Talk:Kola Superdeep Borehole

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 24, 2011, May 24, 2015, May 24, 2017, May 24, 2018, and May 24, 2020.

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: Technology & engineering / Science & education High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the technology and engineering in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the science and education in Russia task force.

Other projects

We should at least mention the KTB borehole in Windischeschenbach, Germany that reached 9101 m. http://www.icdp-online.org/contenido/icdp/front_content.php?idcat=946 http://www.icdp-online.org/contenido/icdp/front_content.php?idcat=708 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.160.91.57 (talk) 08:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Why isn't the picture of the hole itself shown? What the heck? The actual picture is epic. don't know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:CEA6:601:30EA:BFE7:EE2D:DFC9 (talk) 17:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

metres or millimetres?

"a 5,000-millimetre (200 in) section". Really? Why use millimetres? I guess it was not accurate to 1 mm. And even if it was, why not 5.000 m? Sclaes (talk) 23:33, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I'll change it to 5 m (16 feet). (5 m is 196.85 inches or 16.404 feet so whoever wrote 200 inches clearly isn't too concerned about precision.) Vaughan Pratt (talk) 17:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]