Talk:James Bridge Copper Works

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Desertarun (talk) 09:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that the former James Bridge Copper Works has been described as the "most contaminated site in Europe"? Council leader Mike Bird said: "It is the most contaminated site in Europe and I have been fighting this one for more than 20 years." from: "Walsall's 'most contaminated land in Europe' set for revamp". BBC News. 2021-04-30. Retrieved 9 June 2021.
    • ALT1:... that in the 1950s the James Bridge Copper Works in Walsall, England recovered copper from ash and old car parts, helping to ease a national shortage of the metal?"In 1953 James Bridge Copper Works Ltd, due to new smelting processes, became leaders in the reclamation of waste materials to form copper. A number of firms refined copper at this time but none were laid out to deal with such poor material. Mounds of ash and residues from other foundries, old motor-car parts, and similar scrap were all used and material from all over Great Britain came by road and rail to the stockyards of James Bridge ... the end product was the raw material for other manufacturers which eased the national shortage and reduced dependency on foreign copper supplies." from: "Records of James Bridge Copper Works Ltd, Walsall". National Archives. Retrieved 9 June 2021.

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 16:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • New article, long enough, and well written. Hook is good (I shortened it slightly for punchiness), cited, and used in the article. QPQ done. Good to go! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

X long tons (Y t)[edit]

Quantities in the above form are cited multiple times in the article. What is the "t" supposed to indicate? It's especially odd because the ratios X/Y are not constant, as would be expected for a measurement cited in two different units (with a common zero point). Cyrapas (talk) 16:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...oops, it's just significant figures, isn't it... It might still be good to indicate the second unit more clearly, though. Cyrapas (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]