Talk:Robert Peel

message: I've got the impression from other sources that Peel changed his stance on emancipation in the 1830s and acted in favour of it.  This is noted on certain pages, Ultra-Tories is one of them, but not on Robert Peel.  Does anyone know why? 81.105.137.65 (talk) 18:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Douglas Hurd's biography, Peel concluded that Ireland would simply be ungovernable unless emancipation was passed. LastDodo (talk) 15:30, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Catholic Emancipation

message: In George Square in Glasgow, there is a statue of the man, with his birth and death dates being 2nd July 1788 and 5th July 1850 respectively, yet these are not the dates on wiki?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.63.243 (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This Google search reveals many hits for a 5 February birth and a 2 July death, and none for any other permutations.  I suggest the makers of that statue got their facts wrong.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk page post

message: I'm confused by the following sentence: "More importantly, his sponsor for the election—as well as his father—was Arthur Wellesley, ..." When I read it I thought Arthur Wellesley was Peel's father. That's not the case, is it? Could someone who knows whether his father sponsored him or not or whatever was meant please reformulate this bit?
:His father (also called Robert Peel) did sponsor his campaign, as well as the Duke of Wellington. But Wellington was not peel's father (otherwise he'd have been known as Robert Wellesley!)  
----
I don't think we should move someone like Peel to this page.  "Robert Peel" is fairly sufficient to identify him. john 21:09, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Any objections to getting him moved back? Timrollpickering 17:36, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: None from me.  Keep this as a redirect, though.  Mackensen 17:43, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Father confusion

message: There's another shot of Peel on Wikipedia, but so far only Politics of the United Kingdom is using it. Here it is if anyone wants to find it easily:
Timrollpickering 20:18, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Peel was the acknowledged leader of the party between 1834 and 1846. He is considered by many to be the founder. He may have left the party but should be identified here as a Conservative as much as Ramsay MacDonald should be identified as Labour. Timrollpickering 20:48, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Peel virtually refounded the party, and certainly was responsible for making the term 'conservative' popular. He was the first true Conservative, in that sense, and thus should be accorded recognition of the fact. Polocrunch 11:21, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Extra picture

message: I added the clean up request after noticing that the article is one great block. It should be divvyed up into section to make it less daunting. -- Benn M. 03:21, 2005 May 28 (UTC)
:I gave cleaning it up a shot. -- ILFoxtrot 19:23 hrs. July, 19, 2005.
::Thanks. Clean-up request removed. --Benn M. 07:30, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up Request 

message: The fact that he helped set up a police force in Ireland and that he was nicknamed "Orange Peel" IS actually true. Someone from my class edited this into Wikipedia as we are studying about that period in Irish history at the moment. I know that it seems a little weird and perhaps they should have cited sources but this is true as far as I am aware and so I think it was a mistake to edit it out. XYaAsehShalomX 18:06, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The IP contributing that also added a great deal of vandalism to Wikipedia, which is why I thought that this was vandalism (well, that, and the fact that it's pretty weird). I've restored the contribution. Thanks for your help, and apologies for my itchy trigger finger. :) --Ashenai (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Irish connection 

message: 'As an aside in reference to the Repeal of the Corn Laws, Peel did make some moves to subsidise the purchase of food for the Irish, but this attempt was small and had little tangible effect. To criticise Peel for acting too late in repealing the Corn Laws, or for not giving enough subsidies to the Irish, shows a misunderstanding of the historical context.'
No Englander did enough for the Irish before, during or after the Great Famine were more than ONE MILLION People died.
------
I found a reference for the sentence stating that Peel thought about repealing the Corn Laws before the Great Famine. I am not sure how to put in a citation, maybe someone else could insert it:
Evans, Eric J. (1996) The Forging of the Modern State: Early Industrial Britain, 2nd ed., London and New York: Longman, 264
(C.U.)
------
I read that Peel wanted to solve the problems in Ireland but met with heavy resistance from his own party.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.203.96 (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Great Famine

message: What is the picture of Disraeli doing in the "Corn laws and after" section? Granted, he was a successor of sorts, but the text does not actually mention him as it stands...  13:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Disraeli

message: Why is there a picture of Lord John Russell in this article, citing him as PM for the dates Peel was Prime Minister?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.45.127 (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong PM 

message: Bazuz (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should it be Ministry or ministry? 

message: Eugène François Vidocq created the Sûreté in 1812. This predates the founding of the Metropolitan Police Force in 1829. Surely this should be mentioned in the article lest it be accused of anglocentrism. 82.171.40.25 (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vidocq 

message: Under "Factory Act", you say it: "...was in fact aimed at the reformers themselves, with their constituency among the new industrial rich. The Factory Act 1844 acted more against these industrialists than it did against the traditional stronghold of the Conservatives, the landed gentry,..." 
I imagine that laborers, including women and children, experienced this absolutely as reform. I don't think they cared about disempowering a bunch of gentlemen farmers on the way out. Industrialists, however, as I recall, worked them hard, what - 12? 14? - hours a day? 7 days a week? With poor safety precautions? And you call them reformers? -lifeform (talk) 05:23, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Factory Act of 1844 was reform in any century 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Robert Peel. 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/20090119110541/http://www.jdwetherspoon.co.uk/pubs/pub-details.php?PubNumber=305 to http://www.jdwetherspoon.co.uk/pubs/pub-details.php?PubNumber=305
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081211182948/http://www.dronfield.gov.uk/PeelCentre.shtml to http://www.dronfield.gov.uk/PeelCentre.shtml
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) 23:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I notice under namesakes 'Elsewhere' you list:
* Peel Regional Police
* Peel Regional Paramedic Services
* Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board
* Peel District School Board
I propose them for deletion because they are named for the locality they serve rather than after Peel himself.Cloptonson (talk) 09:25, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Namesakes - suggested deletions

message: Far too much detail. As per other articles, 3-4 paragraphs should be our target. - Snori (talk) 14:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed-- I trimmed it to 4 paragraphs. Of course as one of the most famous men in British history he is available for Wiki's use of exceptions regarding space limits. Rjensen (talk) 15:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro in need of a trim

message: IT DOES NOT SAY 2A02:C7E:326F:5D00:B582:5644:90F3:6A81 (talk) 16:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It gives considerable detail on his 7 children. TRY READING THE ARTICLE! Johnbod (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did he have any children 

message: I have said things I regret and I am sorry for that and thanks for all the people who fixed my wrongs I appreciate them a lot and it would mean a lot if you would forgive me thank you for your precious time Sincerely anonymous 2A02:C7E:326F:5D00:A59E:FE64:F735:5DB1 (talk) 17:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am so sorry 

message: The article states that he was the first sitting prime minister to be photographed. Does it still exist? and if so, why isn't it in the article?Notwisconsin (talk) 11:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good question and one I'd like to know the answer to. Douglas Hurd actually says "Peel was the last Prime Minister not to be photographed." I can't access the sources in the article, so what is the truth? TrottieTrue (talk) 01:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  photograph 

message: This is how it currently opens. Terrible grammar. Someone who knows the subject should edit it. I've capitalised the worst bits. 
"In 1838, before Peel became prime minister, there HAVE been growing tensions between the British East India Company and the Chinese Empire during the past years over the importation and trade of opium, which had been occurring for nearly a century. And when the trade of this particular product, DUE TO IT BEING SMUGGLED UNLAWFULLY BY MERCHANTS, IT become a serious political and economic problem, was IT was largely controversial. " AidanMcCaffery (talk) 21:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opium War section needs an edit 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement.  Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. — SamX [talk · contribs] 17:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem