Talk:Trench

Article about trench (sport)

• Does anyone know about the game of trench?? Can someone please make an article about it!! 71.135.168.56 19:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello can you please put the sites in for how you made this article

Trench (mistake)

A trench is a type vffjhgfjhgvhhhlouussion in the ground. Um offensive mistake anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin3577 (talk • contribs) 11:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Its called vandalism. Ingolfson 19:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Maori

I believe the native new zealand ppl were the 1st to use trench aye?

It was the maori who invented the trench, that made the trench wars between the pakeha and the maori. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.154.50.76 (talk) 06:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Trenches were in military use since men were first throwing or shooting stuff at each other. I've however noted in other articles that it looks like the Maori were the first to use trench SYSTEMS and realised how useful loose earth was against artillery compared to stone walls (which they rarely had). Ingolfson (talk) 12:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Dota 2

I don't know if this chapter on trenches in Dota 2 belongs in what is an article about more physical (construction, natural or otherwise) trenches. Perhaps it could be moved to the Dota 2 page?Grooble (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

   agreed and removed  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.165.85.245 (talk) 15:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Demote in layout military engineering to below archaelogy (being today in the 21st century?)

Can we demote military engineering to below archaeology? It is still included in certain training probably but it is not widely used, war is on the wane, and is not as useful as archaeology. Let us hope.- Adam37 Talk 23:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Geologic trench photo?

Can anyone find a good photo of a geologic trench to add? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I am no authority on this subject but a Bing search of creative commons license images has a few. https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=geologic+trench&qft=+filterui:licenseType-Any —¿philoserf? (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Nice, I'm no authority either, but I'll add one to at least get us started. If the authorities come by later, they can always swap it out or improve. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:24, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Spring OSH Course Projects

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 January 2026 and 8 May 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dtodd15 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Dtodd15 (talk) 01:59, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

I've reverted a series of changes related to this project in Special:Diff/1343080855, as the added content has some serious issues:

1. Large portions of the added text, as well as some of the added images, appear to be AI-generated.
2. Many of the sources used are inadequate or inappropriate - in particular, blog posts by commercial service providers (like United Rentals or HAZWOPER OSHA) are not appropriate sources.
3. The added text is entirely US-specific, and often goes into far too much detail for a general encyclopedia. (For instance, giving the definition of a tolerance zone used in North Carolina seems entirely unnecessary.)

Omphalographer (talk) 04:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

• While I value constructive feedback and differing views, I find that the editorial comments and reverted changes have several serious biases related issues. Editorial comments based on “feelings” and “opinions” do not follow Wikipedia’s guidelines for editing, as they fail to incorporate differing perspectives and a broader understanding of the topic. The changes that were removed will be added back into a new section labeled “U.S.-Based Trenching Compliance,” as the facts included are foundational to trench safety and highly relevant to such a complex subject. The re-reverted changes will reflect some of the changes you suggested because they are relevant and appropriate, which is how this process is intended to go rather than deleting work based on opinion.
• To follow proper Wikipedia guidelines for editorial comments, editors should ask questions and raise concerns within discussion comments rather than simply deleting entire sections. Before it is suggested that I deleted the section and replaced it, I want to clarify that I incorporated the existing viewpoints into the new section while also providing additional context and factual information. Trenching related deaths and injuries is grossly due to a lack of education that extensive regulations and safety guidance even exists. Wikipedia generally lacks the incorporation of viewpoints from safety professionals, which is a major purpose of the edits being made to this article as part of this Wiki Education class.

1. Accusing someone of using AI with extensive knowledge on a subject is a bold claim and false, especially when the additions made are based on factual information rather than opinion, unlike many of the comments provided. The only AI-generated addition was the image illustrating the four primary trench protection methods, because there are limited free resources available that clearly and concisely show these methods. This AI image followed all Wikimedia Commons guidelines and was submitted correctly through the proper channels. While everyone has a right to their own opinion, that does not necessarily mean the opinion is appropriate or correct.
2. Your comments regarding sources are something I can agree with to a certain extent. However, a source such as United Rentals is considered an industry leader in trench shield technology and training through United Academy. While sources from companies with a monetary interest are often avoided in many contexts, in complex fields such as trench safety these organizations can still provide valuable technical information. Their training programs, engineering data, and technical documentation often contribute relevant information that is widely used within the U.S. market and is what the competent person must fall back onto to when making safety desicions. The selection of trenching safety methods is based on technical data that is often only provided by the manufacturer/owner of the equipment.
3. This is currently a C-rated article, so the goal should be to improve the content and bring in more perspectives, which is exactly what I did. Reverting the changes is somewhat ironic because it reflects the very behavior you caution against. Your opinion that the article is entirely U.S.-based has some factual basis; however, the additions represent a significant improvement over the previous version that was restored. If you believe the article is too U.S.-focused, you are welcome to conduct research and incorporate additional perspectives on how excavation safety is handled in other parts of the world. The reason the information is largely OSHA/U.S.-focused is because it has the most readily available and well-documented information that is based on established standards rather than opinion. If your opinion is that the article goes into too much detail, it suggests a lack of industry knowledge or experience with the subject. As a safety professional who has written extensively and worked in the safety field for many years, I can confidently say that this is actually the shortened version of the topic. My goal when rewriting these sections was to put myself in the shoes of someone who has no knowledge of the technical side of trenching safety. While there is a lot of information presented, that is exactly the point that needs to be portrayed. I wanted someone to read this and think, “Wow, there is actually a lot more to this topic than I realized, and I need to do more research or training before conducting any of these tasks.”

Dtodd15 (talk) 13:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy ping Ian (Wiki Ed). I'm inclined to agree with Omphalographer myself here - the added content is an off-topic overspecific essay that reads like it belongs on someone's blog not on Wikipedia. This is true whether or not it's AI-generated. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I'd add that, if one wanted to go into more detail on trench safety, it might be more helpful to include more general information on the risks and safety measures themselves, not just government regulations. For example:

• How often are people injured in industrial accidents involving trenches? Are there sources of statistics we can cite?
• Have there been notable disasters involving trench work? Are there historical accounts or reports about them?
• What are the commonly used safety measures in trench work (independent of any regulations requiring them), and how have those measures developed/changed over time?

With regard to sourcing - company marketing blogs are considered low-value sources, and should be avoided whenever better sources are available. Statements about government regulations should almost always cite the applicable regulation itself, not a secondary source which restates the regulation. Omphalographer (talk) 20:12, 17 March 2026 (UTC)