Talk:Elizabeth Raffald

Format error
Not sure what is going on but note b has a format error, displaying 2,019 when it should be 2019. I see that it is generated by CURRENTYEAR, which is not something with which I am familiar. Nice article, by the way. - Sitush (talk) 20:45, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks . I've seen the formatting (which shouldn't be happening, as it's in that template), and left a note on the template talk page, but no response so far... Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:48, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed these errors. The problem was that CURRENTYEAR was being wrapped in the formatnum magic word. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

What is an "innovator"?
This term, which I have rarely heard in noun form outside the context of venture capital, is used in the lede and short description but nowhere else in the article. It may help to explain this a bit more. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


 * OED: "One who innovates; an introducer of novelties or new methods" - I don't think there is much doubt that this description of Raffald is substantiated in the main text.  Tim riley  talk   22:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

"The first page of The Manchester Directory"
I'm 99% certain that this is of a reprint from the nineteenth century. The history of printing is an interest of mine: this book seems to be printed in a nineteenth-century typeface, Miller & Richard's Old Style, very popular for upmarket printing in the second half of the nineteenth century. In addition, the paper and printing quality look very good by eighteenth century standards, although not impossible. Compare it with the surrounding images, which do look normal for the eighteenth century, and there's a striking difference, although they are of worse-quality scans to be fair. According to Abe Books there was a reprint of this book in 1889, and although I can't find images of the inside I think that's likely what we're looking at here. Blythwood (talk) 21:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Added this to the article text (edit: put back). With more examination I've become very certain of this. If you compare with real 1772 books on Wikimedia Commons, e.g. this one, (but feel free to pick out any one at random) the difference in the finish of the paper and presswork is extremely stark. Blythwood (talk) 03:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Your comments are interesting, but it's WP:OR, I'm afraid. We go with what the reputable sources, not with what you think you may have worked out. As a compromise, I've removed the date from the IB image - it's of lesser importance than the image itself. The editor formally known as SchroCat, editing from 2A00:23C7:2B86:9801:6562:A1FC:F7F2:51BF (talk) 18:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
 * OK. I will try to get better photos to confirm this and report back. Blythwood (talk) 11:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)