Talk:Consett Iron Company

Move

Shouldn't this be moved to something like Consett Steel Works. It seems strange that such a huge industrial undertaking should only have a tiny article devoted to it, something which a move to a broader title may help. Just a thought Fintan264 (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

The title is probably fine - all companies change their names at frequent intervals. We could add a redirect for the other name. But additional material, if suitably sourced with citations of books, museums, and reliable websites would be welcome: as you say, the article is very short for the topic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced materials

The following appears to be entirely unsourced (WP:OR) so I've moved it here. If you can find sources for any of it, feel free to add it back. With the sources, of course. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

"The company was closed because of the over capacity caused by the construction of new iron and steel making facilities for which there was no market available to British Steel. The company undertook a hugely expensive expansion programme to double the capacity from around 15 million tonnes/year to around 30 million. Little consideration was given to the finishing end, which is the reason why the company could not sell the increased production. Once the new facilities were completed, the options were to close the older works like Consett and Corby, or not start-up the new furnaces. The latter option would have been too embarrassing to contemplate, so the Consett works was closed. It was not for valid economic or even financial reasons.

The huge capital investsment programme undertaken by Brtish Steel resulted in debts of around £4 billion which were never paid off. These debts were wiped off the books when the company (British Steel) was privatised and sold as a "profitable" business."

Rewrite needed

This article is plainly in need of a complete overhaul. There is substantial material available in Jenkins (see Bibliography in the article), with useful materials at the Durham Mining Museum and other sites. The article requires a decent history explaining the basic timeline, the changes in company name, size and fortunes, illustrated with some historic photographs. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Done (in May 2012). Hope new version goes some way to satisfying the topic - certain that more could be said, especially on the final phase of the company. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:11, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Derwent Iron Company

I created a redirect -from Derwent Iron Company this article gives the details (founder, date, financial trouble) - so in the absence of a proper article, this page seems appropriate. If any problems with this please let me know.Oranjblud (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Consett Iron Company/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CorporateM (talk · contribs) 05:25, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll take on this review. CorporateM (Talk) 05:25, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks for volunteering your time, it's much appreciated. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

First look

Done

Citation 5 has an error Fixed. Some of the language is a bit awkward Calling the company an "undertaking" in the Lede Changed to 'business'. "The company traded as colliery and limestone quarry owners and iron and steel manufacturers" I think maybe you just meant it traded limestone, as oppose to "trading as" Clarified, it refers to the official listing. I would prefer not so many bold company names in the Lede. I believe we usually just bold the name of the article Each one of the boldface names is the target of a redirect per WP:MOS, i.e. each one is a search term and the name of a dummy article. The company indeed had many names during its history. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC) Early unprofitability: Suggest a different title Renamed to 'Starting out' Early unprofitability: Suggest adding something about the Derwent Iron Company being the article-subject's predecessor company to make it more clear Done. Early unprofitability: However Merged paragraphs and rearranged. Early unprofitability: It was not until -> "In April 1864" Done. Early unprofitability: The last sentence should probably be broken up into two to avoid a run-on Done. Success under William Jenkins: There seems to be a lot of editorializing with words like "fortunately" Changed to 'fortunately for the company', which was the intended meaning. There's no for or against here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC) Success under William Jenkins: There's an extra space between paragraphs near the bottom Removed.

Lede

done

"The company was officially listed as trading as the owner of collieries and limestone quarries, and as iron and steel manufacturers.[1]" -> "The company coal mines, limestone quarries, as well as metal processing facilities for steel and iron." Reworded. "the site becoming known as the Consett Steel Works." -> "and the location was renamed to Consett Steel Works" Done. "passed to the National Coal Board on nationalisation in 1947" - can we explain what is meant by "on nationalization"? Since I am US-based, this is a very foreign concept to me. Did the government take control of all businesses at that time? Or did the government acquire the business from its owners? Reworded, thanks for the hint. Yes, the government took over all coal businesses at that time, steel businesses a little later. Then it changed its mind. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC) What is meant by "officially listed"? Removed. Citations 1 & 2 don't appear to have very much citation information filled out. Filled out and updated refs. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:43, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

• It looks like parts of the Lede are cited and parts aren't. If the cited parts aren't included in the body, I think that's ok. However, if they are, you should stick to one format or another (cites in the Lede or no cites) CorporateM (Talk) 21:12, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Moved refs to body. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Early history

Completed

Citation 4 needs an accessdate and the title is a bit odd Done. Suggest "exploit" -> "mine" because exploit is a bit ambiguous Let's try "to quarry and smelt": the exploitation was not to sell ironstone, but to make iron using the newly acquired ironstone. The second sentence is a bit awkward - what makes some ironstone "the best"? Fixed: the highest iron content. Do we have any details on how they "arranged" (with who?) the railroad extensions? Added a railway company: more in footnote. Can we change the second paragraph into two sentences to eliminate a run-on sentence Done. Who provided the capital? Described the shareholders briefly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC) after years of uncertainty, seems like un-needed editorializing Not really; the company was as stated in a perilous financial position and spent more than 7 years with a highly uncertain future, or to be blunt the constant threat of bankruptcy. Can we say something more specific along those lines? Like, "After operating for several years under the threat of bankruptcy" (something even more specific would be better, like how much money was being lost each year.) CorporateM (Talk) 16:48, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. Can we add a wikilink and state for Consett, so the reader can get an idea of where it is? CorporateM (Talk) 17:02, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. Can we get a conversion in parentheses for how much 1 million pounds is in today's currency? CorporateM (Talk) 17:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done (in footnote). I would prefer if we found a way to take out the quotations RE shares. CorporateM (Talk) 17:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. The sentence starting with "It became the owner of " could be broken up into two sentences to avoid the double "and" CorporateM (Talk) 17:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done.

William Jenkins

completed

The caption for the image should describe the image, rather than add new content. CorporateM (Talk) 17:13, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. The first sentence I think could be re-written for general copyediting. CorporateM (Talk) 17:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. Fortunately for the company CorporateM (Talk) 17:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. "Siemens furnaces at Consett came into"? CorporateM (Talk) 17:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. The sentence starting with "In 1887 the company" could use some copyediting and a breakup into two sentences. CorporateM (Talk) 17:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. "There was a 16-bed "Infirmary" to treat injured workers." Was there a particularly high rate of injury? or was this normal. CorporateM (Talk) 21:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC) No indication of high rate of injury; the point is rather to evidence the company's care for its workers. "The 6,000 workers were paid a total of £416,000 per year" I would suggest using WP:CALC to put an average salary per-worker here. CorporateM (Talk) 21:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. Can we add just a few words on what a Roots blower is? CorporateM (Talk) 21:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. I would suggest making the fourth paragraph the first one in the section. CorporateM (Talk) 21:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. "Jenkins wrote a history of the company, describing in detail the facilities and staff" I think this should be used as a source, but not included in the article CorporateM (Talk) 21:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. that he achieved this with a company that had been struggling with bankruptcy from the start shows his ability. Seems like un-needed editorializing. CorporateM (Talk) 21:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Done. continuing his efficient and profitable management. CorporateM (Talk) 21:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

• A lot of the second half of this section I think is not written in an encyclopedic tone and needs could be better integrated with the rest of the content. I might take a crack at copyeditng and moving things around if you don't mind, because I think it would be hard to explain precisely what I mean. CorporateM (Talk) 21:44, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

OK; have copyedited and checked for tone.

• "prosperity" What do you mean by this? Large, consistent profit margins, or... CorporateM (Talk) 21:17, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Changed to 'profit'. See table.

• "efficiency" Does the source say anything more specific about how we brought about efficiency? CorporateM (Talk) 21:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Careful financial management. Cited.

• "For this purpose it created the Angle Mills on a sixteen-acre site. These mills could produce 1500 tons of angles, bars and girders per week" - this sentence uses "the" (singular) but "These Mills" suggests plural. A bit confused. CorporateM (Talk) 21:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Reworded.

• "at Crookhall" - is this a city? CorporateM (Talk) 21:43, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Linked.

• can we take "infirmary" out of quotes? CorporateM (Talk) 21:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

• "Contemporaries regarded [Jenkins] as being particularly shrewd in two respects: in his judgement of what was profitable business, and in his choice of men for managerial posts." I'm not sure I understand this quote... CorporateM (Talk) 22:01, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Added a gloss.

• "had been sub-manager" was "sub-manager" his actual title? CorporateM (Talk) 22:02, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

He progressed from being a chemist, a blastfurnace manager and eventually General Manager after Jenkins.Wilson, p203 Said 'a manager'.

• "He reconstructed Consett Iron Company in 1903–1909 at a cost of £750,000" what is meant by reconstructed? CorporateM (Talk) 22:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Extended the description of Ainsworth's time.

• "until his death in 1920." Needs a source CorporateM (Talk) 22:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

Twentieth century

• Can we get some conversion numbers (to modern currency values) in parentheses? CorporateM (Talk) 22:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

• was wealthy enough Unneeded editorializing CorporateM (Talk) 22:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

• I think it could be merged into fewer paragraphs and copyediting to improve the flow. CorporateM (Talk) 22:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

• The very last paragraph has a really long run-on sentence and needs copyediting/re-writing. CorporateM (Talk) 22:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

External links

• The number of external links seems excessive. Could some of these be integrated as references? CorporateM (Talk) 16:52, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

• Would suggest "Further reading" rather than "Bibliography" as a bibliography usually refers to works published by the article-subject, as oppose to works about them. CorporateM (Talk) 16:53, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

Final review

• "On 4 April 1864, after operating for several years under the threat of bankruptcy, a new Consett Iron Company Ltd was formed[5][6] with capital of £400,000, which was divided into 40,000 shares priced initially at £10 each,[2]:2 with J. Priestman as managing director; two local Members of Parliament, Henry Fenwick and John Henderson, were among the directors." Can we break this up into 3 sentences to avoid a run-on. CorporateM (Talk) 15:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Done.

• "n 1938, the company helped to found" How did it help found it? CorporateM (Talk) 15:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

With financing.

• "resulting in an unemployment rate of 35%," in that area? CorporateM (Talk) 15:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

In Consett. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Flow of the article

As this article has a citation error in huge red letters, I was going to deal with that.

But then I read in more detail and I was uncomfortable with some details. As a lot of people have evidently put a lot of work into this article I hesitate to put my ideas in without consultation ...

May I also make the point that Wikipedia articles are for people who don't already know about the subject, and editors who do know about it will wish to bear that in mind.

So here goes:

1) The top image appears to be captioned "ironmaking" and appears to be a great cloiud of dust. I now see that it isn't a caption, but maybe one should be provided. I suppose the purpose of the image is to shout "See how awful our living conditions were here" and when I was there about 1962 they were awful; but are we sure that is a helpful and encouraging introduction to a reader?

2) There are several red links; red links are only justfied if there is a realistic expectation that someone will provide the linked article shortly.

3) The citation errors.

4) There are numerous dead links. You can't just link to an external news item and expect that it will be static and valid for ever more.

5) One of the links simply takes you to a registration page. Maybe the editor who provided the link had already registered, but a novice reader will not have done so.

6) The section references in Jenkins are unusual [not in itself objectionable] but puzzling until you read the citation at the bottom. Since we never do it this way for a printed book (and Jenkins is a printed book), are we sure this system is helpful?

7) This looks like an attempt to shoehorn a political point into the article: In 1938, the company helped to finance the founding of the New Jarrow Steel Company from the old Palmers Shipbuilding and Iron Company[1] which had collapsed in 1933, leading to the Jarrow March of 1936.

Afterbrunel (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

End of Kaldo ?

In 1964, Consett bet on the kaldo converters. That year, 2 Kaldos and 2 LD converters were built. [1] In 1966, Kaldo production became little. [2] In 1968, a third LD was built. [3]

My question is : when did the Kaldo production definitively ceased ? I didn't find any ref about it. Borvan53 (talk) 23:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

 Done, I finallly got it : first Kaldo was converted in a 150-t LD in 1968, the second one in 1971 [4]. Borvan53 (talk) 21:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)