User talk:Martinvl/Metrication program

Duff citation
Martin, alongside a photo of the Humber Bridge, you state "[Humber Bridge] one of the first major British civil engineering projects to be designed using metric units.[26]" Trouble is, the citation doesn't (AFAICS) substantiate your claim that it was "one of the first major British civil engineering projects to be designed using metric units". The citation does talk about the bridge on page 58, yes. Notice that the entire document is presented in metric units, as you'd expect of a civil engineering company, but that doesn't help. Steve Hosgood (talk) 12:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Page 4 states that the units cited in the book are the units used in the original design - the figures for the Severn Bridge are given in impreial with metric in brackets. Maybe that should be explained in the reference. Martinvl (talk) 12:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The way it is at the moment is very obscure, you must agree! Don't fall into the "deFacto trap" of putting in citations which on closer inspection don't directly back up the claim in the encylopædia article! Or even (several times in his case) don't back up the claim *at all*! Steve Hosgood (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * How about prefixing the reference with "Units cited in this book are the units used in the original design (pg 4). The units for the Severn Bridge (construction started 19zz) are given in feet (pg xx) and for the Humber Bridge (construction started 1972) in metres (pg yy)"? We would then remove the page number from the citation itself?. Martinvl (talk) 14:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Done - Comments? Martinvl (talk) 15:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, you've certainly cleared up any confusion there, but really all the citation is telling you is that the Humber bridge was an early example of a design done in metric *by that civil engineering company*. It doesn't tell you anything about the UK as a whole. I mean, a bigger civil engineering exercise than just one poxy little bridge ( :-) ) was the UK's motorway network. I don't know how that was originally designed, but the markers down the sides have been there since the mid-1960's and have been in km since the start. I would have assumed that that indicated that the design docs for the roads themselves were metric to match. But how do you find a proving citation? I could believe that the 1960's motorways were designed in metric, but I'd be impressed if the Preston Bypass (now part of the M6, built ~1958) had been. Steve Hosgood (talk) 15:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

1945 onwards..
Is the plan to remove this section eventually? Seems to me that it currently repeats a lot of what is said further down, plus it still has lots of the POV pushing that screwed the old MitUK article.

Stuff like "Due to public hostility, the UK's metrication programme was stalling during the 1970s...". Hostility? I never saw a single placard-waving demonstration marching on No.10 to complain about metrication. Or decimalisation for that matter. I could agree with "Due to public and government apathy, the UK's......".

But - that all get said later. I assume the entire section is just for notes then? Steve Hosgood (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * My plan is as follows
 * 1945 onwards - Reduce by another 25% or so, so that it give a chronolgical overview. I am currently working on the last few paragraphs - the text that you see is the remnant of the "curate's egg" with which I started.
 * Metrication Program - Finish off the last section. The other sections are sort of complete, but still neeed some tidying up.
 * Assessment of the British metrication program - delivered
 * Regulatory impact - delivered
 * I am keeping copies of the last two sections in my sandbox in order to preserve referece names when I have multiple references to the same citation. Once this text has been delivered, I proposing renaming "Current usage" to "Currnet Situation". I plan to keep the section "Information disseminartion" and add a new section regarding the EU package sizing (or abolition thereof) as that regulation will negate a large amount of what the Metrication Board did.  In a nutshell, until about two years ago, most groceries coudl only be manufactured is specific size as laid down by teh country, but countries had to accept products from elsewhere in the EU. For example, it was unlawful for British bakers to package rye bread in anything but 400 g and 800 g packets.  In Germany however, 500 g packets are standard.  Thus British supermarkets stocked 400 g British made packets alongside 500 g Germna made packets. More once I get round to writing it. Martinvl (talk) 19:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)