Talk:Slater Mill

Expansion needed!
Geez, this Mill is critically important in the development of the U.S. economy and the start of the Industrial Revolution here, and the best we have is a stub article! Need some expansion here! I'll try to start it. Anyone else wish to contribute? --CPAScott 16:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, my thoughts exactly. I live near it and go to festivals there regularly.  I was rather annoyed when I noticed Pawtucket's page never even mention(ed) it.  Anyway, I know a person that works there, the website has some information, and they have an educational movie they play in the visitor center.  I can get some photos.  ForestJay 02:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I've updated the Samuel Slater article a bit, but haven't had a chance to expand this one. If you can, that'd be great! --CPAScott 03:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

What about Wilkinson Mill?
As the Wilkinson Mill is an important part of the Slater Mill Historic Site, I think it needs more representation here. My suggestion, since they have the same NRHP listing, the title Slater Mill should be changed to Slater Mill Historic Site, with a redirect of both Slater Mill and Wilkinson Mill to the same place. Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcbela (talk • contribs) 15:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * After adding the NRHP Inventory/Nomination document for the site, and noting that it clarifies the NRHP/NHL area is the entire 4.23 acres and includes all 3 buildings of the Slater Mill Historic Site, i agree. Given the source, I just went ahead and renamed the article and boldly moved it from Slater Mill to Slater Mill Historic Site. doncram (talk) 16:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Great! I have a nice photo of the Red House i can add too.--Marcbela (talk) 17:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Worker's housing?
The system developed by Richard Arkwright included housing for his employees and their families. Slater didn't necessarily adopt every facet of Arkwright's system, but it might be worth looking into. Nev1 (talk) 22:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Beverly was first
Hey, sorry to burst the bubble, but the Beverly Cotton Manufactory was the first cotton mill in America, the largest and most successful of its time. I know that Slater Mill now calls themselves the first commercially successful mill, but that's been proven untrue now. Slater's mill is, however, the oldest still-standing cotton mill in America. Silivrenion (talk) 22:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, but should this be in the lead? I don't think all the stuff about Beverley Mill belongs there in what is supposed to be a summary of the article. Surely it would be better to say "...one of the first cotton mills in America" and go into detail on the subject in the main body of the article. Nev1 (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's significant that the historic site hasn't acknowledged the cited sources yet, but you are right.. it's really messy. Someone want to put a fresh pair of eyes on it and help clean it up? Silivrenion (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I cleaned up the article a bit. :) Silivrenion (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Item Number
One of the item number references is a dead link. The vagaries of the numbering system aren't really germain to the discussion of the site itself. Anyone object to simply deleting the sentence starting with "Slater Mill has the distinction of carrying the first, lowest reference number..."? Generic1139 (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I did remove the nrhp reference number discussion from the article. The issue seems to be that Slater Mill has a ref number of 66000001, but a later posting date than other properties with higher numbers. Interesting (though not surprising in a large government database), but not really relevant to information on the historic site itself. Generic1139 (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2013 (UTC)