Talk:Iron Ring/Archive 1

Archive 1

Discussion

the picture says the ring is made out of stainless steel but I'm pretty sure it's made out of iron... anybody (Nekudot) want to investigate this one?

Hey. To my understanding they were indeed made of iron. However, people's rings started to rust, and then it was decided that newer rings would be made of stainless steel. I don't have any official pages from the Wardens or anything like that, beyond my personal experience (I've seen real iron ones as well as SS ones, but all the young engineers I know have the SS ones). However, check out this page: http://me.queensu.ca/undergraduate/activities/ironring/article.asp --PCStuff

Yes, it's all steel now. --@! 15:43, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, in most camps (if not all), you have the choice of either a stainless steel ring or the iron version. It's a matter of preference, though the steel tends to be preferred.

Can someone provide reference to which camps offer the so called "experienced" rings? I know personally that Camp 3 (Kingston) does not as far as I am aware. Also, which camps allow non-engineers (read: family) to attend the ceremony? --ChristopherBorcsok

--> From someone soon to get a ring from camp 25 (U of Regina): We do. 142.165.253.85 18:51, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

--Sveiki 01:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I got my ring 2004. I had a choice b/w iron and stainless steel. I got mine through camp one (toronto) and I recall them saying that some rings were being recirculated from previous (presumably deceased) wearers.

I got mine this year, no choice on type of ring (the new ones were all Stainless Steel), although at the "switch for one that fits" booth some were the old iron ones. The iron ones were apparently pretty low quality and don't last nearly as long as the stainless ones, and we were told they became dangerous because all the rubbing would sharpen the edges. I didn't know any camps let non-engineer family members come to the ceremony, Vancouver doesn't for sure. Rings can either come from deceased engineers or ones that turn in their rings voluntarily. TastyCakes 05:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Camp 1 in Toronto still has the choice of Iron or SS rings (as of March 2006). I believe they are the only Camp to still allow this choice. I have heard they will be phasing that out sometime in the future, but that may just be a rumour. -d

The comments thus far are mostly, but not wholly, correct. It is true that actual Iron rings are only available as an option for those in Camp 1 (University of Toronto AND the often neglected Ryerson University...Yes, Ryerson graduates DO get Iron Rings. York University will also be a member of Camp 1 once acreditation is granted.). So, Camp 1 graduates have the choice between Iron and Stainless, however, due to limited quantities, Iron is not guaranteed, and all people who requested iron may not receive iron. As for them being recycled. Yes, this is also true. Some especially lucky engineering grads may receive a ring that has been previously worn by an engineer. It is recommended that the ring only be worn by 'practising' engineers. Thus, when you retire, or die, you are supposed to return your ring to your Camp so that they can give it to another person. The experienced rings are extremely rare and are not limited to certain camps. As for the ceremony...All ceremonies are private, all across Canada. The only people allowed to attend are those who are being obligated, and those who have been obligated. The previously obligated engineers MUST be wearing their Iron Ring during the ceremony. So no, family and friends are not allowed to attend. Hope this clears some confusion.

Charles: Camp 10 (Quebec) and camp 16 (Sherbrooke) you can invite your family to the ceremony. I know because I attended for a friend of mine while I wasn't an engineer in Quebec City. Also for camp 16 you can invite up to 3 inviteed (I know because I'm in the comitee organising the ceremony)

The previous commenter is not quite correct. There are two Camps which allow family members and guests to be present. In Calgary we were allowed parents + 1 guest. As stated above, in Regina family members are allowed in as well. But it's not like it's strictly regulated, if somebody really wanted to go, they could just walk in. But why the heck would anyone do that? It is nobody else's business, plain and simple. Personally, I'm for deleting this whole thing off of Wikipedia, because no one who is not an engineer would care, and if you are an engineer, you already know about it. It's not that I want it to be a secret. It's just modesty. -EE EIT

Stainless iron
When I got my iron ring, I initially got an iron one (one that had been returned). Unfortunately, I lost it and had it replaced with a stainless iron ring. The chairman of the metallurgical engineering department had informed us that the new rings were stainless iron, not stainless steel. This was in '76. --Michael Daly 06:00, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Obligated/obligation

==The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer==

The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer is the ceremony where Iron Rings are given to graduating engineers who choose to obligate themselves to the highest professionalism and humility of their profession. It is a symbol only and reflects the moral, ethical and professional commitment made by the engineer who wears the ring. The ceremonies are strictly private affairs with no publication. Invitations to attend are extended to local engineering alumni and professionals (who have taken the obligation - non-obligated engineers may choose to register to take the obligation, but may not participate otherwise until obligated themselves), as well as to obligated engineers by those who are scheduled to take the obligation. Although the details of the ceremony are not secret, they are considered sacrosanct and obligated engineers will normally decline opportunies to discuss the ceremony, particularly with engineering students.

This section uses forms of the word "obligate" eight times. Is "obligation" some formal ceremony or not? Is that the way the word is always used in the paragraph? What the hell is the paragraph trying to say about obligations? Right now, this paragraph is almost unreadable, though on Wikipedia that is the norm (Maybe you guys want to keep it for consistency?).

Then again, that paragraph does lend a certain engineering-feel to the article. You know, that nausea which comes from reading or hearing something unintelligible. Keeping the paragraph as it is makes reading the article feel like communicating with a real engineer!

all the "obligation" language is from the ceremony itself. soemone who has gone through it and wears the ring is referred to as an "obligated engineer". for more infor see www.ironring.ca

Merge with "The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer"

The "Ritual" article should not be merged with the "Iron Ring" article. The ring is meant as a symbol of the obligation to society that an engineer can choose to undertake after graduation. The ritual is not a footnote to the ring; it is the other way around. If anything, the "Iron Ring" article should be merged into "The Ritual of the Calling of the Engineer." -- M. 19:00, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The article should not be merged. As an obligated engineer I agree with the argument above - the ring's relative unimportance is stressed at the ceremony. -69.159.54.91 23:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep separate. The Ring has become a symbol of engineering in Canada[1] and thus has significance beyond the ceremony and ought to have its own article. Nephron  T|C 04:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I also agree that the two articles should NOT be merged. They are intrinsically connected, but not entirely inclusive.

Keep seperate. An iron ring is the symbol for not only the Ritual of the Calling of the Engineer, but also for similar events in other countries. I'm tempted to make a WP:POKEMON arguement here, but the real reason is because the iron ring is generic; the ritual is specific (to Canada). BigNate37_T·C 03:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

It's gotta be kept separate. They are related but not mutually exclusive. There are other ceremonies out there that distribute an Iron Ring (i.e. The Order of an Engineer in the USA). The Ritual of the Calling is distinctly Canadian, and is reserved for only those Canadian Engineering graduates.

• Merge - If the article should be kept separate, then why is 90% of the content of the "Ritual" article already here? BTW, has anyone actually ever seen an American or other foreign engineer with a ring? Nfitz 13:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• "Has anyone seen" is not a good question. I've not been in the United States for years, and I wasn't staring at pinky fingers while there. There may be a case to be made for merging, but your arguments didn't make it. Content in this article may need to be pruned and given a better geo-political balance; being Canadian, I'm afraid I don't know non-Canadian information on the topic. On a related note, I was going to remove the merge tags and make a note that the merge proposal was rejected. I didn't notice your comment until I removed the tag from The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer, so I ended up reverting it. BigNate37_(T) 03:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Images of the Iron Ring

I believe that images of the ring should not be made publically available. Should the image be removed? Currently, I removed the "D" from the start of the link to break it for now. (sorry if that bothers anybody, but I'm new) --Pedx 14:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, you can't remove it from Wikipedia. Your best bet is nominating the image for deletion, but Wikipedia is not censored and holds nothing sacred from what I've seen. BigNate37_(T) 15:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've put the image back, partly since the ring has been featured on a postage stamp. If that's the case, why are we afraid to feature it? BigNate37_(T) 15:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

We are not afraid to feature it. The image of the ring is protected, by law. It is not to be reproduced unless explicitly given permission. In this case, you are not given permission to reproduce the image. Canada Post, however, was in THAT specific case. As engineers, yourselves, you should have some sort of knowledge of this. If you really want more information, I suggest you speak with your Camp Wardens. The postage stamp is the ONLY authorized reproduction of the ring. Please respect the sanctity of the ring and the calling. --natassila 14:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

This is not an engineering society publication. It is Wikipedia, and unless the image is copyrighted or there are other legal grounds to remove the image, it should remain. To me, this is akin to someone superstitious removing all occurances of the numbers 666 and 13—just because you feel that something should not be seen does not require Wikipedia to not display that thing. Asking me to speak with someone else to justify your opinion on the matter is not sufficient grounds to remove the image, and frankly I'm not interested in doing your legwork.

A demonstration of violation of either licensing or Wikipedia policy is required to justify removal of an image of the subject of an article. Even if the likeness is copyrighted (which I haven't seen that it is) we can claim fair use for articlespace. BigNate37_(T) 20:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Ha, this reminds me of the Mohammed Cartoon controversy. And besides, why are there 2 images with the same caption? Only one image showing the stamp is enough. --Kvasir 02:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Removing the ring image based on the convention that details of the Ceremony be secret is ridicious. The ring is worn by every obligated engineer, and is visible wherever that engineer goes. Any picture with that engineer would have the ring visible on he or her little finger. The convention for secret ends when the ceremony ends. The ring is an artifact of the ceremony, and its images are not protected by this secret convention. Besides, if the convention for secrecy is so paramount, we won't even have an article on the Iron Ring Ceremony in the first place, and engineering students won't even be aware of the existence of such a Ceremony until a few minutes beforehand. Clearly, that is not the case. --PCStuff 20:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

While the ring's likeness may be copyrighted, it does not mean that its image cannot be featured here on Wikipedia. As the creator of the picture, I held the copyright to the picture before I released them under Creative Commons. Thus, the copyright to the picture itself is not an issue. As to the legality of a picture featuring a ring that may be copyrighted on Wikipedia, as mentioned above, claiming fair use is one way. We are not using the image of the ring for commercial purposes, and its use here does not affect the reputation or goodwill of the Iron Ring ceremony or the Ring itself. Another way to look at the same issue is a sculpture in front of a museum. Just as the sculpture is publicly displayed, so is the ring publicly displayed, on the little finger of every obligated engineer. People can take pictures of the sculpture, and people can take pictures of the Ring. I believe a picture of the ring adds to the article, and qualifies under fair use. --PCStuff 20:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you but not the museum analogy. Many museums won't allow picture taken of the artwork even without the flash. Not sure of the underlining reason though. --Kvasir 03:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvasir, my analogy is regarding a sculpture in front of a museum. In any event, we're both in agreement, and BigNate37's put back my picture, so the point is moot. --PCStuff 04:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh, why don't i just take a picture of my ring and use that as oppose to an image/likeness what have you featured on a postage stamp. Isn't that more direct? I'll do just that if no one objects. --Kvasir 02:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Kvasier, that sounds like a good idea, in addition to the stamp image. The stamp image should be kept to show how Canada istelf has honored the ring. I like having the close-up of one stamp, as well as the larger photo showing how elaborate the postal presentation was. A photo of your actual ring be a good addition to the postal shots. Heck, have someone take a photo of your hand holding a pencil on an architectural drawing; that would be attractive, and illustrative. (Tangent re inside/outside museums: 1. inside are some artworks that may in time be damaged by flash, which is not an issue for items displayed outside; and/or 2. images inside are owned by the museum, or by lender-donors, and the museum or donor may wish to retain exclusive rights to images of the works. They get to do that -- except in the case of works displayed outside, freely available to the public eye). -- Lisasmall 21:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm going to dig up the name of the image from the page history and put it back. If someone removes it without explaining why on this talk page, I'll explain that it was discussed and revert its removal. BigNate37_(T) 03:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyright?

In removing this edit, I wanted to leave a note why. We don't need to worry about whether links or templates start with upper or lower case letters—the software knows what we mean either way. The other thing is that, as far as I know, Kipling never had the copyright to the ring. He may have held the copyright to the ritual, but I would assume the copyright for that is held by the organisation referred to (but not named) in the ritual article. BigNate37_(T) 14:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

U.S

Wow, that is an impressive tradition and ceremony. In the U.S the closest thing was starting your first job and maybe getting a plastic pocket protector and little different colored pencils and screwdrivers to carry in it, but without any ceremony. Wearing a rusty iron ring would not create an impression of good engineering practice. I've never heard of 'camps" of engineers in the U.S. Edison 17:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Does this have anything to do with the article, or are you just criticising the ring itself? Wikipedia talk pages are not discussion forums for their articles' topics, they are for discussing the articles. Please be more specific if you see a problem with this article. BigNate37_(T) 17:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Wording of portion of the article

"The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer is the ceremony where Iron Rings are given to graduating engineers who choose to obligate themselves to the highest professionalism and humility of their profession."

This seems like opinion to me. I went to the ceremony so I could have the ring, not because I wanted to obligate myself to the highest degree of professionalism or humility. I would wager that many people view the ceremony as somewhat pompous, but want the ring because, in their eyes, it symbolizes their achievement of the engineering degree itself. Tim melgin 02:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Removing Paragraph about discrimination

"For many years Canadian Professional Engineering Associations actively discriminated against women, minorities and engineers who received their training in other countries. Rudyard Kipling, who devised this ritual, is today regarded by many as a racist. To those who have been discriminated against this secretive ritual is thought to be the origin. While open discrimination against women and visible minorities by Canadian Professional Engineering Associations has ended, other kinds of discrimination still exist."

This paragraph tries to talk about discrimination against women and minorities, but does not do it justice. For one, it only focuses on engineers of other countries. If the author wishes to write a new article about discrimination in a "history of the Canadian engineering profession" or in an article about discrimination in general, fine. However, this article is about an iron ring, and claiming the ring was key part of discriminating against other people will have to backed up by much more research. Rudyard Kipling may have been racist, however many people note that while some characters in his books were racist, their is not necessarily evidence he himself was racist. Regardless, this is not an article about Rudyar Kipling past's prejudices, this is about an iron ring. This last sentence has no bearing on the ring, it is a vague statement about discrimination, which occurs all over the world in many different forms. I'm removing this paragraph. Any further edits should be discussed here. Drdestiny77 17:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I think removing the entire paragraph went too far. There are some controversies surrounding the ceremony (and thus the ring itself) that should be known, and that paragraph, although perhaps not perfectly worded, was warranted. I can see what you mean about the last sentence being out of place, though, so I have kept that off. The main point is that because the ceremony in which the rings are handed out is secretive to a degree, some feel it is a source of discrimination. Thus, it is possible that the rings themselves may be seen to some as being symbols of said discrimination.Tim melgin 02:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi thank you for discussing on the talk page. I should point out two things:

1. The ritual is not affiliated with any professional organization. It is completely and entirely voluntary.

2. The ritual is *not* a secret. While the ceremony is only for engineers and engineers generally do not advertise the details, it is not a secret. If anyone asks about the ring and what it stands for, engineers who have taken part are free to tell them.

That said if some feel that the reason professional engineering associations in Canada discriminated against those from other countries fine. It is another thing entirely to say that the ring is responsible for this. There is no reference cited for this, nor is their a logical explanation about how a voluntary ritual created AFTER most professional engineering associations were established, somehow caused this.

Finally this article is about the ring, not Rudyard Kipling. He is mentioned in the ritual article, and much information on him is presented in his own wikipedia article.

From this, I propose the following compromise (replacement for the paragraph):

"For many years Canadian Professional Engineering Associations actively discriminated against women, minorities and engineers who received their training in other countries. Some believe that the ritual of the calling of an engineer may have played a part. There are also some criticisms of the ritual writer Rudyard Kipling."

If I see no complaints on this, I will make the change in the main article. If in some months time, there are still no citations about the connection between the ritual and past discrimination, I will remove the entire sentence.

Does this seem fair?

Thank you.

Drdestiny77 04:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

This seems reasonable, and in fact the reference to Rudyard Kipling is not (in my opion) necessary. Actually, I think the main source of any controversy involving the ring was past use (which has since been mostly corrected) of sexest language in the ritual. Currently there exists some language referencing god in the ritual, as well as biblical quotes. Although this does not offend me, I could see where it may offend others, and thus be controversial. Then again, that relates to the cermeony and not the ring. I have reconsidered my original objection, and therefore, if you wish (and barring others' objections), I think it's fine for you to strike the entire paragraph. I would hope that in the wiki entry regarding the ceremony itself would acknowledge these controversies.Tim melgin 19:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think what has been said here is that this article should only include complimentary content. Discrimination by each of Canada's provincial professional engineering associations is common knowledge: it has been discussed in Canada's house of commons, and even been commented on by Canada's Prime Minister. Since the iron ring ceremony is the recognition of one's attaining the rank of professional engineer, those factors that unfairly exclude some people from achieving said rank should be mentioned here. After all it wouldn't be fair to encourage foreign trained engineers to come to Canada with the hopes that they might some day partake of this archaic activity. There is also the belief by many that this ritual is silly. A more balanced presentation of this is needed. The barriers foreign trained engineers face should be included. The iron ring ritual is tainted by Kipling's racism so this aspect of the iron ring ritual should be included for balance. And finally it would be reasonable to question the relevance of it. It does seem kind of a silly thing for grown men to do. (Zen-in 06:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

You write "Since the iron ring ceremony is the recognition of one's attaining the rank of professional engineer", that statement is completely incorrect. The iron ring only means you graduated from an Engineering program at a Canadian University, period. It provides absolutely NO barrier to foreign trained Engineers. Perhaps your ignorance on this issue highlights that the article may need to be improved to further dispel this common "myth".

As for you assertion that discrimination has occurred by the professional associations (which again, are completely unrelated to the iron ring), if you have actually have good references and good knowledge on that particular subject, please consider adding a paragraph to the Canada section of the Professional Engineer article. Kilrogg 07:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

You just stated "The iron ring only means you graduated from an Engineering program at a Canadian University". If a foreign trained engineer is not eligible it is discrimination. This aspect of the iron ring should be included in the article. Discrimination against women, minorities, the disabled, and foreign trained engineers by Canadian engineers and by Canadian profession engineering associations is well known and is common knowledge. It has even been commented on by Canada's Prime Minister. As a service to any foreign trained engineer who might consider emigrating to Canada the discrimination they would face should be mentioned in any article about engineering in Canada.(Zen-in 15:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

So should Canadian Universities also be required to give diplomas to anyone who asks even though they don't take any classes there? If they don't is it "discrimination"? The Iron ring is just like a "graduation ring", it real is completely irrelevant in the workplace. At least half the engineers at my workplace don't have one. I also know people who got one and then never actually worked as an engineer after graduation, they ended up in a different profession. I'm not sure why you are so mislead on this subject. As to the rest of your comments, you really need to cite some sources. Kilrogg 21:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Iron ring for non-Canadian graduates working in Canada

While the ring is automatically available to all graduates of accredited engineering programs in Canada, it is not exclusive to those engineers. Engineers from other countries can get an iron ring by asking nicely. If they are working in Canada as engineers and are registered as professionals in the province(s) in which they work, they can contact a local camp and arrange to receive their ring at the next ceremony. --Michael Daly 08:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Removing article about registration requirements

"To be considered for membership in a Canadian Professional Engineering Association, an applicant has to work for a member company. This is the most difficult requirement to fulfill, regardless of the skill or dedication of the individual."

This phrase is unrelated to the iron ring. It is about Canadian Professional Engineering Associations. The term "member company" isn't even correct; there is not such thing as member companies. You must gain experience under the direct supervision of a P. Eng, under a P. Eng at the company who may not be your supervisor but can vouch for your work, or even possibly and engineer at another company who agrees to be your mentor. I am removing this paragraph. Any further edits should be discussed here. Drdestiny77 17:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree this paragraph contained misinformation, and was generally out of place on the iron ring page.Tim melgin 02:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

When a Canadian engineer becomes a fully qualified professional engineer he/she can choose to attend one of these camps and receive an iron ring. In order to achieve said qualification the engineer in training must have references from professional engineers they have worked for or who are familiar with his/her work. This is a difficult requirement for foreign trained engineers to meet. Professional engineers in Canada are more interested in collaborating with fellow alumni and have no incentive to help a foreign trained engineer. It is not a level playing field. In recent years this situation has concerned the highest levels of Canada's government.

"As we bring people here to our shores, and then deny them the opportunity to exercise their skills because of unfair obstacles. We said that we would deal with that, . . .”

Prime Minister Martin, Nov 13, 2004, Penticton

Maybe this needs to be stated differently, but it is not misinformation. (Zen-in 05:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC))

Criticism

75.37.23.25, the Criticism section you just re-added was unrelated to the Iron Ring. As the article states, "the ring is not a prerequisite for practicing professional engineering in Canada.".

Of the three bullets of that section, the first one might be more appropriate in the Professional Engineer article, and requires sources to back up all those claims. The second bullet of that stuff might be relevant to the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers article. The third bullet might be relevant to the Professional Engineer article (although I fail to understand how this is a bad thing, would you want someone with no work experience approving the design of bridges?). And remember to research and include sources to back up any claims made. Kilrogg 20:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Ring position

"The location of the ring on the dominant hand also means that it is the furthest from a wedding ring made of gold or other precious metals, which symbolises that monetary gain should not be what motivates an ethical engineer." This seems to me to be pure speculation on the part of the original writer. What about left-handed engineers? Are they, then, expected to break with Canadian tradition and wear their wedding bands on their right hand?

The explanation I've been told, by multiple engineers, is that the ring is placed on the little finger of the engineer's writing hand, so that every time the engineer places pencil to paper, they will feel and hear the ring, reminding them of their Obligation. It has nothing do to with the metal content of anything else on their body. -- JustAnotherProphet 13:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I read somewhere that Kipling noted there was added symbolism, but only for right-handed engineers. If I recall correctly, it was never the intent to create this separation of money-getting and engineering, it simply worked out that way for righties. The second reason you describe is the (more) correct, originally intended and still current idea behind the ring. I have no source to cite, but I have definitely read this and been told something similar. Speculation? No, not in my opinion. Disclaimer: I used to edit this article and I would be embarrassed by this reply if I later realize I was the one who wrote that, so please bear in mind I haven't taken the time to dig through the article's history. I am a Canadian, left-handed engineering student, for what it's worth. BigNate37_(T) 16:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

It was me who added this back in 2006, there was also that bit about lefties. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iron_Ring&diff=prev&oldid=35789843 . This is also from hearsay back in the day. I'll find a source and add this back when i can. --Kvasir (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Camps in table?

It looks a bit cluttered the way it is set up, any objections to a nice neat table?Ottawa4ever (talk) 22:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Also Would it be appropriate rather to list these in a seperate article as a 'List article'? Linked of course to this one any objections/thoughts on that?Ottawa4ever (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Now it's a table. Masters of Wiki-fu may be able to improve the layout; not sure if it would look better with cell borders, etc. so I left it plain. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggest merge

Is there any notability to iron rings by themselves to warrant an article separate from The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer? Not every lodge pin and campaign button gets its own article; some of this text is already duplicated there, and the articles are linked. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Oppose geographically significant in that other countries such as the USA are also giving out engineer's (iron) rings and it is well regarded internationally. I would support a rename and a redirect of iron ring here so its not too regionally specific (perhaps a merge of Engineer's Ring instead?). However the ring can stand on its own I believe. That is my stance on merger. As for the comparison of the iron ring to a lodge pin or campaign button....I think the article demands improvement if that is the impression it is giving to a reader.Ottawa4ever (talk) 22:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Comment I'm sure lodge pins and campaign buttons are of great significance to their wearers, but are they notable in the Wikipedia sense? I did a Google Books search on "iron ring" and, after you eliminate the textbooks on magnetism and ship rigging, the only discussions about the engineer's iron ring are in books about or by engineers themselves. Nobody is talking about iron rings, and they are inseparable from the ritual. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:49, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I did a quick search myself; The importance and significance to the profession i think can be seen in this article from the cbc; [2]. I dont think your search is complete but likely has scratched the surface here. This article mentions nothing of the ritual, but talks of the iron ring; the signature of a Canadian engineer to be used as identification of a deceased engineer in Haiti who could not be identified. And this; [3], though not the same article quality, still refers to the iron ring without the ritual used in tribute. And lets face it Engineers author books. You cant hold that against them, In fact I would hope an engineer would have input on discussing the significance of this ring. The ring has a deep symbolic meaning. I would encourage you to broaden your literature search on the iron ring itself. Those articles in themselves can be a secondary sources establishing General notability. I am sorry but I am not convinced by your reasoning above. Ottawa4ever (talk) 15:23, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

But it's not notable outside the constantly navel-gazing world of people who write articles for the engineering society newsletters. It's about as significant as idenfitying a deceased Shriner as a lodge member because of his fez. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion, but thats why we have these discussions, to gauge concensus of as many as we can. I provided an outside link unrelated to engineering written by cbc (not an engineering newsletter) that mentions nothing of the obligation but the significance of the ring as a signature. A reliable secondary source. I think its a solid source that says otherwise to your view that the ring is non notable. If needed there are others. But Id like to let others gauge in on this, so far its just you and me. Ottawa4ever (talk) 00:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Considering Order of the Engineer and Engineer's Ring are separate articles, there is no reason to merge The Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer and Iron Ring. Conceptually, the ring and the society are two separate matters. Also see the above for an earlier discussion regarding the same merge, which was also rejected. Engini86 (talk) 06:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I look forward to an equally significant article about the tassel on a Shriner's fez, which seems to be about the same level of notability. Pretty soon we'll have a catalog of all the furniture in all the world's fraternties, clubs, societies, sodalities, covens, and Beaver lodges. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The fact that you can even equate the Iron Ring with campaign buttons and furniture demonstrates you don't have the slightest idea what the Iron Ring actually is. I'm sure that in your philistinistic view, things like the Brass Rat, West Point Cadets' Swords and all medals, rings and badges are just more examples of silly good-luck charms. Engini86 (talk) 21:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Every month the blue pages of the PEO newsletter have 2 or 3 "iron ring" wearers who've managed to goof off, screw up or outright defraud their clients. All an "iron ring" means is that someone gave you an iron ring; it is neither necessary nor sufficient as an indication of competency in engineering, as you were probably told at your swearing-in to the lodge. I have no knowledge of the other lodge furniture you mention and I am quite sure possession of a brass hat or a holy sword or any of that other hardware is a positive indication of the bearer's integrity and worthiness. --Wtshymanski (talk) 22:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Fes.jpg

Note the Tassel.

Adoption in other countries section

There is an error I have removed ref: the use of the Ring in the U.S. It is not necessarily a smoothly finished ring, but the citation referenced the Order's page delineating the structure of the large ceremonial ring through which the engineer passes the hand...it is NOT in ref: the ring worn on the hand. As stated, U.S. members of the Order do not necessarily wear a smooth band.75.21.149.52 (talk) 11:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

"Cold Iron"

"Cold Iron" is a phrase uttered to ward off fairies and demons. It is derived from the blacksmith's admonition to never work cold iron, and is related to the phrase "strike while the iron is hot". Pustelnik (talk) 13:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)pustelnik