Talk:Marc Isambard Brunel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sophie or Sophia?[edit]

The article names Brunel's wife as Sophie Kingdom but the photo of the family grave names her Sophia. I must say I always understood her name to be Sophie but the inconsistency with the gravestone requires some explanation. If the stone was incorrectly engraved you would expect that someone in the high profile family would have had it corrected. MegaPedant (talk) 13:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the article, she was referred to as 'Sophia' until this major edit of 27 Dec 2007. So all the occurrences of 'Sophie' are the result of one editor, using Bagust as a reference (so did he get it wrong?)
I would suggest that 'Sophia' is more likely to be correct. Comparing the results of a google for 'sophia brunel' with those for 'sophie brunel' shows far more results for the former. More significant are the following cherry-picked links that refer to 'Sophia':
Admittedly these are not definitive, and I know from experience (James Watt birth date!) that all of these sources could have obtained information from an incorrect original... However, some of the persons named on that grave must have been buried after Sophia, and surely within the family they wouldn't have got it wrong?
EdJogg (talk) 01:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, I reverted a change to "Sophie" recently because I thought it was probably just vandalism, but now I see that it is a real question. I would like to add one more wrinkle: Very easily they can both be correct. The reason is that these are alternate Romance versions of the same name. It could be roughly analogous to wondering whether a guy's name was Thomas vs Tom, or Steven vs Steve, or /Porschə/ vs /Porsch/, or /proʒut/ vs /proʃutto/. It just depends on who's talking and what Romance dialect they were speaking at the moment. Just a possible explanation for why both names could be legitimately attested for her. Maybe "Sophia" on her birth and death records but "Sophie" as what was commonly pronounced around the household. I don't know anything about her, though. Cheers, — ¾-10 02:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can I suggest the Google results for "sophie brunel" are referring to his sister, not his mother Sophia. I don't have a copy of Bagust but all other authorities (including, as pointed out above, her flipping gravestone) say Sophia. Whatever she was called en famille I think this encyclopedia article should use her given name. Which is clearly Sophia. --Dominic Sayers (talk) 09:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
PetroGeoff (talk · contribs) clearly agrees too, as he has applied the change discussed above (although he missed one and changed one he shouldn't). I've corrected that. All mentions are now to Sophia Kingdom, except the one reference to the daughter, which I have put as Sophie. This latter still requires clarification. EdJogg (talk) 10:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brunel[edit]

Well I never knew that Brunel is an Old English surname,

86.186.3.245 (talk) 12:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality and Knighthood[edit]

According to this page Marc Brunel started out as French, then took US nationality in 1796. There is no record of him taking British nationality. However in 1846 Queen Victoria knighted him and he has subsequently been known as Sir Marc. Foreign citizens are usually awarded an honorary knighthood (which doesn't carry the right to the style "Sir"), not a substantive one. Can anyone throw light on this anomaly? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:46, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the UK nationality limitation on knighthoods is more recent than this. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:05, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice to track it down for certain. I thought that the "subjects only" rule went way back to when knights were riding about saving poor misunderstood dragons from publicity-concious maidens,;-) AIUI there's a small issue of pledging personal allegiance before all others - a bit difficult if you're a foreign citizen! I'll keep nosing around, if I find some citable facts I'll add them as a footnote. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:42, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Isambard Brunel never was Chief Engineer of New York City[edit]

Marc Isambard Brunel never was Chief Engineer of New York City because that position did not exit outside of the Army Corps of Engineers. Nor are there any records of him being employed as an engineer, even though records of other engineer and surveyors survive.

There WAS a French emigre who served as an Army engineer and surveyor in New York City, Joseph Francois Mangin. He went on to become a famous architect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph-Fran%C3%A7ois_Mangin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferreiro (talk • contribs) 12:35, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Isambard Brunel as surveyor for the Castorland project[edit]

Marc Isambard Brunel's biographies always overlook the 2+ years he spent in upstate New York surveying the Castorland project, a French land speculation that ultimately failed. See The Castorland Journal: https://books.google.com/books?id=WfGL2NYGfN4C&pg=PA400&lpg=PA400&dq=marc+isambard+brunel+castorland&source=bl&ots=Ln3zjx79LO&sig=kNtMdWHq4E_TLSf1x3bkzqGo17k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj1y9GjwfTJAhUBcyYKHcOODh4Q6AEIJzAB#v=onepage&q=marc%20isambard%20brunel%20castorland&f=false

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marc Isambard Brunel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:20, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Citations and references[edit]

Most of the references are to Bagust (2006) which is given a full citation 7 times - not bad when there are only 11 references! The latest edit from Dick Bos (talk · contribs) at least tries to reduce this by changing to the sfn/reference list style rather that the ref format. A change in referencing style requires consensus. I'm quite happy to go through the page and sort out the duplications if there are no objections. Can we say that if there are no objections by the end of the week consensus has been obtained please. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 19:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)  Done Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:ETHNICITY[edit]

MOS:ETHNICITY clearly states - "previous nationalities or the place of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless they are relevant to the subject's notability". Prior to becoming English, Brunel was cadet in the French navy and made some unwise comments in revolutionary Paris - neither of which contribute to his notability which arises from engineering works in the United States and to a much greater extent in England.Icewhiz (talk) 10:49, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for starting some discussion about this. Can I merely suggest that you read some sort of biography of Brunel (and of Bugatti). As you've left both the articles, they now state "was an English engineer" and "was a French car maker", both of which are hugely misleading. "his notability which arises from engineering works in the United States " strongly implies that your knowledge of Brunel is so sparse as to be very, very confused. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide a policy based justification here - how are Brunel's activities in France (French naval cadet, fleeing France following trouble during the revolution) - relevant to their notability. Brunel is notable for his UK engineering works, and to a much lesser extent his prior work in the US (Chief Engineer of New York City) - I am not confused here in the slightest, and you should strike your personal attack. Nothing is misleading in describing an immigrant to England, who lived most of his life in England and his notable career achievements were in England (+a bit in the US), as English. Icewhiz (talk) 11:28, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Andy, for which activities in France was Brunel notable? Jayjg (talk) 15:17, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to centralise this (from two articles) at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Edit-warring_over_MOS:ETHNICITY_at_Brunel_and_Bugatti
The point about France is that he was born there. Thus "an English engineer" is problematic from the outset, even though his two main and notable works were in England. If we state "a French-born engineer who settled in England." then everything is accurately clear from the outset. The article at present is a policy-based [sic] attempt to make it very misleading. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What makes "an English engineer" "problematic from the outset"? He spent most of his life in England, and did everything notable there. I assume he was a citizen. Why was he not "English"? Jayjg (talk) 17:27, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Because it would be a form of cultural appropriation for England to "claim" him as solely English. Fortunately the English don't, this just seems to be Wikipedia. Secondly because his approach to engineering wasn't that of the English engineers. The two Brunels had a particularly French approach, which was novel at the time. No British engineer had managed to build a Thames Tunnel, nor a suspension bridge the size of that at Clifton. The mathematical approach used by the Brunels was not novel in France, but it was radically different to how Telford worked and would not be typical British practice for another thirty years. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:43, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a source saying he's noted for importing French techniques to England - then that may merit inclusion in the lede and body. I'm opposed (per MOS:ETHNICITY) to defining Brunel by place of birth - however if we have sources noting the transfer of knowledge from point A to point B - than that is a separate matter (and should be stated as such (not born at X, but rather something along the hypothetical lines of - "Brunel is noted for importing French techniques to England, building structures that were impossible....." (properly cited and conforming to sources, of course)).Icewhiz (talk) 11:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But your version also defines him, implicitly, by place of birth and it does so incorrectly, by implying that he's English. "an English engineer", unqualified, implies that both his birth and practice were English. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your concern appears to be with the policy. If you think it is misleading to list only the nationality corresponding to the person's notability, you could recommend changing it.--Trystan (talk) 12:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you read ETHNICITY as it already stands, it seems to support these, both Brunel and Bugatti. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:08, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andy, the reasons you've provided for this do not seem compelling or convincing to me; at first it was because he sent his son to be educated in France, then it was because he had a "French approach" to his engineering. I'm not saying this is the case, but the arguments so far give the appearance of trying to find any possible post-emigration connection between Brunel and France in order to justify the description. Jayjg (talk) 13:24, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, we should describe him as French-born because he wasn't born in England, so describing as "an English engineer" becomes misleading. No styleguide says, "Be stylishly inaccurate". We are arguing over six words here: [1]. His ongoing connection to France does support including a fuller version though. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:44, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but this gets back to Trystan's point: it appears that your real objection to describing someone born in France as "an English engineer" is because that person "wasn't born in England". All the other reasons given (son educated in France, had a "French approach" to engineering) aren't the real issue; rather, the real issue is that describing such a person as an "English engineer" is, in your view, "stylishly inaccurate". On the other hand, MOS:ETHNICITY states the exact opposite; that such a person should be described as "an English engineer" unless being born in France "is relevant to the subject's notability". You appear to be arguing that being born in France is always "relevant to the subject's notability" because anything else is "stylishly inaccurate". Jayjg (talk) 14:34, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ETHNICITY is generally wary of describing anyone as "an English engineer" and prefers to avoid it altogether. But if you read the second clause of it, there's a clear recognition that it doesn't apply in all cases and that in some cases, their origins are significant and should be noted. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:54, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see any wariness in the guideline against providing the nationality relevant to notability, as part of establishing context. The caution is against previous nationalities or place of birth, which need to be linked to be linked to notability to warrant inclusion. As the article does not mention France other than in describing Brunel’s early life - which is already summarized in the lead section - I think the lead adequately summarizes the article on this point.--Trystan (talk) 12:54, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Trystan: Agreed. Perhaps what we're seeing here is (the all too common) confusion of "nationality" with "ethnicity". Jayjg (talk) 13:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Isambart?[edit]

There is a link in this article to commons:Category:Marc Isambart Brunel; on that page the infobox records: "Name in native language - Marc Isambart Brunel". I have never heard of such a spelling as "Isambart", but there is some supporting evidence online. It is not mentioned in this article. Since this is English wikipedia, I propose that the category be renamed to use the English spelling by which he is normally known here. (I note that despite the fact that commons:Category:Marc Isambard Brunel "does not currently exist", there are two items in it!) -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marc_Isambard_Brunel&oldid=1205137780"