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 has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
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
As you would expect from the 1911 Britannica, the article is highly POV, biased in favour of Pennant and against the strikers. I'll do a rewrite when I can find the appropriate books. Rhion 19:18, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree. This wikipedia article is essentially word for word the 1911 Britannica article, with no other sources. It would be better simply to point readers to the 1911 Britannica. For a different standpoint see eg R Merfyn Jones The North Wales Quarrymen 1874-1922 (1981, Cardiff, University of Wales Press). Gwedi elwch (talk) 04:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another who agrees - what's to be done then? cheers Geopersona (talk) 09:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
