Talk:Derbyshire lead mining history

Derbyshire High‑importance

	Derbyshire portal The article on Derbyshire lead mining history is supported by the Derbyshire WikiProject, which is a collaborative effort to improve the quality and coverage of Derbyshire-related articles on Wikipedia.DerbyshireWikipedia:WikiProject DerbyshireTemplate:WikiProject DerbyshireDerbyshire articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mining High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

[edit]

The description of smelting is good as far as it goes, but nothing is said about the bolehills where lead was smelted before the introduction of the smelt mill. Furthermore, I think the date given for the introduction of the cupola is a little too late.

The word 'cuopla' appears too early in the article, at a point where the subject is actually (despite the heading) smelt mills. This section could do with revision.

Also we could do with a complete article on lead smelting generally, as the subject does not apply just to Derbyshire. Peterkingiron 22:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But the article and associated customs are specific to Derbyshire. 81.156.85.244 10:01, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation[edit]

Some one had queried the citation of Ford, T.D. and Rieuwerts, J.H.: There are copies advertised on Amazon.co.uk . Peterkingiron 16:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation and citations[edit]

I have added what I think is a valuable reference to the article showing that lead mining was in Wirksworth before 1086. The reference to Domesday is done using the "ref" and reflist tags. This is a different way of doing refs. If you get really posh then you use the cite tag as well. I have left it a bit untidy as I'm hoping that the main editors might find this a better way. If not then please move it back to your common style. Victuallers 17:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS - This is one of the best Derbyshire pages Ive seen to date. I'm hoping that someone will start a Derbyshire wikiproject as there are some quite poor articles around Victuallers 17:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not be ofended that I have removed your addition (though not the reference). I have done this because what was added was repeating what appeared below; there is also evidemce of Roman mining - as you will see. This is an article of quality, but perhaps not quite in the usual style of WP. Peterkingiron 21:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not offended at all ... I have added another ref to Bakewell. Victuallers 18:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

citation[edit]

bole smelting is described in section 3 User Ronslack 13:53, 5 June 2007 If there is a problem is that we now have two separate descriptions of smelting mills. This appears to be the correct Derbyshire term, in contrast to 'smelt mills' in north Yorkshire. This clearly needs to be fixed. Peterkingiron 22:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modern lead mining?[edit]

This is a wonderful lead mining history article to find in WP! It is a shame not to have to such info in WP about modern lead mining. Please add such info if you can. There must be pollution, danger, and toxicity associated with lead mining and production, currently. But there does not seem to be any info in WP about this. Please add such information.-69.87.203.198 12:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA/A Assessment?[edit]

hi does anyone else think that this is ready to be nominated? Thanks Bluegoblin 7 14:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs to be amended so as to provide in-line citations for every statement. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

recent change[edit]

Re: 500yd wooden rails - After underground visits and study of the survey the reference to 500 yards of wooden railway is clearly incorrect, 100 yards would have been closer but still optimistic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lycas fc (talk • contribs) 19:44, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the substitution of a quotation:

In the words of a petition to king Charles I "many thousand people are dailie imployed in the lead mynes, to the greatt proffitt of your Majestie ... and to the whole Comonwealth ... in getting greatt quantities of lead for the use of the Kingdome in generall, and in transporting the rest to forraigne Nations..."

and added the following sources:

Hardy, W. Miner's guide. 2nd ed. 1762
Henstock, A. "T'owd mon war frum Bonser". Mining History, 14, 2, pp68-69

I have done this because the (unlogged in) editor has at the same time adopted a referencing style that does not work. He gives the source for the quotation as "2". Any additions to the article ought to have precise footnote citations. I have no objection to the changes to the text (assuming they are right), provided proper citations are given. Accordingly (with this qualification), I will not object if my reverting is itself reverted. The text of a footnote should be placed in the middle of <ref></ref>. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that anonymous contributor was trying to add footnotes as requested by the article tag. I have attempted to fix what I think they were trying to do, but more work may be needed.--Pontificalibus (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote this summary because there was very little about the history of the lead industry on Wikipedia. It is based largely on material from my book Lead Miner's Heyday. I think I have now sorted out the reference problem. ronslack 7.1.2011Ronslack (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The need in this article is for on-line citations, not alterations to the content. It should not be too difficult to get this to GA-status, but it needs to be properly referenced. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:42, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am pleased to see a lot more references. I have spent quite a bit of time in adjusting the punctuation of these. However:

Please log in before editing, so that the rest of us recognise that it is you and not a vandal.
A lot of page numbers are still needed for references - indicated by the reference ending in a comma.
There may still be material that needs a citation.
I believe that a lot of the PDMHS Bulletin/Mining History are now available on the PDMHS website. It would be useful of Internet links could be provided to them as part of the Bibliography.
Please do not use abbreviations: this is contrary to WP style. I have expanded the MLSL references to indicate they are British Library sources - BM MSS are now in BL.
A personal communication reference is not good enough: see comment in article. It is a variety of original research.

Nevertheless, the progress is substantial, and I hope we can get this to GA status. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the reference to a nutating disc engine at the Alport Mines. A nutating (disc) engine appears to be a modern variant of the Wankel internal combustion engine. The engines at the Alport mines in the 19th century were conventional hydraulic water pressure engines (Burt, R. A short history of British metal mining technology in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. De Archaeologische Pers, Nederland, 1982). Ronslack (talk) 10:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Ronslack, 12 February 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.189.6.122 (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]