Talk:Central Electricity Generating Board

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

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled][edit]

British Electricity Authority or was it Central Electricity Authority??? Linuxlad 12:49, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It was both. A document in the National Archives (Records of the Gas and Electricity Divisions, and the Electricity Commission) says that the BEA was set up in 1948 and later renamed the CEA; then in 1957 the CEGB replaced the CEA. I will mention this in the article. --Heron 13:41, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks - somewhere or other I've got the mini-history written by Gil Blackman for the 1990 dismemberment - there's quite a lot of info there. Linuxlad 19:15, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Bias?[edit]

Is it just me or is this article a little biased in favor of the thing? Thanx 68.39.174.91 7 July 2005 10:42 (UTC) Yes, possibly - but it doesn't take a genius to edit it slightly - 'Its advocates said.... what'd there. However its critics maintained it was large monolithic and unaccountable. ' Linuxlad

Totally agree. It either needs some sources to back up assertions such as probably as well managed as by or else rewritten. I suspect it is a page being edited by former staffers and management — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.54.103 (talk) 08:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:CEGB.png[edit]

Image:CEGB.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for new section on Legacy[edit]

In contrast to the above comment about bias, I would like to see some content here about the significant legacy that the CEGB left for the energy sector in the following decades. Many senior executives in the energy sector around the world today got their start in CEGB. It would be an exaggeration (but only just) to say that every power station in the free world has a copy of Modern Power Station Practice, a suite of reference texts published by the CEGB. Let's see if we can garner some support across the Wiki community. How do we do that?--Graham Proud (talk) 05:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article merge?[edit]

The article Central Electricity Research Laboratories is tagged to suggest a merge into this article, with discussion to be on this talk page. That suggested-merge template was added in 2011, but it seems that the editor who added it (RadioFan) never logged the reason here, and I see no other mention of a merger on this talk page. Is there any interest in such a merger, or should the suggestion template on the other article just be dropped? 50.181.30.121 (talk) 04:27, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Central Electricity Generating Board. 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) 01:13, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]