Talk:Cromford Mill

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

Cotton Times[edit]

The well respected editor User:Nyttend raised a query about using this site as a reference. Cotton Times Bibliography I have found it to be useful and accurate, and all the text can be found either on interpretive boards on site or from common books most of which he gives in the bibliography. Has anyone contrary experiences? If a better reference is found then it should be used and Cotton Times go as an External link. Thanks to all who have assisted in improving the references. (B1 requirement) -- Clem Rutter (talk) 10:01, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I quote from the left side of the main page: Unless otherwise stated, all articles on this site were written by and are the copyright of the Webmaster: Doug Peacock. This is a perfect example of a self-published source; encyclopedias are not built on self-published sources, aside from things written by experts. I've looked for a Doug Peacock on Google, and I'm getting nothing on this guy: if he were an established historian in this field, with works on the topic previously published by reliable publishers, he would be showing up before pages like profiles of insurance agents. If the sources in his bibliography are good, use those sources instead of relying on what he's drawn from them; he could be misinterpreting the sources, adding to them, etc., and you wouldn't know it without relying on these reliable sources. Nyttend (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you are saying- he seems to be a reliable hobbyist-but hasn't let me down in the past. I have seen the fact somewhere- but my memory is not good enough to say where- I think it was on site from an interpretation board. I can easily get diverted from my Urgent to do list. (At the moment setting up some list pages for Woollen and Worsted in West Yorkshire- deep into tesseract and shell scripts, then making OTRS intelligible to mortals ). Just looking at the page I see it needs to be cleaned up- but my priority would be to integrate some of the text from the hideously large gallery into the main text before I started chasing up an alternative reference. I would let it stand at the moment, or if it important to you just mv the text onto this talk page with a request to others to find a better reference, and go to the Mills project page, or to Derbyshire and raise this as a general concern. I too can't find other works by the guy but his pages don't link to commercial sites- and I don't see a conflict of interest. When I have sorted out some better wording for OTRS- he is the sort of guy I would like to approach to see if he would change the copyright statement to CC-BY-SA. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 14:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is something that has been suggested in a number of publications. However Fitton,R.S., (1989) The Arkwrights: Spinners of Fortune, Manchester University Press, considered the authorative work, makes no mention. It does however on pages 52-53 describe machine breaking around Manchester in 1779, and threats against the Derbyshire mills. Arkwright enlisted the help of local gentlemen. He writes of Fifteen hundred stand of small arms . . . a battery of cannon raised of nine and twelve pounders In addition to his workers he was also able to enlist the help of the local leadminers. The rioters never came within fifty miles of Cromford and it was never threatened again. Chevin (talk) 17:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cooper, Transformation of a Valley- p.95 while talking of the loopholes installed at Belper refers to "the destruction of his mill at Chorley and his subsequent arming of Cromford with 'Fifteen hundred Stand of small Arms ... a great Battery of Cannon' and upwards of 500 spears fixt in Poles between 2 and 3 yards long. No mention of grapeshot. Any more clues? -- Clem Rutter (talk) 10:35, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The restoration galleries[edit]

Looking at this article again-- well a lot has happened since the article was first put together. I propose to shake it up a bit starting with a reformat of these galleries, and then look a little further at other World Heritage sites to see if we cam learn anything. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 21:24, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cromford Mill. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cromford Mill. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:20, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cromford_Mill&oldid=1209906471"