Talk:Scary sharp

Propose Merge

This article is very vague, and hardly encyclopedic. Most likely not even worth notable mention in Sharpening but maybe it should be merged and redirected. ♫Slysplace | ^talk 01:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

hmmm-- in the places I go looking, "scary sharp" is pretty well-known as a way to describe water+flat plate+silicon carbide waterproof paper type sharpening. Notable in my book. __Just plain Bill (talk) 20:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

This phrase "The name is sometimes written with a trademark symbol (™) for humorous effect." really takes away from this articles encylopedic value. There are no refrences or citations, The usenet external link never mentions "Scary sharp" and the exerpt from Woodworking Magazine refers to an individual in the use of the term, "Dunbar's so-called scary-sharp method". The article provides no other practicle use of the term or so-called method. ♫Slysplace | ^talk 14:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree the article can use some work; why not be bold and chase a reference or two? Google is your friend. The "humorous" (™) actually speaks to the practicality of the method-- it doesn't need any sort of precious setup nor refined attitude, and is available to anyone who can get their hands on wet-or-dry sandpaper and has access to a flat surface. __Just plain Bill (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I see no humor in any aspect of wood working tools and the (™) speaks nothing of practicality in the article. I'll remove the {{Unencyclopedic}} tag but as for being bold you obviously have more passion for the article than I, if you feel it's notable clean it up and have your friend google help. Slysplace ^{talk ♫} 01:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, the "humorous effect" is this: Expert artisans are often bright folks, with a twinkle in their eye, even at the same time that they are being quite serious about what they do. Since Scary Sharp (™) is such a simple, accessible, expeditious (and elegant) process, it makes no sense at all to package and sell it and advertise it in glossy catalogs and magazines. Hence the spurious (™), by way of a thumb to the nose at the Hidden Persuaders whose operating model is more consistent with blithe reckless consumerism, than simple practical activity. __Just plain Bill (talk) 15:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

A primary source surfaces

I am the Dave from the original use.net/rec.woodworking post. I am not claiming to have invented the use of sandpaper to sharpen, but I am partially responsible for its popularity as "ScarySharp" (Always hated that name, but it's probably part of the reason it became popular) I believe I'm as close to a first person source as they come. My time is limited at the moment and I'm a neophyte at editing articles. But I would be happy to work with more experienced users to provide some of the historical background. Some of the early developments of ScarySharp came through the 'Oldtools' mailing list so they may not be common knowledge. I would like to add that the(™)was a humorous addition by Steve Lamantia but it was exactly the social nature of the original postings that led to it's initial popularity. ScarySharp is relevant not only for its contribution to woodworking, but as an example of how something from the early popular awareness of the web had a cultural impact. FWIW, the Fine Woodworking article featuring Mike Dunbar came out about five years after the fact. It was a case of the real world catching up to internet based culture.Dmopincarne (talk) 01:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Dave, right here on this talk page is probably as good a place as any. Anything you'd like to say about it is welcome, especially if you can point to live links to relevant online stuff, archives, what have you. Thanks! __ Just plain Bill (talk) 03:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Origin of the term a mystery?

The article stub seems to overlook what might be one of the single greatest points of interest - that being the origin and meaning of the term Scary as it applies to Sharp. Is this 'scary' the adjective, Scary the surname or something else entirely? 66.41.159.76 (talk) 13:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Towards the end of this page you will see the words "terrifying sharpness". Pretty well sums it up, I think. __Just plain Bill (talk) 16:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

On the Internet, researching knives and sharpeners I've run into into the term "scary sharp" dozens of times, and I don't recall it ever referring to a type of sharpening (such as sandpaper etc,) but rather to the degree of sharpness. The imprecise term refers to sharpness that ranges depending on the user, from utility sharp (might slice printer paper) on up to include (in order of sharpness): "tomato slicing sharp," "hair popping sharp," "shaving sharp," and "hair whittling sharp." "Scary sharp" is a popular term used by knife aficionados of all stripes, everywhere.

For example, in this video, "scary sharp" refers to "hair whittling sharp."

Spyderco Paramilitary 2 Scary Sharp!! - YouTube
www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ1qfSsMNt0
Jan 18, 2012 – Just a little demo I saw jdavis882 do, take a knife and hold a hair in the air and cut it into. So check out me chopping a dangling hair with my ...

CarterCutlery can use a cinderblock to sharpen?

Knife Sharpening - Getting a knife Scary Sharp!
This clip is from our "Advanced Blade Sharpening" DVD, which is a sequel to our "Blade Sharpening Fundamentals."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5stV_1kID-U

And using a water stone:
Scary Sharp Demonstration 03
      The owner of Spyderco and also; Ontario Cutlery are among those who chat on Bladeforums.com. Googling that site returns about 6,970 results for "scary sharp," and at first glance, I see nothing that looks like the "Scary Sharp Method." However, of particular interest to us might be this thread which clearly defines "scary sharp" as not being as sharp as "Holy Crap Sharp:"

Define Scary sharp
15 posts - 8 authors - Aug 6, 2009
How do you describe "Scary Sharp"? For me, scary sharp is when you can cut arm hair without touching skin, where sharp would be you could ...

While I personally do think it's ludicrous for somebody to claim to have invented sharpening with sandpaper, for the first time I do see the "scary sharp method," seemingly named after a low-circulation magazine article title or Usenet forum or some such. I get the feeling that wood workers are the only ones that know that meaning. Big Wow. So that means it gets to be in Wiki!? If so, the article should be renamed from "scary sharp" to "the scary sharp method." Keep in mind, individuals nor dictionaries get to create words, only the society does. Yet I understand that need (to claim & "trademark," to piss on the woodpile, etc). But I think the wood carver niche is far outvoted by the rest of the "knife culture." Simply put, "scary" means "frighteningly." scary: Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, 11th Ed "1: causing fright : alarming <a scary story>"
--68.127.94.194 (talk) 08:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)Doug Bashford

Using the Scarey Sharp technique for lapping surfaces.

I use the Scarey Sharp technique for flat lapping of surfaces that must be precision machined, such as gasket surfaces, etc. Using a series of successively finer papers, along with liquid, allows one to produce a surface functionally equal to a fine surface grind finish, in virtually any material. Using well supported plate glass, a light circular motion, & even pressure will leave a surprisingly flat surface. This technique is also excellent for removing machining marks from flat surfaces prior to polishing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.98.224 (talk) 18:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Why does this exist?

Quoth Andy Dingley: "rv prod If you want sources, then source it/ Plenty out there, this is a well-described technique. Undid revision 667160477"

Not sure wht this means in English - but while sharpening with sandpaper is a known technique, the name "Scary Sharp" isn't. Are we really, really relying on a Usenet post from 1995 to back up calling it this?

If anything, this should be a subsection of "Sharpening" called "Sandpaper Technique".

If there are real, actual, reputable sources that directly call this method "Scary Sharp" (as opposed to "Scary Sharp" meaning "really sharp" which is how I've always understood it) I'd love to see them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.213.82.212 (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Actually - disregard the above. The English language is weird. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.213.82.212 (talk) 14:52, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Deletion

Really though, why was the deletion proposal simply removed? "Fix it yourself" is not a good reason. Andy Dingley needs to provide sources or this article should be re-nominated for deletion. I don't see any indication that this is a "real thing" outside some online discussions from the 90's. Also note that first-person sources should not be editing the article directly, as adding information about yourself or your own work violates Wiki guidelines. 204.11.129.240 (talk) 02:14, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

The proposed deletion tag has been removed as it's invalid. Since it had already been used previously and was contested, it may not be used a second time, per WP:PROD.

A brief search shows a number of valid sources, such as legitimate woodworking magazines, discussing the method and the name, which means it likely meets notability and verfiability requirements. In that case a lack of citations is not grounds for deletion. Wikipedia's official policy in WP:ATD states "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." Andy Dingley has correctly pointed this out, and is under no obligation to provide citations, in fact it's the obligation of an editor who wants to tag or remove material to first try to find sources, see WP:BURDEN. Please consider any of the many alternatives to deletion, to improve the article via copy editing, adding citations, or possibly changing the title or merging with another article. -- IamNotU (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2017 (UTC)