Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stockton and Darlington Railway/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 13:24, 28 March 2014 [1].

Stockton and Darlington Railway edit

Nominator(s): Edgepedia (talk) 07:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Stockton and Darlington Railway was the world's first public railway that used steam locomotives. It opened in 1825, and this has been celebrated every fifty years. This has been recently peer reviewed by User:Tim riley, following which I've made some adjustments ([2]) after reading Rolt's biography of the Stephenson father and son.

Thanks Edgepedia (talk) 07:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was not transcluded to the FAC page; I have done so now. Sarastro1 (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, thanks Sarastro! And thanks for the review and support. Edgepedia (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support – As noted above, I peer reviewed the article. Railway histories aren't normally much in my line, but I really enjoyed reading this one. It seems to my layman's eye to be comprehensive and well balanced; the illustrations are top notch; the referencing is scrupulous, drawing on a good variety of sources; and the prose is a pleasure to read. The changes made since the peer review have improved the article further. Certainly FA quality in my view, and I hope we shall have more FACs from this nominator. – Tim riley (talk) 13:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Like Tim (who drew my attention to this one), I know little of railways, and to be honest my eyes glazed over at some of the more technical parts here. With those exceptions, I found this readable and easy to understand. Nicely written too. I will be happy to support once my list of niggles and nit-picks are answered. Sarastro1 (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Was the S&DR a company or an actual physical railway line? It is only on reading most of the lead that this becomes clear, so I think we need to say so early on, in the first sentence. Otherwise, the reader is left with a confused idea of a railway line building towns, etc.
    • Added railway company in the first sentence
  • Similarly, on a few occasions throughout, S&DR is used interchangeably to mean the physical railway and the company. It may be worth going through to make this a bit clearer in a few places.
    • "railway" can be short for railway line and railway company. As most of the time in the article it refers to the company, I've clarified here and here. Edgepedia (talk) 19:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • “After an official opening ceremony on 27 September 1825, the railway rapidly developed coastal traffic and had soon built a new port and town at Middlesbrough.”: Although I understand the intention, I’m not sure that “the railway rapidly developed coastal traffic” quite makes sense, although I can’t think of a reword.
    • After several attempts I've rephrased the lead. Edgepedia (talk) 19:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Looking at this sentence Edgepedia (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've slightly tweaked this line myself. Feel free to revert. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • I've had another go. As it was the lead and we need to keep things simple, I thought it better to expand and say what I actually meant. Edgepedia (talk) 13:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • ”Although the SD&R was involved the building of the East Coast Main Line between York and Darlington”: Is there a missing word after “involved”?
    • Added word
  • ”Coal from the inland mines in County Durham was taken away on packhorses, and then horse and carts as the roads were improved.”: Could we have a date for this?
    • The newspaper article used as a reference doesn't have one. Will see what I can find. Edgepedia (talk) 17:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK. I won't strike, just in case, but this won't affect my support either way. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • ”as the recent death of King George III had made it unlikely a bill would pass that parliamentary year”: I wonder do we need “recent” and “year”? Maybe “as the death of King George III had made it unlikely a bill would pass during that parliament”?
    • rephrased as suggested
  • ”had not been reached with Lord Barrington over the line passing over his land”: Could be reword to avoid “over…over”?
    • changed to "...not reached agreement about the line over..." Edgepedia (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • ”Concerned about Overton's competence, Pease asked Stephenson to meet him in Darlington.”: What came of this meeting? From the rest of the paragraph, I assume that Overton was removed, but could this be made explicit?
  • ”leaving behind gentlemen on hunters”: Not sure that “gentlemen” is quite the appropriate tone for an encyclopaedia.
    • They're described as gentlemen in the source; I'm taking the word to mean "a man with an income derived from property, a legacy or some other source, and was thus independently wealthy and did not need to work" (from the gentleman article) - a hunter would be equivalent today of a sports car. Don't know what you mean by "appropriate tone"?
      • At the time, "gentlemen" usually meant the upper class, or a "better sort", and hence some sort of judgement. For me, "men" would be better and simpler. Sarastro1 (talk) 13:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Will go with men for simplicity. Tomlinson (or his source) probably assumed only gentlemen owned hunters. Edgepedia (talk) 17:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • ”Made of stone west of Darlington and oak to the east, Stephenson would have preferred all of the sleepers to have been stone, but the transport cost was too high as they were quarried in the Auckland area.”: I think a little rephrase is needed here. As written, it looks as if Stephenson was made of stone and oak rather than the sleepers.
    • I've rephrased
  • While I can follow “8s 6d” and similar (I’m ‘’just’’ too young to remember first hand!), I’m not sure everyone from the UK will and it may confuse those from elsewhere.
    • Should I convert to new pence each time? I tried to handle this with a footnote. but if this is not worked I could do that (after all, that's what happens with miles).
      • The note works fine, but to use the abbreviations s and d in the text, I'd be inclined to spell it out on first mention (i.e. 8s (shillings) and 6d (pence)) or link s and d, which is how I've seen it done elsewhere. Sarastro1 (talk) 13:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Expanded [3], also showing how I've formatted it later. I mention shillings first in note 4, but readers may not read that. Edgepedia (talk) 17:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • I cut the first bracket as I don't think you need it: it's nicely covered by the (8s 6d) one. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • ”The rate for transporting coal destined for ships had been restricted in 1821 to the low rate of 1⁄2d per ton per mile in an attempt to make the business uneconomic.”: Why?
  • ”By the end 1827”: Should this be the “end of”?
    • Done
  • ”Both Tomlinson (1915, pp. 141–142) and Rolt (1984, p. 143) state this claim was unfounded and the company had shown earlier that locomotives were superior to horses, Tomlinson showing that coal was being moved using locomotives at half the cost of horses…”: Can we not relegate some of this to a note so that the flow of the text is not disrupted by the page numbers?
    • Done
  • ”…and Thomas Storey, Engineer, proposed…”: Why is engineer capitalised? It may be better as “Thomas Storey, an engineer, proposed…”
    • Tried that, then went with "the engineer Thomas Storey"
  • ”However, this bypassed the S&DR…”: I’m not sure this is the best way to begin a paragraph.
  • ”The N&DJR made a generous offer to lease the GNER”: Who says it was generous? Be careful of editorial voice.
    • I removed the word (same link as above)
  • ”but in 1860 the Upsall, Normanby & Ormesby Railway received permission for a line with access to the river, the S&DR claim of exclusive rights to the foreshore rejected”: Is something missing at the end here?
    • I changed the tense by adding "having been"
  • ”the group of fisherman's cottages that was at that time Saltburn”: This implies that is was renamed after the development. Could the new name be added?
    • What I was trying to imply was that Saltburn is no longer a group of fisherman's cottages. As this was not clear I've rephrased it and linked to the article on the town earlier in the section.
  • ”After its restoration in 1851, the dividend had recovered to 8 per cent by the end of 1854 and then not dropped below 71⁄2 per cent.”: Something doesn’t quite make sense here.

Sarastro1 (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thanks for these comments. I've made a start and will work on this tonight, and over the weekend if necessary. I have a couple of questions above. Edgepedia (talk) 13:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think just a couple of troublesome sentences remain. Edgepedia (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for the update. Can you please check the two sentences I've changed? Edgepedia (talk) 13:52, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: All looks good to me now, and I'm happy to support. As far as I can tell as a non-expert, this meets all the criteria. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Several of the captions could use editing for grammar
  • File:Opening_of_Stocking_and_Darlington_Railway_(crop).jpg needs US PD tag
  • File:Stockton_and_Darlington_seal.jpg: "This tag can be used only when the author cannot be ascertained by reasonable enquiry. If you wish to rely on it, please specify in the image description the research you have carried out to find who the author was." Same for the several other images that use that tag
  • File:Stockton_%26_Darlington_Railway_with_today's_lines.svg: what source(s) was used for locating the railway lines? Same for File:Wear_Valley_Railway.svg
  • File:Timber_Viaduct_on_the_Darlington_%26_Newcastle_Railway.png: this has two UK licensing tags, one saying the author is known and the other saying he/she isn't, and no US PD tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
doing ... Edgepedia (talk) 20:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC) Done[reply]
Sorry, I should have gone through the images a bit more thoroughly before coming here and there were quite a number that, irritatingly, are uncredited. After reading a couple of the discussions on commons I note this is not the same as unknown. I've argued on a few that the image is so old that the artist must have died over 70 years ago, but seven images (listed below for reference) I've uploaded locally and tagged with a {{PD-US-1923-abroad}} licence. These are certainly PD in the US, as they were published before 1923, but this is not certain in the UK. Edgepedia (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: Are the changes I made ok? Edgepedia (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment and question I like this very much and am minded to support. I took a hack at the prose but I still have one difficult question; is there a way to explain staith beyond the current wikilink redirecting to wharf? I appreciate we use local language where possible, but I fear this is an obstacle for understanding, and when printed the link is of no value. Otherwise, good work. --John (talk) 23:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks John. I've been looking for a dictionary definition but I haven't found one! All the books I read just use the word without explaining it; I had to look it up to be clear about its meaning. I would like to add a footnote, but I need a reliable source. Edgepedia (talk) 06:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had a go here. I see if I can find a better source in my local library later today. This doesn't seem to be an ENGVAR issue, as I found the meaning in a U.S. Dictionary, but looks like a technical word. Edgepedia (talk) 06:53, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Found a copy of Webster's at Project Project Gutenberg, and referenced it to that. Edgepedia (talk) 07:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The full Oxford English Dictionary gives these three definitions of "staithe":

  1. The land bordering on water, a bank, shore (earliest citation c. 893)
  2. A landing-stage, wharf; esp. a waterside depôt for coals brought from the collieries for shipment, furnished with staging and shoots for loading vessels. (earliest citation 1338)
  3. An embankment. (more recent, dating from 1613)

May be of use. Tim riley (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tim. I've left the definition referenced Websters for the moment; @John: are you happy with this? Edgepedia (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Stockton and Darlington was not the first railway and a train had carried passengers before, but its opening in 1825... - before what? Presumably 1825 but is worded weirdly - before looks odd left hanging in this instance.

Changed to ... and a train had previously carried passengers, ..., which gets rid of the dangling before. Edgepedia (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment -- I didn't see a dedicated source review for formatting/reliability but a brief scan revealed no glaring issues so we'll call it a day here, tks all. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Stockton_and_Darlington_Railway/archive1&oldid=1166570443"