Talk:Lord Kelvin

Lord Kelvin was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 26, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
September 25, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Former good article nominee

This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Peerage and Baronetage / Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Top-importance).

History of Science Top‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physics: Biographies High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Energy Mid‑importance

	Energy portal 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Northern Ireland Low‑importance

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland 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.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	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.

Belfast High‑importance

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belfast, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the City of Belfast, Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.BelfastWikipedia:WikiProject BelfastTemplate:WikiProject BelfastBelfast-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland High‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of Cambridge

This article is within the scope of the University of Cambridge WikiProject, an attempt to improve articles relating to the University of Cambridge, and to standardize and extend the coverage of the University in the encyclopedia. If you would like to participate, you can help us by editing the article attached to this notice, or you could visit the project page, where you can join the project, learn more about it, see what needs to be done, or contribute to the discussion.University of CambridgeWikipedia:WikiProject University of CambridgeTemplate:WikiProject University of CambridgeUniversity of Cambridge articles

Untitled[edit]

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Old discussions are archived.

Nationality again (April 2023)[edit]

The multiple discussions on what to label his nationality in the lede need to be resolved. I suggest saying "British" but adding an explanatory footnote elaborating that he is Irish and Scottish, and will collectively be referred to as British. Thoughts?

Pinging participants of former discussions: @Centuryofconfusion @Donn300 @Gpinkerton @Sandstable @Dirac66 @Interpuncts @DeFacto @Philip Trueman BhamBoi (talk) 22:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't particularly see the need to expand beyond 'British' with immediacy within the lead, and think it would look sloppy if attempted. #Early life and work is the place for this. · | (t - c) 14:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would leave it alone. "... a British mathematician, mathematical physicist and engineer born in Belfast." is true and summarizes the facts.Dirac66 (talk) 02:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No replies for 14 days - it seems that the status quo is settled. · | (t - c) 10:46, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why leave out Irish only for this one person when so many other Irish contemporaries even on Wikipedia are listed as Irish? JamPowWex (talk) 19:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In order to declare the nationality of British as settled I think it is only correct to remove Scottish from Alexander Graham Bell and all other contemporary scientists of the time. Equally remove English and Welsh as nationality from all scientists on Wikipedia and have only British as a nationality for all three countries (and for Ireland between 1801 and 1922). I make this point as an extreme example because Kelvin is one of extremely few examples I have found of Wikipedia where his nationality is deliberately obscured in this way. It's not logically consistent to engage in such linguistic gymnastics to say he was born in Belfast but is not Irish when the same effort is not made for other scientists and notable figures of the time. JamPowWex (talk) 00:17, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As evidence I've selected a random contemporary scientist. Look how much more clearly and sensibly his nationality description and his place of birth and death is to read.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clerk_Maxwell JamPowWex (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JamPowWex, how other people's nationality is treated in other articles is outside the scope of this talkpage. All we need to concentrate on here is what we know about Kelvin from the reliably sourced biographies concentrating on him. -- DeFacto (talk). 07:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary. Consistency is vital. All of Kelvin's contemporaries born in Ireland are listed as Irish unless there is a record of the change to another nationality. The onus is on you to prove that he was not Irish. In the absence of good evidence either way he should be treated like any other person. For example Ernest Rutherford, listed as New Zealand when New Zealand was a British colony, moved to Canada after his education there and finished out his career and died in England. Unless you can provide a good argument why Maxwell is Scottish and Rutherford is a New Zealander but Kelvin is not Irish when all three would have been contemporaneous and entitled to British citizenship then it is absurd to pick this one individual and say he be treated differently. JamPowWex (talk) 14:45, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Best known as"[edit]

@DeFacto The discussion just above concluded that Lord Kelvin is best known by that name. Is that not sufficient? Mathnerd314159 (talk) 22:10, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathnerd314159, no, that's not sufficient to put that wording in the article lead in Wiki's voice. To add subjective wording such as that I think it needs to be at least discussed and sourced in those terms in the article body, demonstrating that there is a consensus amongst the reliable sources saying exactly that. What's wrong with just leaving it as is, without that editorialisation? -- DeFacto (talk). 22:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my original motivation was consistency with other articles. Almost all articles that use a title different from the name start with the name and then introduce the title later in the lead:

Lord Dunsany - "usually, Lord Dunsany"
Lady Gregory - "Isabella Augusta, Lady Gregory"
Baroness Orczy - "usually known as Baroness Orczy (the name under which she was published) or to her family and friends as Emmuska Orczy,"
Lord Byron - "known simply as Lord Byron,"
Mahatma Gandhi - "The honorific Mahātmā, first applied to him in 1914 in South Africa, is now used throughout the world."
J. K. Rowling - "best known by her pen name J. K. Rowling"
Bono - "known by the nickname Bono"
Mark Antony - "commonly known in English as Mark Antony"

In this case the JK Rowling phrasing "best known" seemed appropriate, as it was short and to the point, but I guess if you feel strongly some other wording could be used. Note that for all of these articles, they either have a single source or no source. I guess I don't understand, is there some amount of reliable sources arguing that Lord Kelvin is not the name he's best known by? I don't even know how to look for such sources, but '"lord kelvin" -"william thomson"' gets 145 results while 'william thomson kelvin -"lord kelvin"' gets 98 results, so factually it seems Kelvin is the better name. In any case, it doesn't seem like a particularly controversial opinion, and therefore by WP:VOICE "avoid stating facts as opinions" it should just be a simple inline claim. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 16:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Also known as" is much easier to prove than "Best known as". Dirac66 (talk) 21:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "also known simply as Lord Kelvin" BhamBoi (talk) 03:42, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture scheduled for POTD[edit]

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Sir William Thomson, Baron Kelvin by T. & R. Annan & Sons.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for June 26, 2024. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2024-06-26. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. (200th anniversary of his birth) If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.6% of all FPs.} 04:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Kelvin (26 June 1824 – 17 December 1907) was a British mathematician, mathematical physicist and engineer born in Belfast. He was the Professor of Natural Philosophy at the University of Glasgow for 53 years, where he undertook significant research including electricity and the formulation of the first and second laws of thermodynamics. He was also the first determine the correct value of absolute zero, and the Kelvin scale of temperature is named in his honour. Kelvin received the Copley Medal in 1883, served as president of the Royal Society from 1890 to 1895, and in 1892 became the first British scientist to be elevated to the House of Lords. This photograph shows Kelvin resting on a binnacle (the stand for a marine compass) of his invention, and holding a marine azimuth mirror.

Photograph credit: T. & R. Annan & Sons; restored by Adam Cuerden

Recently featured:

Succession-Box At Bottom[edit]

I thought that there was some "bot" that went through Wikipedia articles and found inconsistencies. It is the USUAL practice in Wikipedia articles about peers/nobles that their peerage/noble title is included in the succession-boxes so that someone can QUICKLY track the route of the title from person to person. I can't do that here, because the succession-box doesn't include "Baron Kelvin" (or, if it's atypical, "Baron OF Kelvin"). Why isn't that title included in the succession-boxes in this case, and why isn't its absence AUTOMATICALLY called to the attention of some person? I'm going to have to search this article itself to find out what happened to the title when this man died.2600:1700:6759:B000:E894:BFCC:705D:880 (talk) 09:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence Simpson[reply]

After reading the article (something I shouldn't have had to do), I find that this man's title "Baron Kelvin" died with him, but the curious statement that it's because he had neither children nor close relations. So, apparently, this title was conferred with an atypical remainder such that absent "legitimate [heirs][male heirs] of the body", it could be inherited by, say, a brother and the brother's descendants or male-line descendants, etc.. That is done of course, (the Dukedom of Wellington was engineered to lower the probability that it would ever become extinct), but if it was done in this case, then say so. Spell it out. Also, the article says he was enobled as much for his opposition to Irish Home Rule as for science. Could that be fleshed out a bit, such as by including the text of the royal action? I've done a word-search on this article for "Irish", "Ireland", and "Home Rule" and I can't find anything about him opposing Irish Home Rule.2600:1700:6759:B000:E894:BFCC:705D:880 (talk) 10:12, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence Simpson[reply]

As it says in the infobox, he had no children so he was the first and last. --Cavrdg (talk) 10:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're only telling that if I take the time to look elsewhere in the article then I could find what I SHOULD have been able to find by an instantaneous down-scroll to the end and check of the succession-boxes. You've done nothing to convince me that the absence of the "Baron Kelvin" title is in accordance with some Wikipedia rule. (And I don't think it IS in accordance with the rules, and if there IS some rule for this article to be allowed to be inconsistent with other articles about peers, then what is that rule and how soon can it be repealed?)2600:1700:6759:B000:E894:BFCC:705D:880 (talk) 10:12, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence Simpson[reply]

I just read through what I think you mean by "info-box", and all that it says there is that he had no children. Not only is that not as fast as a quick end-scroll to the bottom, but it's not dispositive of the issue. It DOES NOT say (as you allege) that because he had no children he was the end of the line for this title. All it says is that he had no children, which doesn't settle it. If the title had been granted with an atypical succession, such as allows inheritance through other relatives, his having had no children wouldn't cause the title to die with him. And the article contradicts that anyway, because the article says "His title died with him, as he was survived by neither heirs nor close relations", which implies that his title could have been inherited by someone other than a child had such existed. If the grant of the title provided for a succession ONLY to his children, and he had no children, then that would cause the title to go extinct, and the sentence I quoted would have said (assuming a desire for accuracy which I'm probably a fool to assume) "His title died with him, as he was survived by no children".2600:1700:6759:B000:E894:BFCC:705D:880 (talk) 10:25, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence Simpson[reply]