Talk:The Signal-Man

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Short story task force.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	November 14, 2012

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

Article name

I did a search: Google returned 12,500 hits for "The Signal-Man" Dickens I then tried: "The Signalman" Dickens and got 21,000 hits. So, by popular opinion, the title should have "Signalman" as one word, not two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.82.16.50 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 18 April 2006

Whatever one may think of a Google search as the mirror of "popular opinion", I think it would be fair to say that the story was first published with the (all caps) title of "THE SIGNAL-MAN" -- which I have reason to believe would probably have been "The Signal-man" in mixed case (see here) (cf. such Victorian usages as "Fleet-street") -- but it is undoubtedly also true that it has since been republished many times as "The Signalman", reflecting the more modern spelling of the common noun "signalman". -- Picapica 14:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Surely, in the interest of accuracy, the page's title should follow the title of the story as Dickens published it. Those who follow the contemporary spelling will find a link at the beginning of the Wikipedia entry "signalman" that will lead them here. It may be the case that "The Signal-man" reflects more appropriate capitalization. I doubt it, but let it be changed if anyone feels strongly enough to do so. -- Talented Mr Miller 14 August 2006

That's fine by me, TMM. -- Picapica 22:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Signalman"

From the article - "who would today be referred to as a signalman" (emphasis added). Today (that is, 2008 rather than (say) 1980), the person in question would be referred to as a "signaller", thanks to the irresistable march of Political Correctness - I would suggest that we either change "signalman" to "signaller" (but alias the link, as Signaller is about the military position), or change "today" to something like "in the twentieth century". 78.105.161.182 (talk) 14:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The word "signalman" is gender neutral. Unfortunately, some of the PC brigade don't understand this. –Signalhead ^< T > 15:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A debatable point, of course, and I'm sure one that many people have strong views on. However, our priority should be factual accuracy - we should reflect the world as it is, rather than as we'd like it to be. In any official Network Rail or RAIB or ORR or DfT document, he'd be a "signaller" today. My main issue is with "today" rather than "signalman", when it comes down to it - would you agree with keeping "signalman" and changing "today" to "in the twentieth century" or "in modern language"? 78.105.161.182 (talk) 16:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have no issue with you changing "signalman" to "signaller" in the article, because I accept that that's the term used today (on Network Rail). I was just pointing out that 'PC' claims that "signalman" is sexist are phoney. –Signalhead ^< T > 16:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it, why not just delete the entire parenthesis and put the link at 'signal-man' in the first sentence? Is the hyphen _that_ critical an issue? Anyway, that's what I've done. Please feel free to revert or edit if it's not acceptable. 78.105.161.182 (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good move -- having seen the talk page updates before the article edit I was worried what might have been done to it!
EdJogg (talk) 13:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Staplehurst connection

Must disagree about the section on the Staplehurst crash as a possible basis for the story. This section seems to be written in a perfectly appropriate style. The only question is whether non-factual reporting of this kind is suitable for an encyclopedic entry. If not, then the section should simply be deleted. I can’t see that a stylistic re-draft would change anything.

To me, it seems highly likely that Dickens’ harrowing experience at Staplehurst would have put this theme in mind as a topic for ghost-fiction. It is on the same level as unprovable but long-held theories about some of his female characters being based on his mistress Ellen Ternan, or his beloved sister-in-law who died young and is assumed to have inspired Little Nell. These theories are freely aired on Wikipedia. Valetude (talk) 16:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]