3D printing, or on the tools used for working with STL. Please feel encouraged to add this EL to articles related to that, and cite my comments here as a supporting opinion for them.

As to their inclusion here, then I'm less sure. My only concern is quite different - my experience of "CNC wood router"s has been that they're 2D or 2½D machines, mainly used for profiling work. Although I've used CNC mills in metal and plastics that could use your rhino models, and 3D additive printing is an obvious candidate for them, I've not used a "CNC wood router" that would be able to do fine-detail small-cutter bas relief work like this. As such I don't think they're relevant enough to this article that I'd re-add them - but as noted, I do think they should be welcomed on some other articles. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]