This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Devon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DevonWikipedia:WikiProject DevonTemplate:WikiProject DevonDevon
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Coventry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CoventryWikipedia:WikiProject CoventryTemplate:WikiProject CoventryCoventry
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Should this early beam engine, also Fairbottom Bobs, the Elsecar engine, the Whitbread Brewery engine and Resolution, be listed in this historical cat? They had little historical significance, their significance is only either local (Resolution) or acquired later as a result of their preservation. Old Bess and the Lap Engine belong in that category (although they're not there) as they had historical significance as part of the steam engine's development. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:13, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Only just seen this after all are now added. Whitbread (strong case as an early rotative, possibly the second after John Wilkinson (industrialist)'s Bradley Works engine, and before Lap), Resolution (arguably as use in the heart of the Industrial Revolution, and possibly as end of line in the transition to rotative for that use which also means possibly not), Newcomen Memorial Engine (possibly not in itself, it's early but there's older), Elsecar & Fairbottom Bobs (not in themselves). Debateable if all redeem themselves as they were considered worth preserving as examples. Widefox; talk21:50, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Most weren't "considered" for preservation, they were simply the last handful left at the time long after obsolescence when preservation became interesting. This is why the canal pumping engines are over-represented compared to the far more common mine drainage engines. Mines were closed and scrapped, canals were already backwaters where an obsolete engine was "sometimes" used. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, sure they could only pick what's left, which gives us a WP:systemic bias if we (almost) blindly add to all as I did. Feel free to remove from any Andy. We have a preserved cat after all. Widefox; talk12:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP coverage always ends up biased according to existing articles. The Chacewater Mine engine, well known under that name, keeps getting renamed as "Chasewater" and now it's getting listed as Wheal Busy, just because that's what a related WP article is called. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
