User talk:ClemRutter/Archives/2012/February

Electrification
This article conforms with the common usage of the term in history, especially the history of technology and economic history. In the histories electrification usually means the period from the 1880s to the 1930s when the U.S. and Europe was wired. Specific usages are factory electrification and rural electrification. A book about the subject is Electrifying America. There is also a book Factory electrification.

On Wikipedia there are separate articles for specific topics such as Railway electrification system. If you have anything else in mind, create a separate subtopic or a separate article. This is about national electrification.Phmoreno (talk) 03:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I am just reporting that I cannot personally verify that. Experience with dealing with topics from the 1760s-1850s shows that a term can have two meanings dependent of location. It is simpler to pass on the warning early, so the expert is aware of the fact. Tech history articles are rare- good ones are rarer. I could do the first but not the latter- you seem to be doing the latter, and it makes good reading. Ping me if I can help out on verifying European usage- I prefer to take it through a personal talk page rather than interrupt another editor flow or to make potentially contraversial edits directly. I am still trying to find for you out what the equivalent UK term to US Electification is. Maybe an area to try is that Oxford Advanced Learning dictionary defines electrification: the process of changing something so that it works by electricity while most google refs seem to define it as the process of providing electricity.


 * The Electrification article has an About tag that redirects to Electrification (disambiguation) for other meanings, therefore there should be no confusion. I am hardly surprised that you can't find mention of electrification if you are looking in a time period before there was even the idea that such a thing would happen.  As for the history of technology, there are encyclopedias on the subject and there is a large group of interested persons.  Wikipedia has articles on the history of technology, but they are poor quality.  I would recommend McNeil (1990).Phmoreno (talk) 13:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has articles on the history of technology, but they are poor quality. Agreed, Electrification (disambiguation) is a classic example! We have to be careful to check the terms we are using are universal. The period I have been working in (above) shows that. It does surprise me that we get an example like this occuring so late. * Page 213-234 gives some details of the UK situation attributing the start of the Electrical distribution industry to !879 Swan and Edison, with Goldalming having the first public electricity supply in 1881. It failed! The South Eastern Brush Electric Light Company @ Colchester was 1884- then a reference to Lincoln Nebraska 87. I can't come up with a usage of the word electrification in any of these case- or any with the meaning 'to provide power´ The only usage I know Europe side is to mean 'to convert to electricity'


 * Further research provides this 1978 retrospective usage on a google Electrification rural Yorkshire: Maxwells Northallerton. However reading the article: they are using the term to refer to change not provision: W. H. Burton and Sons, pioneers in rural electrification


 * Hansard Rural electification 1956 may be a useful reference for you

--ClemRutter (talk) 14:22, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The term electrification is very commonly used with the meaning as in this article. A search of the articles on my computer turned up a page of examples.  The clearest example is Note 3 in Electrification which is linked to the specific chapter of that title in A Century of Innovation.Phmoreno (talk) 15:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I get a lot of references that agree too-the majority of googles. The problem is I haven't found any European usage of the word before 1956, so I can't prove that the usage is universal, and as such we need to note it. We don't have the problem with the verb- to electrify- as that appears to have at least three meanings in both continents. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Per standards of Wikipedia, it's not the number of references that count, it's the quality. In this case we have the National Academy of Engineering in the U.S., which represents the various branches (electrical, civil, chemical, etc.). That's definitive for the U.S. If you want to find something in Europe, I recommend checking the engineering societies' papers.Phmoreno (talk) 19:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Can we just wind back a little- its your text, all I am doing is giving you a warning that your term is not universal and has a narrower meaning outside the US.. You can use that information how you like. In the past- good articles have been ruined by edits and reversions, leading to frustration on all sides. We are holding this conversation here to try an avoid this happening. You edits are good- and technology is poorly served at the moment: just be aware that only using Australian/ ZA/ European or US references for an article that purports to be international in its coverage, is a recipe for disaster. The subject is one that I would read but is outside my current topic editing area- which principally has to do with Textile manufacturing Cotton mill- another area that is poorly served hence Line shafting. If you want to come back to me when you are ready, and ask if there is anything in the text that is US Centric, please do and I will be glad to help.--ClemRutter (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

The different regional usage of terms is problematic, but perhaps can be handled without hurting the article. I have no problem with putting alternate names in parentheses or having a glossary for translation if they are numerous. I'd like to see a list of those from electrification and line shaft and would appreciate your leaving them on my talk page so I can insert them. Some of the articles in my files on electrification are from European authors, and I will check them for different terms. Also, I will check to see if I can find anything by the Economic History Society (U.K.). I am a member of the Economic History Association (U.S.), and these two organisations offer dual membership, which includes a subscription to the Society's Journal; however, the joint membership is much more costly so I did not join both. The Journal would probably cover both topics. In the two dozen articles on my computer that show results to a search for electrification, not one has the term in the title.Phmoreno (talk) 23:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Not a big issue. The current lead section needs a lot of work but if we take it as it is: "Electrification was the build out of the electrical generating and distribution systems which occurred in the United States, England and other countries from the mid 1880's until around 1940 and is in progress in rural areas in some developing countries." and expand it a little, nothing needs to be done to the rest of the article. How about "Electrification, in North America, is the provision of electrical generating and distribution systems. Elsewhere, the term has a narrower meaning, referring to the change to using electricity as a source of energy . For example rail electrification referred to the change from directly using fossil fuels to the used of electricity. The roll out of electricity started in Europe in 1881, and occurred in the United States from the mid 1880's until around 1940. Rural electrification is still in progress in some areas of some developing countries."
 * That ought to do- lousy English but it gets the points over and then everything else stays as it was. And we will see the references and notes as here.

"" --ClemRutter (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I get your point here with the electrification example and think I can come up with something satisfactory to address the various usages. It may take a day or two to get back to it though.  If you can give me examples for line shaft I will take care of that also.Phmoreno (talk) 04:48, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

It just occurred to me that the Encyclopedia Britannica is a good place to start. I did see an article for electrification in a search for: electrification Encyclopedia Britannica. A similar search for line shaft turned up nothing.Phmoreno (talk) 23:34, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The Encyclopædia Britannica article tells the sorry story. I once owned a complete 9th edition- but it got left behind at my parents when I moved out. EB Online do use one of my Commons photos for their article on Westerwald pottery.--ClemRutter (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I didn't realize that Encyclopedia Britannica was a U.S. publication. False advertising! Anyway, a reliable European usage of electrification is from Page 24 near bottom of page "Electrification is indeed the primary tool of industrialization." INSEAD, the sponsor of the paper, is a European business college.  Robert Ayres (scientist) is an American who got his Ph.D. in the U.K. Phmoreno (talk) 04:29, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That is good read. I can have fun with that! In its own way it is political dynamite. Speak soon. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know what you are referring to about "that was a good read" (my comments or the Ayrew-Warr paper?) and being "political dynamite". Phmoreno (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The biggest problem I have in understanding (your)this issue is that I don't know whether the different usages are regional or related to the various fields of study versus, such as the history of technology or economic history versus popular journalism. Otherwise, I think it would be easy to reword to categories such as the broadest definition, electrifying the entire economy, versus specific sectors such as railways, factories, urban areas, rural areas.Phmoreno (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Take it as it was said- I liked his style- I spent 25 minutes scan reading it and the references. Political dynamite- from British perspective, we have two very contraversial/political infrastructure projects Crossrail and HS2- both being imposed by a Conservative government against the wishes of their own MPs. The growth paradigms described do not fit in well with either groups core beliefs. Apply the concept of useful work to the banking crisis really does signal a need to curtail their actvities US side,Our airwaves are full of reports of US primaries- and I suspect that suggesting a rôle for 'large government' would not be very welcome! In many ways, Obamas initial programme was right and the curtailing of infrastructural change must be a cause for the negative growth we see, albeit purported to just sluggish growth by the army or PR consultants employed to do non useful work. It make one question whether Romney is justified in spending so much money on the TV advertising- the definition highlighted in Ayres p 10 could be seen to very critical. A real political hot potato.


 * Focusing on the definition again. Ayres only uses the word twice in the whole document, both on p 24. To my reading he is using the term to mean 'the change from one type of energy to another' (yes the document goes into the fact, that technically, the energy source may be the same in both cases. Linguistically we can say that electrification is the process whereby something is electrified. But then it gets complicated- I suggest that US attempted to provide electricity to remote communities- so common processes like lighting could be electrified- the electrification of lighting in rural communities became contracted to electrification of rural communities then to Rural Electrification and then further contracted so the provision of a rural electricity transmission network was politically and economically branded as Electrification. Have I any evidence? None whatsoever! Over to you. All I can say is that the power transmission issue in the UK would be different- as distances are smaller, and early system seem to be provided as excess capacity from a stationary steam engine in a local mill.(Again, no evidence) Transmission became a municipal responsibilty. Yes, I don't know whether the different usages are regional or related to the various fields of study versus, such as the history of technology or economic history versus popular journalism but I suspect that all are factors.


 * So, I suggest you write the piece from your perspective with the changed lead. Put a note on the talk page that the article may have to be changed to ensure that it has global relevance- and invite other editors to come forwarde with suggestions. The page is in a couple of Wikiprojects- seek advice there. If you are greated by silence you know you have got it about right. I am always looking and listening for notable references. On one topic the BBC ran a programme on a topic I was working on. Pencil at the ready- I heard them read out a few facts- ones I had written a couple of weeks earlier! Wait long enough and the language will change as well. (Words mean exactly what I want them to mean, Humpty Dumpty, Through the Looking Glass, by Lewis Carroll.). Speak soon.--ClemRutter (talk) 18:47, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * As for the evolution of the term, I believe electrification was used early on in the technical literature, perhaps going back to the 1880s. Unfortunately I had to return The transmission of Power by Hunter & Bryant (1991) to the library or I would probably be able to verify this.  The reference is very difficult to locate. I had to get it through an inter-library loan from far away.  By 1935 the term was in common usage: Rural electrification.Phmoreno (talk) 23:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

re- country park info boxes
Hi Clem, I have completed several country park info boxes (including Riverside) - is this similar to what you meant! It was handy in a few occassions to find some missing information (to go in the box) ! DavidAnstiss (talk) 20:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
&tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 12:16, 11 February 2012 (UTC)