Talk:Redruth and Chasewater Railway

A map would be nice; showing industry, towns, ports, terrain,etc?

We should actually have an article on the former industrial network of Cornwall, since it was quite the hive of industry before the mid-19th century, but that's another story...Graldensblud 17:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Spelling

The article title has been mis-spelt. Chasewater is in Staffordshire, Chacewater is in Cornwall. I will correct it. Biscuittin (talk) 12:09, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Umm, a bit more warning would have been useful. I think several reference sources say that the original name was spelt with an "s". Having said that, the c-version is what it seems to be called today, so the move is OK; but references to the original railway, rather than to the modern trail, should probably be spelt "Chasewater". I'll check some books - watch this space...  —SMALLJIM  13:27, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes - I think a short quote would be useful here:

“ Many people are puzzled by the spelling "Chasewater". I have heard it said that this was simply a mistake on the part of an official in London, but [Denys Bradford] Barton's explanation is that it is "a legacy of the days of its (the Railway's) formation when this was the more customary spelling." Certainly Richard Thomas consistently used it in his "Report on a Survey of the Mining District from Chasewater to Camborne" (1819). ”

So actually, despite what I said at first, I think it ought to be moved back. A future article on the Redruth and Chacewater Railway trail could perhaps have the other spelling, though Google shows that that isn't consistent. What do you think?  —SMALLJIM  15:28, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Chacewater is the spelling used in R W Kidner's book. Biscuittin (talk) 18:07, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

So... just to be clear, you don't agree that it should be changed back? I can dredge up plenty more refs to show that was its original name. What about this?  —SMALLJIM  18:19, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

If "Chasewater" was the original name of the railway then I agree it should be changed back. I think it is one of those cases like Llanelli and Mynydd Mawr Railway and Llanelly and Mynydd Mawr Railway. Perhaps Chasewater was a Cornish spelling and Chacewater is an Anglicized version of it. Biscuittin (talk) 18:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Placename spellings in Cornwall do not appear to have been standardized until the late 19th/early 20th C (and I am aware of a few where the OS persists in using forms which are never used by locals). I would incline to prefer whatever the railway called itself for the title of the article. DuncanHill (talk) 18:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks both. I've moved it back, cited the above ref and one other. BTW - I think that comparison with Llanelly / Llanelli is spot on.  —SMALLJIM  23:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry I jumped the gun. I did do some research (by looking at R W Kidner's book) before making the change but I obviously didn't do enough. Biscuittin (talk) 08:15, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I have corrected the links to this article. Biscuittin (talk) 08:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I have created a disambig page: Chasewater (disambiguation). Biscuittin (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your tidying up work, Biscuittin - sorry I wasn't around yesterday to help.  —SMALLJIM  08:42, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Intro a bit unhelpful?

I think it's important that the introduction is pithy and easily comprehensible to the non-specialist reader.

I would like to suggest that the explanation about Cha*S*ewater (which is repeated in different words in the text) is discouraging to someone who just wants to know what the railway was and did. Incidentally I see you have all been having a huge debate about this; with great respect, the company spelt itself with an S and that's an end of it. It's not for us to approve or disapprove, or to rationalise why they did it (unless we can point to an authoritative source ... e.g. a map or gazzetteer of the period using the S spelling). If no-one objects, I suggest we leave the explanation in the body of the article as the sole point of reference for this.

Secondly I was a but flummoxed to read that the railway ran from Devoran to the mines; I'll have to read my reference books again, but surely the overwhelming flow was from the mines to the port? I suggest that the route ought to be described that way round in this situation of a dominant traffic direction.

Oh and a map, did someone say? Yes, I was going to do one a couple of years ago, but I got a bit discouraged by some hair splitting that was going on nearby (present company excepted), but I'll try again, when I have finished maps for some other mineral lines that I am doing. Afterbrunel (talk) 12:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I've amended the direction as you suggest, though you could have done it. I think the alternative spelling should be mentioned in the lead, per MOS:LEADALT. A map would be very helpful :)  —SMALLJIM  15:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Small Jim. Yes, I could have done it myself, but I have found in Wikipedia that some people get disproportionately possessive of the status quo, (resulting in reversion of a lot of edit text), hence my advance trail of my intentions.

I'll do the map shortly. Afterbrunel (talk) 18:09, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the map (could it have a legend to clarify what the different coloured lines mean?) and for the extensive expansion of the article.  —SMALLJIM  13:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC)