Talk:Richard Trevithick

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
How hard could this be to turn into a GA?
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 03:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: This article is rather overwhelmed with pictures at the moment, they certainly need organising better, if no-one else does this, then I might well do it. G-Man 00:14, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and hope the article as I have just left it is an improvement. Best wishes, David Kernow 01:40, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: This article seems to be heavily focused on road and rail transport.  However Trevithick was more important in the long run as the person who introduced for this introduction of steam engines that worked above atmossphereic pressure.  The present article is incomplete in failing to say enough about the rest of life.  Peterkingiron 08:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomplete 

message: I have just added quite a bit of new material (eg. South American exploits, reaction engine etc) much of it from Richard's biography by James Hodge (from the Science Museum, bookshop London which will hopefully address the above comment in part. I have tried to merge it with the existing article and make it flow reasonably and I have not actually deleted much at all, just moved it around quite a bit. Further tidy-ups welcome.ChrisAngove 17:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations!  You have done a very good job in expanding what was previously a grossly inadequate article.  I have made a few minor adjustments today, unfortunately some of them while inadvertently not logged in.  Peterkingiron 22:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Substantial New Material

message: A large number of Cornish people do not identify as English or see themselves as from Cornwall, 'England' for reasons relating to the ongoing debate about the past, present and future constitutional status of Cornwall, together with many people's sense of a distinct Cornish cultural identity - see Constitutional status of Cornwall and
   Revert warring over England/English vs United Kingdom/British. Since 2001 the Cornish have had their own unique ethnic UK Census code '06' similar to the Irish, Scots, Welsh and English,  2001 Ethnic Codes, and on many official forms it is now possible to register as Cornish as opposed to English.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.134.75.62 (talk) Aug 5 2006
The above is simply untrue, as can be seen by simply following the link provided: there is no separate "ethnic code" for Cornish in any Census, including the latest 2011 one.  It is not the job of Wikipedia to pander to people's fantasies.  "A large number of Cornish people" are deeply embarrassed by the antics of a handful of very loud-mouthed delusional people with no grasp of history, migration patterns within Britain or, basically, anything real. 77.101.233.240 (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert warring over [[England]] / [[English]] vs [[United Kingdom]] / [[British]]

message: It might be worth mentioning in some fashion that the 500 guineas won in the wager would be worth in 'today's' terms around £35,000 (an online conversion calculator gave a 2006 figure of £34,030-odd). While direct comparisons are rendered problematical by changes in society - much we now buy didn't exixt then - the sum was far from trivial, and weakens the frequent argument that the Middleton locomotive was the first to be "commercially successful."195.92.67.74 (talk) 23:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that an equivalence amount seems useful. However, I don't think this in any way changes whether the Middleton locomotive can be considered the first commercially successful locomotive or not. A prize of this sort is not what is meant by "commercially successful" - that phrase, I believe, means that the locomotive is being used successfully for revenue generation over a substantial period of time. The Penydarren locomotive clearly never did this, while Salamander did. Gwernol 23:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: TRanslating historic sums of money into modern ones is fraught with difficulty, because different commodities have suffered quite different inflation rates.  The sum was a substantial one.  If your comparator was a labourer's weekly wage, you might get a much higher figure.  If you work on UK house prices, the figure even from the end of WWII, would be several tiems higher!  The Penydarren loco was certainly mechanically effective, but the cast iron rails on which it ran were not up to the task and the engine was converted to a static use.  Those at the Middleton Colliery and on Tyneside were part of profitable transport systems that continued to function while the colliery they served continued to work.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pen-y-darren Locomotive's winnings 

message: The above threads have become somewhat confused, so I suggest further discussion takes place in a fresh thread. Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~.
Trevithick was born in the Kingdom of Great Britain, and when he died that realm had become the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. I would suggest that British would be an acceptable description of his nationality, avoiding the problems associated with either Cornish or English. DuncanHill (talk) 23:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thinking, Duncan. For the record (again) I have no issue with whether we describe Trevithick is English or British, but I do object to anon IP users with no editing history ignoring WP:UKNATIONALS, despite reminder comments embedded in the article. Sure, it's not "policy", but it is good sense. Unless/until we have consensus that the nationality should be changed, we should stick to the original wording (English) ... richi (talk) 00:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But UKNationals doesn't actually say that, as far as I can see. DuncanHill (talk) 00:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Which isn't to say that I'm not in favour of getting a consensus! DuncanHill (talk) 00:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That was my (imperfect) summary of Wikipedia:UKNATIONALS#Changing_an_exisiting_UK_nationality. Put simply: don't change it without consensus. I changed the comment to simply point here ... richi (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Oh, and another thing, it's been "traditional" to take into consideration how the subject of a biographical article described his own nationality. Do we have cites for RT calling himself English, British, or Cornish? ... richi (talk) 00:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that's a very good question! I don't have anything to hand, ODNB does say he was known in Cornwall and elsewhere as the Cornish Giant, but I shall see what I can find - and would be very glad if any other interested editor could also do a bit of digging! DuncanHill (talk) 00:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear -- the UK WP tradition is to go with the description of nationality that the subject used, not that secondary sources ascribed to him. In other words, can anyone find a cite where he describes himself as "British" (for example) ... richi (talk) 09:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The UKNATIONALS actually does suggest looking at how a subject is widely referred to, as well as looking for evidence of the subjects own usage.  DuncanHill (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

text: At Wikipedia:UKNATIONALS#Guide_to_finding_UK_nationality. DuncanHill (talk) 16:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

text: OK, citations please, especially from verifiable, reliable sources that show he viewed himself as "Cornish" ... richi (rant) 23:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Any citations suggesting he referred to himself as anything else? UKNATIONALS does NOT insist on finding the subject's own usage. DuncanHill (talk) 02:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, I didn't say it did. Where does "insist" come from? Anyway, it does say, "Look specifically for evidence that the person has a preferred nationality", which amounts to the same thing and is consistent how I've often seen these sort of disputes resolved ... richi (hello) 18:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but Trevithick was an engineer who died in the 1830s.  I might be wrong, but I expect it would be quite a tough job finding any sources that testify that he considered himself Cornish, English, British or Martian! Cornishman5040 (talk) 20:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an encyclopedia. WP:V and WP:RS are non-negotiable ... richi (hello) 20:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely.  The issue, however, is that (1) as DuncanHill pointed out, "UKNATIONALS does NOT insist on finding the subject's own usage" and (2) (the point I’ve just made) there is probably no evidence that exists showing the subject’s own usage- but please correct me if I’m wrong about the chances of that.  (And anyway, as UKNATIONALS says, the subject might be wrong about considering themselves to be a certain nationality.)  Therefore some other means has to be used to find his 'correct' nationality. Cornishman5040 (talk) 22:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you can talk about process, or you can help build consensus. One way you can do that is to find verifiable, reliable refs, consistent with WP:UKNATIONALS, which support a change to the original editor's intent. As I've said before, I have no opinion ... richi (hello) 00:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I started to do this on my user page as linked above - but someone objected on the grounds that they wanted the subject's own usage, not usage by libraries, museums, encyclopædias etc. I just re-read Bronowski's "Ascent of Man", Bronowski describes Trevithick as Cornish too. I don't see any consensus for "English", and I don't see any prooof that Trevithick himself used "English", what I do see is a range of usage tending towards "Cornish" or "British" and away from English. DuncanHill (talk) 11:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'm coming to that conclusion too. I also agree that it's unlikely that we'll find evidence of what he called himself, more's the pity. Do you think we might achieve consensus with "British (Cornish-born)" or something like that? ... richi (hello) 19:32, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, maybe. I suppose British is a reasonable compromise. I don't think there'll ever be a consensus for English and some people don't seem to think Cornish is appropiate for some reason. Cornishman5040 (talk) 18:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Excellent! I think this is a pretty good solution (British in main text and infobox saying British and Cornish) Cornishman5040 (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality problem 

message: The image :Image:GBP2coinTrevithick.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I added a fairuse thingy to the image, but forgot to come back here and say so! DuncanHill (talk) 20:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:GBP2coinTrevithick.jpg

message: To those of you who seem to think that it is acceptable to remove any mention of Cornish ethnicity (cultural identity) from these articles, why is it I don't see you removing UNREFERENCED Welsh, Scottish and Irish ethnicity statements from other info boxes? Lets see you remove the Scottish references for James Watt, and change Scottish to British. Well?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.211.98 (talk) 14:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Trevithick is undoubtedly Cornish. I don't see anyone disputing that, or "removing any mention of" his Cornish identity from the article. The problem is with asserting, without any qualification, in an infobox, that his "ethnicity" is Cornish, definitively and exclusively; or indeed with asserting any such ethnicity, including "British", were anyone to make that claim. This is a rather large assumption, and a fairly egregious piece of original research. And what might or might not be in the James Watt article - or on any other page - is irrelevant of course, as is whether anyone is planning to make equivalent changes on those pages or not. --Nickhh (talk) 15:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My first thought on seeing the removal was, 'yes, correct action'. If Trevithick had been born in Berkshire, no one in their right mind would have claimed that as his 'ethnicity'. -- EdJogg (talk) 16:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Wow, people actually spend time discussing this stuff, rather than just saying "this kind of thing is irredeemably silly, and no serious person would start randomly assigning speculative "ethnicities" to historical figures"? Please don't finally kill off my naive belief that Wikipedia is something more than a platform for fringe political and nationalist advocacy. --Nickhh (talk) 19:12, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cornish ethnicity

message: It is absolutely absurd that this article specifies at the start "Richard Trevithick (13 April 1771 – 22 April 1833) was an English[1] inventor and mining engineer." and the reference [1] goes to a biography written by his son "Francis Trevithick, Life of Richard Trevithick,1872." which refers to him as a Cornishman throughout.
Throughout the quoted biography countless references and an extremely clear distinction are made between Cornish engineers and English engineers, in the field of mining technology. Richard Trevithick falls clearly into the former camp. It is available online here: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=RTTOd1zMLrIC and you can check yourself by doing a search for "Cornish" and "English" through the book.
Locking this article and leaving it so that it shows Richard Trevithick as an Englishman is a traversty, and on this important day when the article will be reached by millions due to the Google "doodle" it is particularly unfortunate. It should be immediately corrected and locked as the correct version. It has taken decades to achieve the proper historical recognition for Trevithick that he deserves, due to the false but formerly ubiquitous teaching that Stephenson invented the steam locomotive - and now this. Cornishmen all over the world would turn in their graves if they heard this great Cornishman and mining icon is being falsely labelled as an "English engineer".
Kind Regards, 
Southwesterner.
Southwesterner (talk) 04:57, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored the referenced wording in the lead paragraph. DuncanHill (talk) 11:45, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Southwesterner, 13 April 2011 

message: Could we create a redlink for Tregajorran in the first sentence of the Childhood and early life section?©Geni 17:36, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Mjroots (talk) 18:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: edit request

message: :Category:Richard Trevithick has been tagged for deletion. Discussion is here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011 May 2#Category:Richard Trevithick Andy Dingley (talk) 08:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagged for deletion 

message: The lead is currently pretty thin on the ground and tagged appropriately for it, so I'll make a suggestion - is it possibly widely acknowledged that Trevithick is someone who hasn't gotten as much credit as he deserved? His legacy is an untarnished one but like so many notable inventors, he doesn't get much credit. SURE this has been mentioned allot. Would this kind of thing be good for further research? --Τασουλα (Shalom!) (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ignored. 

message: This addition describes the modern Swansea replica as "inaccurate", on the grounds of major working parts being reversed. However this is not an inaccuracy, rather a confusion as to which locomotive was being reproduced.
The earlier 1802 Coalbrookdale locomotive had the furnace beneath the crosshead. It was also drawn in a surviving drawing that has been widely reproduced - three versions on this page alone.
The 1804 Pen-y-darren locomotive corrected the obvious drawback and placed the furnace and crosshead at opposite ends. No drawing survives, but text descriptions do, sufficient to verify this.
So the Swansea replica (furnace and crosshead apart) is not "inaccurate" as such, but rather is based (as it is described) on a best-guess appearance for the Pen-y-darren locomotive. Our description should reflect that, although the details listed are brooadly those affected. We should also lose the incorrect illustration for the "Pen-y-darren locomotive", as we know this is unrealistic and is actually the Coalbrookdale locomotive.
I thought this error had been fixed years ago? No doubt someone found another coffee table book and "fixed" it for us. 8-(    Andy Dingley (talk) 14:11, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The recent the addition in question contains enough terminological howlers to indicate a paucity of expertise in this field. I have re-jigged it a bit, but it needs more work really. Globbet (talk) 01:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coalbrookdale 1802 vs. Pen-y-darren 1804 locomotives 

message: Should the banner complaining of insufficient inline citations be removed? I see plenty of inline citations which were, presumaby, add after the banner was added. Roly (talk) 13:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there are still several sections with no inline refs at all: Marriage and career; Career; Early experiments; The London Steam Carriage; Engineering projects; Draining the Peruvian silver mines; Trevithick leaves for South America; Later projects; Legacy. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should banner be removed? 

message: http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=759395
Just added, I've just removed it.  It's a fascinating read and puts forward many interesting ideas. However it's also full of holes. This should be read by anyone who is already familiar with Trevithick and the engineering of this period in detail. However I don't like the idea of any new readers dropping into it - it's just too flakey.
Thoughts?  Andy Dingley (talk) 11:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that with a subject as well-known as Trevithick, we should discourage the use of such websites.  This appears to be litlte more than a blog, which is not a WP:RS.  Francis Trevithick's biography of his father is an older work, and is not always right.  I would still regard Burton as the best source.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Burton?  It's a good personal biography, but there ought to be a better coverage of the technical side of Trevithick. Mind you, it would be too enormous to find much of a market these days. What is there  that does for Trevithick what Dickinson & Jenkins does for Watt? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  A friend has a much more thorough treatment, written in the 1930's I think, which I will get details of. There is also the new book The Oblivion of Richard Trevithick by Philip Hosken of the Trevithick Society. Same friend has a copy, which I am hoping to get my grubby mits on soon. Globbet (talk) 00:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

text:  It's:  I borrowed it a couple of years ago and agree with my friend it is more reliable than Francis' and more technical than Burton. It has recently been reprinted, I see. I have not read the Hosken yet, but he says it deals more thoroughly with the correspondence. Globbet (talk) 10:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

text: Having not seen Hosken's book, I cannot judge it.  I was more concerned that excessive reliance should not be placed on Francis Trevithck's book.  Dickinson was a good historian, but (as an older historian) his work may have been overtaken by more recnet discoveries.  In this particular case, the issue may not arise, but that is the principle.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:08, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Much of the recent scholarship in stationary engines is based on examining old photos, as new collections come to light. Yet pre-WW2, historians (and George Watkins is the obvious example) could simply go and look at surviving engines. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious EL? 

message: The Chris Barrie documentary says that Trevithick hung a patent lawyer (serving Watt injunctions) upside down over a mineshaft.
Also, that the important power to weight ratio of the London Steam Train *engine* is 3 hp to 300 kg (compare with Watt and Wright Brothers engines). There might be sources for that somewhere on the net.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.138.208.8 (talk) 16:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upside down & power to weight  

message: Someone made this article worse by saying Cornwall is in England as opposed to the UK GB. 
Considering the laws in the UK state specifically Cornwall, as seperate from England then it should be Britian.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.16.43 (talk) 16:04, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been discussed before, please do not change without consensus. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:48, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking that it reads badly because, for some reason, it mentions Cornwall twice; "British inventor and mining engineer from Cornwall, England, UK. Born in the mining heartland of Cornwall..."Obscurasky (talk) 15:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: England or Britain

message: The first two sentences sound repetitive and don't read terribly well. It effectively says that he's British from the UK. And that he's from Cornwall, born in Cornwall. I can see there's been some disagreement over the opening text previously, but I think it could still do with some minor tweaking Obscurasky (talk) 13:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First two sentences sound repetitive. 

message: Surname Trevithick is definitelly NOT germanic, british in origin, but Slavic. Travichik more preciselly means "grass-er".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.143.96.75 (talk) 08:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I always thought that Trevithick, as with many Cornish names, was Celtic in origin. I don't know if Slavic is also Celtic. --Roly (talk) 08:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a Cornish name; the initial "Tre-" implies it ("by Tre, Pol and Pen, ye shall know all Cornish men"), and means "settlement" in the Cornish language (see :kw:wikt:tre); the terminal "-ck" pretty much confirms it. Compare for instance Marcus Trescothick. It's a very common form of place name in Cornwall: to take a random example, at the article on the village of Trewennack, follow the coordinates link and see just how many places in that area begin "Tre-" or end "-ck". --Redrose64 (talk) 09:44, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality 2 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Richard Trevithick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050311225256/http://www.bbc.co.uk:80/cornwall/uncovered/stories/august2004/walk_through_time/06.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/cornwall/uncovered/stories/august2004/walk_through_time/06.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Richard Trevithick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160308162312/http://open-lectures.co.uk/Industrial-Archaeology-Societies/2918-Trevithick-Society-The/View-details.html to http://www.open-lectures.co.uk/Industrial-Archaeology-Societies/2918-Trevithick-Society-The/View-details.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130102121618/http://www.cornishminer.com/product_info.php/cPath/25/products_id/230 to http://www.cornishminer.com/product_info.php/cPath/25/products_id/230
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:16, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Richard Trevithick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612124726/http://www.locos-in-profile.co.uk/Articles/Early_Locos/early1.html to http://www.locos-in-profile.co.uk/Articles/Early_Locos/early1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070625220403/http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RAtrevithick.htm to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RAtrevithick.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Richard Trevithick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110415125004/http://www.museumwales.ac.uk/en/rhagor/article/trevithic_loco to http://www.museumwales.ac.uk/en/rhagor/article/trevithic_loco/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified