Talk:Dredge No. 4

A fact from Dredge No. 4 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 February 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Dredge No. 4 (pictured), now a National Historic Site of Canada, mined nine tons of gold between 1913 and 1959?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2017/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dredge No. 4.

Wikipedia

Canada: Yukon / The 10,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian Territories.
	This article was created or improved during The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada, which started in November 2016 and is ongoing. You can help!!

Mining Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Incorrect figures[edit]

"Over those 338 days, it dredged about 300,000,000 cubic yards (230,000,000 m3)"

This does not work out by any sanity check. It's nearly a million cubic meters per day where the article states earlier that it typically did 14000 cubic meters per day and did 22 buckets per minute. At .45 cubic meters per bucket it works out to 17.5 buckets per second to make the ridiculous rate. Can anyone supply a more reasonable figure?Linktex (talk) 14:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That figure is in the source, though I agree it doesn't appear accurate. I'll remove it and try to find better info. (It's likely these were off by a factor of 10 in the source.) Mind matrix 15:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]