This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
Gooch's title at the GWR was Locomotive Superintendent; the title Chief Mechanical Engineer was not created until 1915. Reference: Wikipedia article, List of Chief Mechanical Engineers of the Great Western Railway
I can't see how to edit the first paragraph of the Gooch article!
Yes; it's a common misconception that Chief Mechanical Engineer (CME) was a universal title, and synonymous with Locomotive Superintendent. Unfortunately, a number of books use the title of CME indiscriminately for all such staff, regardless of whether that was the actual job title or not. I can go further: since the first CME of any British railway was
John Aspinall, of the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway (although I can't source that at this stage), anybody who left office prior to Aspinall's appointment in 1886 cannot have been a CME. However, I can source the date that Churchward's job title changed (you can't use Wikipedia itself as a reference source, see
WP:CIRCULAR): MacDermot's History of the Great Western Railway, volume 2, p. 568 "[Churchward] was accorded the title of Chief Mechanical Engineer early in 1916"; there are similar notes in the RCTS Locomotives of the Great Western Railway, part nine, p. J3 and in Haresnape's Churchward Locomotives, p. 10.
As for your second point: the first (or "lead") section of any article does not, by default, have its own "[edit]" link, so you need to use the "edit" tab along the top edge as if you were editing the entire page. However, if you go to
my preferences, then select the "Gadgets" tab, and under the heading "User interface gadgets: editing" is the option "Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page" - make sure that is ticked. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)reply
MP
Gooch was am MP for
Cricklade for 20 years? Assuming that the infobox should still be for engineer and not for MP, shouldn't this be mentioned in both the infobox and lead section? I think he still counts as "a politician" even if he never addressed Parliament.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
17:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Politicians debate matters that are raised in parliament. His Hansard record comes back with 0 results; and whilst that might be attributed to the time it takes to digitise the older records, in his diaries Gooch unashamedly - even proudly - states that he did not take part in any debates, treating Parliament as a gentleman's club. He was an MP, but not a politician. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
18:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
So we can't mention him being an MP? You are saying his 20 years as a Member of Parliament does not contribute in any way to his notability? You might also want to adjust the
politician to explain that British MPs who make no contributions in the House of Commons are excluded?
Martinevans123 (
talk)
18:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes we can, it's right there at
Daniel Gooch#Political career and I did not remove any of that text - indeed, I added a mention. The main thing is that being an MP is not what he is best known for, nor can it be considered to be among his major achievements. Career politicians give up the day job; Gooch did nothing of the kind. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
21:32, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure how he had a "Political career" if he wasn't a politician. I guess UK "politics" was slightly different in 1865. I think his position as an MP should appear in the lead section and in the infobox. In fact most MPs have a dedicated section of the infobox especially for that?
Martinevans123 (
talk)
23:03, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
He was elected to Parliament: that means he is, among other things, a politician. We call people politicians just for standing for Parliament, even if they're not elected. It is interesting that he never said anything in a debate, but that doesn't mean he wasn't carrying out the other functions of an MP. We call Sinn Fein MPs who don't take their seats politicians. Being an MP is not what he is best known for, so I wouldn't lead on it, but it is a notable fact about him that I would include in the lead section.
Bondegezou (
talk)
15:13, 7 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I generally favour shorter, to-the-point infoboxes, so I'll say yes to a mention in the lead section and no to a mention in the infobox, but I do not have a strong feeling on the infobox. Get the article right and worry about the infobox later is my attitude!
Bondegezou (
talk)
10:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)reply
The article focuses on Gooch's engineering career, so the infobox should too. The question is whether to have a couple of lines in the infobox about his MP career.
Bondegezou (
talk)
09:36, 10 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I had assumed that being an MP was a "categorical fact" and not dependant on the content or focus of the article. And that the "MP" infobox module was the standard way of signifying this. I guess the alternative is to just add "Member of Parliament" to his list of "Occupations"?
Martinevans123 (
talk)
09:53, 10 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes. "When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article..". I'd say that his being an MP was a "key fact" about his life.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
11:34, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Martinevans123: as an MP, what did he actually do, other than get elected? Did he, perhaps, speak for or against some Parliamentary motion that affected the GWR in particular or the railways in general? --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
21:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I have to admit, I have no idea what he did. I suspect nothing. I guess he turned up for votes occasionally. It's just getting voted in for 20 years that counts as the "key fact". I suspect he was a hopeless MP. But still an MP. As I said I assumed it was just a "categorical fact".
Martinevans123 (
talk)
22:03, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
He didn't vote on anything - you can't vote in the Commons until you have made your
maiden speech. Since he proudly boasted of never having spoken to the House (it's in his diaries, see
Daniel Gooch#Political career), he therefore could not have voted. That's been my point all along - since his contribution to national politics was precisely zero (except perhaps to block the seat from a more deserving candidate), and he treated the post as a virtual
sinecure, it is
WP:UNDUE to place MP on an equal footing with his real work for the railways and towards international communications. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
23:43, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Gosh, you mean there are corrupt MPs who just use the position to feather their own nests? Who knew. I think, provided a good source can be found, those details could certainly be added to the article. Or maybe you think we should say only good things about him? I think we need as full a picture of Gooch as possible. That's been my point all along.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
23:50, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the clarification, Tim. It seems Sir Daniel was not so idle after all. I would have no objection to some or all of those details being added.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
12:11, 16 November 2021 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
Gooch's title at the GWR was Locomotive Superintendent; the title Chief Mechanical Engineer was not created until 1915. Reference: Wikipedia article, List of Chief Mechanical Engineers of the Great Western Railway
I can't see how to edit the first paragraph of the Gooch article!
Yes; it's a common misconception that Chief Mechanical Engineer (CME) was a universal title, and synonymous with Locomotive Superintendent. Unfortunately, a number of books use the title of CME indiscriminately for all such staff, regardless of whether that was the actual job title or not. I can go further: since the first CME of any British railway was
John Aspinall, of the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway (although I can't source that at this stage), anybody who left office prior to Aspinall's appointment in 1886 cannot have been a CME. However, I can source the date that Churchward's job title changed (you can't use Wikipedia itself as a reference source, see
WP:CIRCULAR): MacDermot's History of the Great Western Railway, volume 2, p. 568 "[Churchward] was accorded the title of Chief Mechanical Engineer early in 1916"; there are similar notes in the RCTS Locomotives of the Great Western Railway, part nine, p. J3 and in Haresnape's Churchward Locomotives, p. 10.
As for your second point: the first (or "lead") section of any article does not, by default, have its own "[edit]" link, so you need to use the "edit" tab along the top edge as if you were editing the entire page. However, if you go to
my preferences, then select the "Gadgets" tab, and under the heading "User interface gadgets: editing" is the option "Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page" - make sure that is ticked. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)reply
MP
Gooch was am MP for
Cricklade for 20 years? Assuming that the infobox should still be for engineer and not for MP, shouldn't this be mentioned in both the infobox and lead section? I think he still counts as "a politician" even if he never addressed Parliament.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
17:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Politicians debate matters that are raised in parliament. His Hansard record comes back with 0 results; and whilst that might be attributed to the time it takes to digitise the older records, in his diaries Gooch unashamedly - even proudly - states that he did not take part in any debates, treating Parliament as a gentleman's club. He was an MP, but not a politician. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
18:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
So we can't mention him being an MP? You are saying his 20 years as a Member of Parliament does not contribute in any way to his notability? You might also want to adjust the
politician to explain that British MPs who make no contributions in the House of Commons are excluded?
Martinevans123 (
talk)
18:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes we can, it's right there at
Daniel Gooch#Political career and I did not remove any of that text - indeed, I added a mention. The main thing is that being an MP is not what he is best known for, nor can it be considered to be among his major achievements. Career politicians give up the day job; Gooch did nothing of the kind. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
21:32, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure how he had a "Political career" if he wasn't a politician. I guess UK "politics" was slightly different in 1865. I think his position as an MP should appear in the lead section and in the infobox. In fact most MPs have a dedicated section of the infobox especially for that?
Martinevans123 (
talk)
23:03, 6 November 2021 (UTC)reply
He was elected to Parliament: that means he is, among other things, a politician. We call people politicians just for standing for Parliament, even if they're not elected. It is interesting that he never said anything in a debate, but that doesn't mean he wasn't carrying out the other functions of an MP. We call Sinn Fein MPs who don't take their seats politicians. Being an MP is not what he is best known for, so I wouldn't lead on it, but it is a notable fact about him that I would include in the lead section.
Bondegezou (
talk)
15:13, 7 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I generally favour shorter, to-the-point infoboxes, so I'll say yes to a mention in the lead section and no to a mention in the infobox, but I do not have a strong feeling on the infobox. Get the article right and worry about the infobox later is my attitude!
Bondegezou (
talk)
10:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)reply
The article focuses on Gooch's engineering career, so the infobox should too. The question is whether to have a couple of lines in the infobox about his MP career.
Bondegezou (
talk)
09:36, 10 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I had assumed that being an MP was a "categorical fact" and not dependant on the content or focus of the article. And that the "MP" infobox module was the standard way of signifying this. I guess the alternative is to just add "Member of Parliament" to his list of "Occupations"?
Martinevans123 (
talk)
09:53, 10 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes. "When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article..". I'd say that his being an MP was a "key fact" about his life.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
11:34, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Martinevans123: as an MP, what did he actually do, other than get elected? Did he, perhaps, speak for or against some Parliamentary motion that affected the GWR in particular or the railways in general? --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
21:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I have to admit, I have no idea what he did. I suspect nothing. I guess he turned up for votes occasionally. It's just getting voted in for 20 years that counts as the "key fact". I suspect he was a hopeless MP. But still an MP. As I said I assumed it was just a "categorical fact".
Martinevans123 (
talk)
22:03, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
He didn't vote on anything - you can't vote in the Commons until you have made your
maiden speech. Since he proudly boasted of never having spoken to the House (it's in his diaries, see
Daniel Gooch#Political career), he therefore could not have voted. That's been my point all along - since his contribution to national politics was precisely zero (except perhaps to block the seat from a more deserving candidate), and he treated the post as a virtual
sinecure, it is
WP:UNDUE to place MP on an equal footing with his real work for the railways and towards international communications. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
23:43, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Gosh, you mean there are corrupt MPs who just use the position to feather their own nests? Who knew. I think, provided a good source can be found, those details could certainly be added to the article. Or maybe you think we should say only good things about him? I think we need as full a picture of Gooch as possible. That's been my point all along.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
23:50, 15 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the clarification, Tim. It seems Sir Daniel was not so idle after all. I would have no objection to some or all of those details being added.
Martinevans123 (
talk)
12:11, 16 November 2021 (UTC)reply