![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is that website address correct? The website it leds to is full of placeholder text and mentions no relation to SpaceX 2605:6000:9FC0:90:6C02:60A9:C2D9:774F ( talk) 02:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
On the website, they also sold fire extinguishers with the flamethrower, so I added it to the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advanced AI ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
This is, in my understanding, not a real company and is kind of a pun. There is no proof that this is actually a company, and clearly names such as Tunnels R Us is a joke. This should be reviewed for deletion. – Dasyntex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dasyntex ( talk • contribs) 12:22, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
It's real. In an interview with TED's Head Curator, Chris Anderson, on youtube Musk confirms activity with the Boring Company. However, he does mention that it's not really a focus of his, and is "more of a hobby." [1] Bknutsen ( talk) 16:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)Bknutsen
References
Photos of TBC/s TBM have been circulated, so a compatibly licnesed picture should be added to this article for its Tunnel Boring Machine -- 70.51.200.162 ( talk) 04:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Tech company seems like a good catch-all. Hasn't yet expressed (unless I'm wrong) interest in either mineral extraction or ground-up development of proprietary tunnel boring machinery.-- MainlyTwelve ( talk) 16:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether or how to incorporate this into the article, but here's some information about The Boring Company as a legal entity:
On January 11, 2017, "TBC - THE BORING COMPANY" was incorporated as a Delaware corporation, file #6279803.
On March 24, 2017, "TBC - THE BORING COMPANY" registered with the California Secretary of State to transact business in California (file #C4008073), and listed its "Principal Office in California" as being on Park Road in Burlingame (San Mateo County), and its president as Jared Birchall (who is also president of Neuralink).
On April 10, 2017, "TBC - THE BORING COMPANY" filed a Fictitious Business Name statement with San Mateo County (file #M-273088), saying it was doing business under the name "THE BORING COMPANY", and had been doing so since January 15, 2017.
Birdfern ( talk) 04:31, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
I added an entry on Musk's most recent announcements, made via Twitter, and I'm assuming that citing the tweets is acceptable, as they're primary sources. I'm reasonably new to adding content instead of just fixing grammatical errors, and I didn't see any tweets cited elsewhere throughout the page, so I thought I should ask. -- DawsonCXVII ( talk) 13:16, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
This environmental assessment document has a large amount of technical and route details on the proposed project. Prepared for the City of Los Angeles. NOTICE OF PREPARATION INCLUDING AN INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR THE Dugout Loop High Speed Transportation Project, August 2018. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 06:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Please participate in discussion at Talk:Boeing#RfC on hatnote. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 19:16, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Tho i'm indisposed right now from giving the needed edit the attn it will deserve, the article has so far failed to deal with the ramifications of his sloppy and perhaps deceptive use of that word. Based on our talk page, it seems there's been a subsequent correction or at least clarification via at least company insiders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:199:C202:287E:B58D:483C:903F:5A3E ( talk) 03:30, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
The article covers the same project under the Los Angeles proposals and the Hawthorne segment and confuses the current news. While the Hawthorne segment may eventually be extended, the portion that is under construction and nearing completion per Musk is within the city of Hawthorne. Cheers Fettlemap ( talk) 14:20, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Need a better source than reddit, but once one appears we can hopefully incorporate this Elon-esque analogy into the article:
I also note that "Prufrock" was announced verbally in a conference by Elon; presumably many reporters weren't aware of the T.S. Eliot link and merely wrote down what they heard, hence the "proof-rock" alternative spelling in various sources. Rosbif73 ( talk) 07:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
I removed the following passage:
In January 2019, Musk responded to a query from an Australian MP regarding a tunnel through the
Blue Mountains to the west of Sydney, suggesting costs of $15 million per kilometer or $750 million for the 50-kilometre (31 mi) tunnel, plus $50 million per station.
[1] A few days later, he stated that he had been asked by the director of
CERN about construction of the tunnels for its 100-kilometre (62 mi) diameter
Future Circular Collider and that The Boring Company could save CERN several billion euros.
[2]
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
The two sources simply report what Musk said without further analysis, implying that Musk is in serious talks with these agencies and lending credibility to the cost estimates. I would argue that speculation about future projects does not necessarily belong in the article, but if we're going to include it, we should provide a balanced view. I suggest using sources such as ABS News, which includes the opinions of experts in the field who are skeptical of the cost estimates, and The Independent which clarifies that the CERN director had an "informal brief discussion" with Musk. – dlthewave ☎ 18:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Process thought: editor Rosbif73 should be notified, since Rosbif73 added those statements back on 21 January 2019. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N2e ( talk • contribs) 22:01, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Sources used in the article differ on whether TBC was founded in 2016 or 2017. Some work relative to tunnel boring, including some equipment acquisition clearly started in 2016, and Musk and SpaceX were at the center of it. But sources on when The Boring Company, as a legal entity, was officially incorporated vary.
The article lede had said, for quite some time now, founded in "2017", based on sources such as here (LA Times) and here (Wall Street Journal]. Both are serious secondary reliable sources, and both articles, published in 2017, refer to the company being founded in 2017 "...the firm Musk created this year" (LA Times) or "...was earlier this year spun into its own firm..." (WSJ).
Recently, this was changed in the prose of the article lede to "2016" without a new source being provided by the editor making the change. I have changed it back to 2017, per WP:BRD, in order to have this open discussion here on the Talk page.
In one other place in the article, the infobox, it is said TBC was founded in December 2016, with this source here (Crunchbase). Since Infoboxes are supposed to summarize sourced info in the article, it's pretty clear that this alone is not sufficient to establish the year of founding.
Thus, bringing this inconsistency here to the Talk page to see if we might not research it more, and find more sources, to clarify the answer to the question. What do others think? N2e ( talk) 02:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Done the article prose is now consistent, per this consensus, and the sources. Mentioned by Musk in late 2016; founded as a company in early 2017. All explained in the History section.
N2e (
talk) 06:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a lot of redundancy in this article between the "History" section and the individual city sections. My vote would be for the "History" section to be reduced to the general history of the company and leave discussion of individual permit processes and so on for the city sections. Furthermore, that redundancy is adding to the confusion (evident in some of the cited sources as well) about whether some of these projects are "hyperloop" projects or just regular electric vehicle/high-speed electric rail tunnels. I just added a source to the Baltimore section, an article in today's New York Times, that says that Musk's companies are not currently pursuing hyperloops at all. That seems consistent with other recent reliable sources (as opposed to tweets, too many of which are cited in this article). So streamlining this article would also clarify the scope of the company's business. blameless 03:49, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Prufrock aims for "a 15x improvement in tunneling speed over the existing state of the art." That would be a remarkable breakthrough, if they can pull it off. Please improve the article by adding details about how the design of the machine is being improved. 2601:281:CC80:5AE0:50A7:5D3B:325F:945C ( talk) 14:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
There's reports such as [2] [3] that Miami's mayor is considering a The Boring Company for tunnel projects in Miami. Thoughts on adding Miami under the "Tunnel projects and proposals" section of the article? Should we wait until there's more confirmation and reporting available? Saucysalsa30 ( talk) 22:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbt2toXijd4 What do we do from here? 2600:1006:B012:A207:159F:CBD3:F9B8:EAFB ( talk) 21:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
TBC has been the subject of extensive criticism, but the criticism section right now is tiny and bad. Why are we mentioning some random YouTuber making a video? Why are there no comparisons to wildly more efficient public transport (trains, busses, etc), which is one of the most widely discussed criticisms? Why no discussion of fire safety which has also been a major issue. 2A02:8109:A33F:F27C:48EE:2FCB:2E9E:26E9 ( talk) 19:47, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Rule 9 of Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia: write neutrally and with due weight.
This entry reaks with negative bias, in strong violation of above core Wikipedia editing principle.
Bias examples of the article as of this writing:
And many more. Tuskla ( talk) 23:42, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to completely restructure this article. It has the following problems.
The article primarily relies on local or fringe sources, with only a few citations stemming from long-established sources like The Verge or Bloomberg. Teslarati is used a couple of times (like to their site here), which is an outlet focussed on Musk and his companies, as well as electric vehicles. Nothing they write is particularly critical, though most of their pieces are more announcement-esque anyway. Any thoughts on them as a source? I'd welcome input from other users. Cortador ( talk) 10:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Why were the edits adding Safety, Capacity, and Security removed? I added information on these features (which happened to be positive findings), confirmed by The Boring Company to be true (as per the website). These features were removed almost immediately. I note some of the editors have a negative bias towards more than one of the Elon Musk entities, according to their Wikipedia history.
This is not fair - the general public should have access to all the information, to make an informed decision. JKNZ99 ( talk) 23:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
"This is not fair - the general public should have access to all the information, to make an informed decision."
Are you trying to convince the public of something?
🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg!
Talk 01:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Dear Admin, Please add a heading titled "Safety" and the following, as found on the City of Las Vegas webpage
_____________________________
Safety ( https://www.lasvegasnevada.gov/News/Blog/Detail/boringcompany)
The Boring Company has the following safety features:
Emergency Exits: The tunnels are equipped with emergency exits at regular intervals to allow passengers to evacuate safely in case of emergencies.
Fire Suppression Systems: The tunnels are equipped with real-time gas and smoke detection. Fire suppression systems are designed to NFPA standards, and will quickly detect and extinguish fires.
Video Surveillance: The tunnels are monitored via video surveillance to ensure the safety and security of passengers and infrastructure.
Vehicle Safety Features: The vehicles themselves are designed with safety features, including collision avoidance systems and emergency braking, and have seat belts, airbags, and crumple zones. The vehicles are NHTSA 5-star rated.
Operational Protocols: The loop operates under strict operational protocols and regulations. They have regularly scheduled practice drills with Police and the Fire Department.
Direct Communication:The vehicles are in direct communication with the Control Centre.
Security: The Loop achieved the top Gold Standard Award from the Department of Homeland Security TSA for security plans.
Build Safety (
https://fortune.com/2024/03/12/ceo-las-vegas-agency-boring-company-safety-tunnels/)
In June 2023, an investigation by Nevada's OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) found that The Boring Company had several worker safety incidents during construction, and resulted in eight citations. Steve Hill (CEO of the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority) said that the LVCVA's safety team "will be involved in future construction". This "has been welcomed by The Boring Company". JKNZ99 ( talk) 03:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is that website address correct? The website it leds to is full of placeholder text and mentions no relation to SpaceX 2605:6000:9FC0:90:6C02:60A9:C2D9:774F ( talk) 02:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
On the website, they also sold fire extinguishers with the flamethrower, so I added it to the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advanced AI ( talk • contribs) 18:43, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
This is, in my understanding, not a real company and is kind of a pun. There is no proof that this is actually a company, and clearly names such as Tunnels R Us is a joke. This should be reviewed for deletion. – Dasyntex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dasyntex ( talk • contribs) 12:22, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
It's real. In an interview with TED's Head Curator, Chris Anderson, on youtube Musk confirms activity with the Boring Company. However, he does mention that it's not really a focus of his, and is "more of a hobby." [1] Bknutsen ( talk) 16:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)Bknutsen
References
Photos of TBC/s TBM have been circulated, so a compatibly licnesed picture should be added to this article for its Tunnel Boring Machine -- 70.51.200.162 ( talk) 04:41, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Tech company seems like a good catch-all. Hasn't yet expressed (unless I'm wrong) interest in either mineral extraction or ground-up development of proprietary tunnel boring machinery.-- MainlyTwelve ( talk) 16:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether or how to incorporate this into the article, but here's some information about The Boring Company as a legal entity:
On January 11, 2017, "TBC - THE BORING COMPANY" was incorporated as a Delaware corporation, file #6279803.
On March 24, 2017, "TBC - THE BORING COMPANY" registered with the California Secretary of State to transact business in California (file #C4008073), and listed its "Principal Office in California" as being on Park Road in Burlingame (San Mateo County), and its president as Jared Birchall (who is also president of Neuralink).
On April 10, 2017, "TBC - THE BORING COMPANY" filed a Fictitious Business Name statement with San Mateo County (file #M-273088), saying it was doing business under the name "THE BORING COMPANY", and had been doing so since January 15, 2017.
Birdfern ( talk) 04:31, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
I added an entry on Musk's most recent announcements, made via Twitter, and I'm assuming that citing the tweets is acceptable, as they're primary sources. I'm reasonably new to adding content instead of just fixing grammatical errors, and I didn't see any tweets cited elsewhere throughout the page, so I thought I should ask. -- DawsonCXVII ( talk) 13:16, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
This environmental assessment document has a large amount of technical and route details on the proposed project. Prepared for the City of Los Angeles. NOTICE OF PREPARATION INCLUDING AN INITIAL STUDY/ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR THE Dugout Loop High Speed Transportation Project, August 2018. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 06:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Please participate in discussion at Talk:Boeing#RfC on hatnote. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 19:16, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Tho i'm indisposed right now from giving the needed edit the attn it will deserve, the article has so far failed to deal with the ramifications of his sloppy and perhaps deceptive use of that word. Based on our talk page, it seems there's been a subsequent correction or at least clarification via at least company insiders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:199:C202:287E:B58D:483C:903F:5A3E ( talk) 03:30, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
The article covers the same project under the Los Angeles proposals and the Hawthorne segment and confuses the current news. While the Hawthorne segment may eventually be extended, the portion that is under construction and nearing completion per Musk is within the city of Hawthorne. Cheers Fettlemap ( talk) 14:20, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Need a better source than reddit, but once one appears we can hopefully incorporate this Elon-esque analogy into the article:
I also note that "Prufrock" was announced verbally in a conference by Elon; presumably many reporters weren't aware of the T.S. Eliot link and merely wrote down what they heard, hence the "proof-rock" alternative spelling in various sources. Rosbif73 ( talk) 07:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
I removed the following passage:
In January 2019, Musk responded to a query from an Australian MP regarding a tunnel through the
Blue Mountains to the west of Sydney, suggesting costs of $15 million per kilometer or $750 million for the 50-kilometre (31 mi) tunnel, plus $50 million per station.
[1] A few days later, he stated that he had been asked by the director of
CERN about construction of the tunnels for its 100-kilometre (62 mi) diameter
Future Circular Collider and that The Boring Company could save CERN several billion euros.
[2]
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
The two sources simply report what Musk said without further analysis, implying that Musk is in serious talks with these agencies and lending credibility to the cost estimates. I would argue that speculation about future projects does not necessarily belong in the article, but if we're going to include it, we should provide a balanced view. I suggest using sources such as ABS News, which includes the opinions of experts in the field who are skeptical of the cost estimates, and The Independent which clarifies that the CERN director had an "informal brief discussion" with Musk. – dlthewave ☎ 18:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Process thought: editor Rosbif73 should be notified, since Rosbif73 added those statements back on 21 January 2019. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N2e ( talk • contribs) 22:01, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Sources used in the article differ on whether TBC was founded in 2016 or 2017. Some work relative to tunnel boring, including some equipment acquisition clearly started in 2016, and Musk and SpaceX were at the center of it. But sources on when The Boring Company, as a legal entity, was officially incorporated vary.
The article lede had said, for quite some time now, founded in "2017", based on sources such as here (LA Times) and here (Wall Street Journal]. Both are serious secondary reliable sources, and both articles, published in 2017, refer to the company being founded in 2017 "...the firm Musk created this year" (LA Times) or "...was earlier this year spun into its own firm..." (WSJ).
Recently, this was changed in the prose of the article lede to "2016" without a new source being provided by the editor making the change. I have changed it back to 2017, per WP:BRD, in order to have this open discussion here on the Talk page.
In one other place in the article, the infobox, it is said TBC was founded in December 2016, with this source here (Crunchbase). Since Infoboxes are supposed to summarize sourced info in the article, it's pretty clear that this alone is not sufficient to establish the year of founding.
Thus, bringing this inconsistency here to the Talk page to see if we might not research it more, and find more sources, to clarify the answer to the question. What do others think? N2e ( talk) 02:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Done the article prose is now consistent, per this consensus, and the sources. Mentioned by Musk in late 2016; founded as a company in early 2017. All explained in the History section.
N2e (
talk) 06:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
There is a lot of redundancy in this article between the "History" section and the individual city sections. My vote would be for the "History" section to be reduced to the general history of the company and leave discussion of individual permit processes and so on for the city sections. Furthermore, that redundancy is adding to the confusion (evident in some of the cited sources as well) about whether some of these projects are "hyperloop" projects or just regular electric vehicle/high-speed electric rail tunnels. I just added a source to the Baltimore section, an article in today's New York Times, that says that Musk's companies are not currently pursuing hyperloops at all. That seems consistent with other recent reliable sources (as opposed to tweets, too many of which are cited in this article). So streamlining this article would also clarify the scope of the company's business. blameless 03:49, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Prufrock aims for "a 15x improvement in tunneling speed over the existing state of the art." That would be a remarkable breakthrough, if they can pull it off. Please improve the article by adding details about how the design of the machine is being improved. 2601:281:CC80:5AE0:50A7:5D3B:325F:945C ( talk) 14:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
There's reports such as [2] [3] that Miami's mayor is considering a The Boring Company for tunnel projects in Miami. Thoughts on adding Miami under the "Tunnel projects and proposals" section of the article? Should we wait until there's more confirmation and reporting available? Saucysalsa30 ( talk) 22:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbt2toXijd4 What do we do from here? 2600:1006:B012:A207:159F:CBD3:F9B8:EAFB ( talk) 21:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
TBC has been the subject of extensive criticism, but the criticism section right now is tiny and bad. Why are we mentioning some random YouTuber making a video? Why are there no comparisons to wildly more efficient public transport (trains, busses, etc), which is one of the most widely discussed criticisms? Why no discussion of fire safety which has also been a major issue. 2A02:8109:A33F:F27C:48EE:2FCB:2E9E:26E9 ( talk) 19:47, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Rule 9 of Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia: write neutrally and with due weight.
This entry reaks with negative bias, in strong violation of above core Wikipedia editing principle.
Bias examples of the article as of this writing:
And many more. Tuskla ( talk) 23:42, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to completely restructure this article. It has the following problems.
The article primarily relies on local or fringe sources, with only a few citations stemming from long-established sources like The Verge or Bloomberg. Teslarati is used a couple of times (like to their site here), which is an outlet focussed on Musk and his companies, as well as electric vehicles. Nothing they write is particularly critical, though most of their pieces are more announcement-esque anyway. Any thoughts on them as a source? I'd welcome input from other users. Cortador ( talk) 10:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Why were the edits adding Safety, Capacity, and Security removed? I added information on these features (which happened to be positive findings), confirmed by The Boring Company to be true (as per the website). These features were removed almost immediately. I note some of the editors have a negative bias towards more than one of the Elon Musk entities, according to their Wikipedia history.
This is not fair - the general public should have access to all the information, to make an informed decision. JKNZ99 ( talk) 23:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
"This is not fair - the general public should have access to all the information, to make an informed decision."
Are you trying to convince the public of something?
🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg!
Talk 01:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Dear Admin, Please add a heading titled "Safety" and the following, as found on the City of Las Vegas webpage
_____________________________
Safety ( https://www.lasvegasnevada.gov/News/Blog/Detail/boringcompany)
The Boring Company has the following safety features:
Emergency Exits: The tunnels are equipped with emergency exits at regular intervals to allow passengers to evacuate safely in case of emergencies.
Fire Suppression Systems: The tunnels are equipped with real-time gas and smoke detection. Fire suppression systems are designed to NFPA standards, and will quickly detect and extinguish fires.
Video Surveillance: The tunnels are monitored via video surveillance to ensure the safety and security of passengers and infrastructure.
Vehicle Safety Features: The vehicles themselves are designed with safety features, including collision avoidance systems and emergency braking, and have seat belts, airbags, and crumple zones. The vehicles are NHTSA 5-star rated.
Operational Protocols: The loop operates under strict operational protocols and regulations. They have regularly scheduled practice drills with Police and the Fire Department.
Direct Communication:The vehicles are in direct communication with the Control Centre.
Security: The Loop achieved the top Gold Standard Award from the Department of Homeland Security TSA for security plans.
Build Safety (
https://fortune.com/2024/03/12/ceo-las-vegas-agency-boring-company-safety-tunnels/)
In June 2023, an investigation by Nevada's OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) found that The Boring Company had several worker safety incidents during construction, and resulted in eight citations. Steve Hill (CEO of the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority) said that the LVCVA's safety team "will be involved in future construction". This "has been welcomed by The Boring Company". JKNZ99 ( talk) 03:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)