Talk:National Instrument 43-101: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:00, 27 March 2009

Mining Start‑class High‑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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the National Instrument 43-101 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Resource Estimates

Can someone include how resource estimates are calculated as per NI 43-101 standards 66.16.158.235 (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NI 43-101 is not a tool for calculating resource estimates. It is a tool for "qualifying" those estimates. Making a "proper" resource estimate is not straight forward and relys on a lot of commodity specific information and experience. It can be a lengthy process to do properly. This is something that can not be easily addressed here, nor should it. See Mineral resource classification for a bit more info. Turgan ^Talk 15:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major update March 09

I went and updated this. The comparisons with the JORC code are worthwhile, in my opinion, because the NI 43-101 and JORC Codes are, in practise, quite different beasts. It is also worth considering that the layperson is not actually well served by a 250 page report which is mandated to be published in full on the TSX-V by the company, at the behest of the CSA. Sure, the uglies are all there, but the reader is not likely to become well informed about the economics and the sensibility or otherwise of investing.

We should therefore consider trying to link this in with investing pages as this is basically securities oversight tool, as Turgan says. Rolinator (talk) 08:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing this. It definately needed it. Turgan ^Talk 04:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Rolinator (talk) 08:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 We should therefore consider trying to link this in with investing pages as this is basically securities oversight tool, as Turgan says. [[User:Rolinator|Rolinator]] ([[User talk:Rolinator|talk]]) 08:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 :Thank you for doing this.  It definately needed it.  [[User:Turgan|Turgan]] <sup>[[User talk:Turgan|Talk]]</sup> 04:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
+:: No problem. [[User:Rolinator|Rolinator]] ([[User talk:Rolinator|talk]]) 08:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)