Talk:Great Gold Robbery

Comments on revised text
, you asked for comments. I haven't many, but such as they are, here goes:
 * Lead
 * "four men, two of whom—William Tester and James Burgess—were both employees" – we don't want the "both" I think.
 * "sacked for being a gambler" – a little colloquial? Perhaps "dismissed"? Here and later.


 * South Eastern Railway
 * "Messrs Bult & Co." Unusual to have "Messrs" and "& Co" together. Usually it's one or the other. Just checking.
 * That's the way the main source has it, but I'll hunt round to see if he's erred on this. - SchroCat (talk) 18:56, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "The agents … was Chaplin & Co." – plural-v-singular clash.
 * "by train to Gare du Nord" – I'd give the Gare du Nord a definite article.
 * "Access to the safe was through the lid of the safe" – might flow better as "…through its lid"


 * Participants
 * "the fashionable area of Shepherd's Bush" – unexpected adjective: I thought Shepherd's Bush had always been a touch ropey, but I am quite prepared to be told I'm wrong.
 * "William Tester was a well-educated man who wore a monocle and had a desire to improve his position" – this doesn't quite hang together. I'd omit the monocle, I think.
 * I think that's what you've been told a couple of times! - SchroCat (talk) 18:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Tu quoque, laddie!  Tim riley  talk   19:13, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "information relating to" – "about"?


 * Planning and preparation
 * "Pierce relayed his thoughts to Agar" – just "he" would be better here, rather than "Pierce" I think, to help the flow.
 * "prior to" – or as we say in English, "before".
 * "telling his friend it was impractical" – the "it" is a bit lonely – perhaps "the plan" or some such. And are we sure it was impractical rather than impracticable?
 * I went with "scheme", as there was no plan - SchroCat (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * "A pre-arranged signal was arranged" – well, yes.


 * I'm not sure the new version - "an arranged signal was arranged" - is a whole lot better.  Tim riley  talk   19:16, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It’s not, but that’s because I cocked up the deleting. - SchroCat (talk) 19:20, 20 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Robbery: 15 May 1855
 * "to pop open the lid" – do we need the "pop"?

That's my lot. A really fascinating article. One rather shares the judge's reluctant admiration. –  Tim riley  talk  
 * Fantastic, many thanks, I'm much obliged for these, which I've addressed. - SchroCat (talk) 19:06, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Cassianto

 * Lead
 * "...gold bullion and coins was stolen from the guard's van of the London Bridge station to Folkestone service while it was being shipped to Paris." -- of the London Bridge Station doesn't quite make sense. Also, what is "Folkestone Service"?
 * Is Chubb & Son needed this early on? It seems to get in the way, somewhat.
 * "two of whom—William Tester and James Burgess—were both employees" do we need "two of whom" and then "both"?
 * "then left the train at Dover". Didn't they fancy taking it? ;)
 * "For sale: one train, slightly used..." - SchroCat (talk) 19:05, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

More soon.  Cassianto Talk  18:08, 20 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Planning and preparation
 * "notice of the regular police and railway police." -- Would it not be easier to simply say "police" in order to avoid repetition?
 * I went with “the municipal and railway police” instead. - SchroCat (talk) 06:09, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll have another read tomorrow with clearer eyes, but it all reads quite wonderfully for now. This was very enjoyable, made all the more fun with visions of Holloway and Guinness running down the Eiffel Tower laughing inanely.  Cassianto Talk  20:48, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 1855 Bullion box (NRM 159A 86).jpg

Purpose
It's my recollection that the gold shipment had some connection with the Crimean War: funding it or subsidizing some aspect of it. Am I delusional, or should this be mentioned? --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * That was the plot of the film, I think, rather than reality. - SchroCat (talk) 07:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

TFA tweaks?
Hi, two questions...
 * eldest son of Isaac Robert Cruikshank - missing link intentional?
 * Note m. - "judgement" is better spelt judgment for legal decisions? Eg MOS:SPELLING "(except in the sense of a judge's decision, in which case judgment is preferred)" and per Judgment (law). Also per Hanrahan (I can't see inside his train robbery book but snippets of other of his books have the 'judgment' spelling). And last but not least, and just in case I haven't convinced you:)... per Fowler's "judgment in legal works". JennyOz (talk) 12:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi JennyOz, Yes - good call on both of those, which are done. - SchroCat (talk) 15:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Image crop
@SchroCat, would it be good for me to crop the lead image a tad to reduce the margin on the print? It's also a few degrees askew, which further reduces the readability of the text at presentation size. Remsense 诉  01:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I’m not sure it really needs cropping. We could so, but I’m fairly ambivalent about whether there are any real benefits. Where is is askew? Looking at the caption, it appears - to my eye, at least - to to fairly straight. - SchroCat (talk) 07:07, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh—that's because I already fixed it. Remsense  诉  07:27, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Three feet square
"These were three-feet (0.91 m) square"

Is this the area or the length of the side? It's not clear from context. Both 3 square feet and 3x3=9 square feet are less than 0.91 square meters. IvicaInsomniac (talk) 05:39, 5 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Fixed IvicaInsomniac (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Which pound? (avoirdupois or troy pound)
The text states that 224 pounds = 102 kg. (Ignoring the technicality that pound is a force unit and kilogram is a mass unit...) gold is typically measured in troy units. 224 avoirdupois pounds do equal 101.6 kg; but 224 troy pounds only equals 83.6 kg. Is there a source that confirms which unit was referenced? — Eoghanacht talk 14:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No. - SchroCat (talk) 15:03, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The pound (lb) is a mass unit. You're thinking of the pound-force (lbf).
 * We can calculate backwards from the value, given the gold standard at the time. In the 19th century, £1 was 113 grains of pure gold. The value of the robbed gold was £12,000, that would be 1.356.000 grains. Divided by 224, we get about 6,050 grains. That's more than a troy pound (5,760 grains) but significantly less than an avoirdupois pound (7,000 grains). Looking at it differently, 224 troy pounds of gold would be worth £11,418, while 224 avoirdupois pounds of gold would be worth £13,876. So they probably meant troy pound. But this may be WP:SYNTH. Rontombontom (talk) 18:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Agar's sentence
Am I missing something or does the article really omit a mention of the sentencing of the main perpetrator? Rontombontom (talk) 18:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, never mind, sentenced for life for another crime, it's in the previous section of the article... Rontombontom (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Copyedit revert
I am failing to see how I introduced grammatical errors to the article. I was actually fixing grammatical errors, simplifying sentences, and otherwise being a good steward.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Great_Gold_Robbery&diff=1223984951&oldid=1223984614

@SchroCat can you explain? 71.11.5.2 (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I am going to guess you are an American? Many of the changes you made may well be okay in US English, but not in British English, which is the variant in which this article is written. - SchroCat (talk) 15:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I am really not seeing anything I changed that is specifically American. Do you have specific examples? 71.11.5.2 (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Much of what you changed, which is why I changed it back. US comma use differs quite drastically to BrEng, for example. - SchroCat (talk) 16:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)