Hello, Steamybrian2! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! --SquidSK(1MC•log)14:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What source do you have for this edit? My sentence was sourced (Matthews 2006, pp. 29, 30) harv error: no target: CITEREFMatthews2006 (help), and since that does not back up your claim, so you should remove my ref (it's the {{sfn}} at the end of the line) and replace it either with (i) a {{citation needed}} tag or (ii) a reference to different source which shows the name changes that you describe. Till then I have reverted, thanks --Redrose64 (talk) 17:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nevertheless, it needs to be referenced; there is no mention of Butt in the present version. I am leaving this alone for now, I'm off to Warley exhibition. Tomorrow, if the editing has stabilised again, I shall clean it up. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am back from Warley, armed with a secondhand copy of:
Butt, R.V.J. (1995). The Directory of Railway Stations. Yeovil: Patrick Stephens Ltd. ISBN1 85260 508 1. R508.
Gather the material required. Books, websites, newspapers etc.; but every fact added must have a source to back it up.
In this case my facts are the opening, renaming and closing dates, and my source is "The Directory of Railway Stations", by R.V.J. Butt, published in 1995 (which we can call "Butt 1995"). The relevant facts are on page 195.
Check the existing referencing style in the article.
In the case of Reading Southern railway station, it is two-stage - that is, clicking on one of the little superscripted numbers (like this [1]) takes you to a section (here headed "Notes") which contains short references - there are only authors, years and page numbers.
Beneath that, there is a section (headed "References"), containing the full descriptions of the books, etc. used.
In this case (not applicable to all articles), clicking on a short note will indicate which of the books it refers to. This shows up well in Firefox, where the row concerned is highlighted in pale blue.
Add the referencing source first.
Edit the "References" section, where we see that the existing rows are built using {{cite book}} templates, and are sorted by author and year of publication. Since it is a book to add, I therefore go to Template:Cite book, copy a blank template and paste this into the article as a new row. Fill in as many parameter values as possible. It is never possible to fill them all in, and when two-stage referencing is used, as in this case, some items (such as |page=, |chapter= and |quote=) must be left blank. Observing the other {{cite book}} templates, I see that they all have |ref=harv. This is the mechanism by which the "Notes" entry links to the "References" entry, so I make sure that my new template has that too. Then I remove all the unused fields.
Save that edit. You can see my change by following this diff link.
Edit the section that is to be amended.
Add, amend, rewrite the relevant sentence(s). Add the reference for the amendments (this is the {{sfn|Butt|1995|p=195}} bit) Check for any existing references on the sentence, and make sure they're still valid. If they disagree with the new text, remove the reference.
Save that edit. You can see my change by following this diff link.
There are problems elsewhere, the most obvious one is with these three edits, particularly the part reading {{www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations-web site photo of 1967 shows station with track removed and 1968 photo with bridge removed so cannot have been used for freight!!!!!. I remember the site about 1969 and recall there was no track there then. Freight services referred continued to Reading General. }}.
OK then.
Double curly brackets are used to invoke a template, but there is no valid template name specified.
If you intend to specify a web page at any point (whether in a template or otherwise), you must include the initial http:// part; it's also best, if directing somebody to a particular piece of information, to provide the full URL, rather than the site's front page.
The character after the URL must be either a space, pipe, closing square bracket or closing curly bracket; anything else (such as the hyphen here) will be taken as part of the URL.
Multiple exclamation points are discouraged.
Comments such as "web site photo of 1967 shows station with track removed and 1968 photo with bridge removed so cannot have been used for freight!!!!!. I remember the site about 1969 and recall there was no track there then. Freight services referred continued to Reading General." should really go on the talk page.
So here, I have removed all of that, and placed the comments on Talk:Reading Southern railway station. The URL has inspired me to visit the website, where I have found that the full URL should be http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/r/reading_southern/index.shtml - I have placed that in a new "External links" section, within square brackets so that it can be titled properly. I may draw information from that later. Anyway, here's a diff.
A lot of Wikipedia edit knowhow is practise and experience. I've been unemployed for nearly 5 months now, so have used some of the free time to edit Wikipedia, and so have improved those Wiki-editing skills a lot (don't think that they're skills that a potential employer would want though). In so doing I came across various oddities, which experience with other pages (and examination of a fair few help pages, guidelines, policy docs etc) told me weren't quite as they should be - so I often clean these up a bit. If I notice that a particular user has been making similar mistakes several times, I might put a message on their talk page. When I edit a page, I always tick the "Watch this page" option, so that I can see quickly which pages that I'm interested in have been edited recently. This user-talk page is therefore on my watchlist, so how about this.
If you want to ask a question of me specifically, pop it on my talk page.
If you want to ask a general question, and don't mind who answers, put it on your own talk page, and somebody who is watching that page (such as myself, and possibly User:Lamberhurst), will attempt to answer it; however, that depends largely on people watching your page also being logged in.
To ask a question pertaining to a specific article, it's probably best to put it on the article's talk page; however, that does again depend on users watching the page.
If I am watching the page (which is the case with both my own talk page and this one), I will endeavour to help, if I can, as soon as I notice a question appear.
If you want a quicker response, precede your message with {{helpme}} (note the double curly brackets), which will place a great big orange box on the page (which you can see by clicking the word "helpme"); it will also place the page into Category:Wikipedians looking for help. Somebody on helpdesk duty will spot it in a few minutes; almost certainly more quickly that I will, and they will also know the answers to more complex questions that I don't know about.
See also the box at the top of this page, section "Getting help".
Wherever you ask, it's best to start a new section (there's usually a tab at the top) for each distinct question. Follow-ups to earlier questions can be added at the tail of the relevant section.
If you like, I can go through some of your recent edits to see if there are technical improvements which can be made. For example, here's one to begin with, which could have caused trouble. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have not reverted your previous edit; however the information that you added should really go elsewhere. Category pages don't normally contain text, other than a brief description of the kind of pages that should belong to the category. If your intention was to place articles into that category, you should instead edit the last section of the article concerned, find the existing category lines; and add another one. Use the "Show preview" button, and at the very very end of the page (way after the "Save page" buttons, and stuff like that), the categories will be listed. If yours comes up in red, it's a non-existent category; but blue or purple, and you're OK.
Under the list of closed stations are those which have been subsequently reopened by Heritage Railway Societies. I have noticed that none of the stations closed by BR between Taunton- Minehead which have since reopened by West Somerset Railway have been included. Was this a deliberate policy..?
When placing messages on any talk pages, please sign your message by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end. This is how it comes out when I do so: Redrose64 (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Manchester-Rochdale via Oldham
I have not checked the Wikipedia entries but presume the stations along this line have been listed as closed in October pending future reopening as a Metrolink line.?
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.
Hi, I see you have removed the referenced closure dates for articles on the Maldon to Woodham Ferrers such as Stow St Mary Halt railway station but in some cases not added a reference for the new date or a comment for the edit. Any chance of referencing and commenting your changes? Scillystuff (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The line between Maldon East to Woodham Ferrers was closed for passengers on 10th September 1939 and to freight traffic between Woodham Ferrers to Maldon West 1st April 1953 and Maldon West to East in 1959. These dates have been taken from "Passengers No More" by G. Daniels and L. Dench and also in "Lost Railways of East Anglia" by L.Oppitz.I have an Ordnance Survey Map of 1962 which shows the track completely removed. The newspaper article which quotes 1964 maybe confused with the line between Maldon East to Witham which was closed in 1964. Finally the stations are listed in the Wikipedia "List Of closed stations" as closing in 1939.Steamybrian2 (talk) 17:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have just had a look at Stow St Mary Halt railway station, and the techniques that you have used do not provide a valid reference. In particular, please note that double curly brackets transclude templates: if you don't follow the opening curly bracket with a valid template name, it just won't work (you will notice that reference 2 shows, in red, 'Template:"Passengers No more" by G.Daniels and L.Dench'). I have previously offered to help with referencing; the offer is still open. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Redrose64 for your help but I am slowly learning these technical names. Question- How can I introduce a valid template name? I shall have to read about transclude templates.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 19:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)]][reply]
Writing new templates can be difficult. It might be best if you were to tell me what you want it to do; then I can see if there is already something that does the job.
Templates are short pieces of a page. They are not Wikipedia articles in their own right, but can be copied into proper Wikipedia articles as required. There are two ways of using them: transclusion and substitution. Transclusion basically means that the current contents of the template are copied into the page in place of the wikicode delimited by double curly brackets, at the time that the page is viewed. So if I were to put something like
The driving wheels of a GWR "Grange" are {{convert|5|ft|8|in|mm}} in diameter
when somebody views the page, the Wiki software goes to look at Template:convert, copies that in and so displays:
The driving wheels of a GWR "Grange" are 5 feet 8 inches (1,730 mm) in diameter
Substitution is similar, but the copying takes place when you save your edit. This is only used for certain types of templates, and the documentation will normally say when it is recommended: see for example Template:uw-test1. If a template is used on a page, and then the template is modified, the modification will automatically pass through to all pages transcluding the template, but to none of those which substituted it.
BTW it's not necessary to put double square brackets around your signature - the standard signature puts in any double square brackets that may be required; that is, sign with ~~~~ not with [[~~~~]] - or just click the signature button located above the edit window.
Some pages (some of which are on referencing) that might be useful:
If you could let me have the details of your Passengers No More edition (i.e. date and isbn if there is one), I will put together the template. Another thing - if you are being asked for refs for station opening/closure dates but don't have any, just let me know as I should be able to dig them out of Butt/Clinker etc. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Passengers No More" was published around 1963 by Ian Allan Ltd which was before ISBN numbers were issued. I will try to buy a copy of Butt or Clinkers books for my own reference library. Thanks for your help.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)]][reply]
Having re-read this section, I think I may have misread it first time. I thought that you wanted to create a template, now, I think that you want to know how to use an existing template. One of the most useful for referencing is {{cite book}}. If you click on that, you'll see the documentation, which has some blank templates ready to be filled in, and also examples of the usage. Depending on the article's reference style, the template would either be placed inside the <ref></ref> tags (as per Iffley Halt railway station), or in a bulleted list near the bottom (as per Abingdon Road Halt railway station). To see how something has been done, it's always a good idea to look at the wikicode of existing pages - go for the "edit this page" tab, look around, and then either click "Cancel" or use the back button of your browser.
Let's take the first blank one and fill that in as best we can (I have removed the |separator= parameter, because unless you want some special behaviour, leaving it in causes more trouble than removing it). The values that I've filled in for you should show as green, and in a different typeface:
Daniels, G.; Dench, L. (1964). Passengers No More. Shepperton: Ian Allan. VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |laydate=, |trans_title=, |trans_chapter=, |laysummary=, |chapterurl=, and |lastauthoramp= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
Many of these you will never find a suitable value for. When we've filled in all that we can, the empty ones can be removed.
To find some more information, have a look at the first few pages of "Trains No More". Usually, just before, or just after, the main title page there is a page with the copyright information, almost always a left-hand page; and pretty much every book published since the 1950s will have one. Look for entries like "Copyright 19xx", "First edition 19xx", etc. There may be more than one different year shown; but there must be a copyright message somewhere. The most recent of the various years goes in the |year= parameter; if there is a month also shown for that, it goes in |month=; the earliest year goes in |origyear=; and the edition (if there is one) goes in |edition=.
The ISBN is usually shown on the same page; but older books with no ISBN might have a SBN instead, which is a direct precursor to ISBN, the only difference is the number of digits. For example, SBN 902888 45 5 is the same book as ISBN0 902888 45 5 (it's The Banbury and Cheltenham Railway, by J.H. Russell). If it's a SBN, it might not be obvious; it might be shown as an unexplained row of nine digits, possibly split into groups: and if it's an Ian Allan publication, their ISBNs of that period will begin "0 7110", and their SBN will begin "7110". See what you can find, and let's fill in more of that template. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:59, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the front title page is just the copyright Ian Allan Ltd and where it was printed and published- so far it is known it is the only edition. The back dust cover has the reference VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964. I suspect that 964 translates to September 1964 being the actual date of publication because the latest entries in the book are September 1963 so allow a year for printing and publishing.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)]][reply]
VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964 is the Ian Allan internal reference code, and in the absence of either a SBN or an ISBN, that can co in the |id= parameter. Virtually all of their books has a code: the style varies, and complex ones like this usually date from the pre-ISBN period. No matter how short (I have seen CX/0183), they almost always have a date encoded within them, but I'm not sure if it's the printing date or the publication date - but I do know that reprints get an amended code, so it's not a "first published" date. You are right that "964" is "September 1964", so I have added this to the template above. Is there really no copyright message? Try all the left-hand pages prior to the contents page. The place where it was published is relevant: for Ian Allan, they often show "London" on the main title page, but either "Hampton Court" or "Shepperton" on the copyright page. Whichever it is of Hampton Court or Shepperton, that can go into the |location= parameter. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Left-handed page iv states copyright Ian Allan. Published by Ian Allan Ltd, Shepperton, Middx. Printed in the United Kingdom by The Press at Coombelands Limited, Addlestone, Weybridge, Surrey.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:44, 21 December 2009 (UTC)]][reply]
Okeydokey, that's the page I was thinking of. Peculiar that there's no year stated in the copyright message.
Anyway, Shepperton is what we wanted; so I've put that into the template. Removing most of the redundant parameters we now have:
{{cite book |last1=Daniels |first1=G. |last2=Dench |first2=L. |title=Passengers No More |year=1964 |month=September |publisher=Ian Allan |location=Shepperton |id=VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964 |page= |pages= |chapter= |quote= |ref= }}
The last five can be filled in, or removed, as required. If used inside <ref></ref> you would fill in either |page= or |pages=, possibly |chapter=, and (rarely) |quote=; but you would remove |ref=. However, if placing near the end of the article, you would remove all of |page=, |pages=, |chapter= and |quote=, and fill in |ref=harv - if the existing {{cite book}} templates have it like that. So you could end up with either
<ref>{{cite book |last1=Daniels |first1=G. |last2=Dench |first2=L. |title=Passengers No More |year=1964 |month=September |publisher=Ian Allan |location=Shepperton |id=VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964 |page=123 }}</ref>
^Daniels, G.; Dench, L. (1964). Passengers No More. Shepperton: Ian Allan. p. 123. VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
or you might have
*{{cite book |last1=Daniels |first1=G. |last2=Dench |first2=L. |title=Passengers No More |year=1964 |month=September |publisher=Ian Allan |location=Shepperton |id=VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964 |ref=harv }}
giving
Daniels, G.; Dench, L. (1964). Passengers No More. Shepperton: Ian Allan. VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
I've not yet found the book myself: but I have found a book published by Ian Allan at about the same time, or slightly later, which has an advert on the back, for "Passengers No More" by G. Daniels and L.A. Dench; accordingly we should amend the relevant field to |first2=L.A. giving:
Daniels, G.; Dench, L.A. (1964). Passengers No More. Shepperton: Ian Allan. VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
You know, I completely forgot to explain all that. Basically, <ref> and </ref> are the two ends of an inline reference. Everything that they enclose gets placed later on in the article, typically where the {{reflist}} occurs.
Double curly brackets {{ and }} are the two ends of a template transclusion.
The template may include zero or more parameters, which are separated from one another by the | character (often known as "pipe", see vertical bar).
The template name is everything between the opening double curly bracket and either the first pipe character or the closing double curly bracket, whichever occurs first. I have mentioned two templates here: they are {{cite book}} and {{reflist}}, you may view them either by clicking the bluelinks (which I provided by using the special template {{tlx}}), or by going to Template:Cite book and Template:Reflist.
Depending upon how the template was written, parameters can be of two types: either |name=value (named parameters) or |value alone (unnamed parameters). All the parameters to {{cite book}} are named parameters; {{reflist}} uses both types, and {{tlx}} normally uses only unnamed parameters. The names of named parameters are case-sensitive; so if the documentation says to use |title=, you cannot use |Title= - it will be ignored.
In The Railway Magazine January 1963 p.67, "Passengers No More" by Daniels & Lench is announced as being published "this month"; so that I think you have a reprint. Thus we can add |origyear=1963 giving:
Daniels, G.; Dench, L.A. (1964) [1963]. Passengers No More. Shepperton: Ian Allan. VPNM/1354/138/CXX-964. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
The copy I have states-
Introduction page V- ....At the time of writing the first effects of the Beeching Report are just being felt..... (therefore dates from after March 1963).
Closure dates in the book date up to 9th September 1963.
([[Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)]])[reply]
Fine; if yours has info from Sep 1963, but the first edition of the book is known to date from early 1963, then you would appear to have a second (or even third) edition rather than a reprint; but my suggestion of |origyear=1963 is still valid, since that parameter is intended for the original publication year, ie that of the first edition. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:27, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ouse Valley Railway
Just a quick note to say that you don't sign edits to articles. The software allows us to see who edited the article and what was done to it. Signatures are for talk pages etc. Mjroots (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edit summaries
Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.
I have tickets to/from this station which show the name as "Sutton Coldfield Town". Can someone please clarify the name of the station as I am not an expert of the railway history in the Birmingham area. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 10:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)]].[reply]
Yep. This is the station on the former Midland Railway route between Castle Bromwich/Water Orton and Walsall/Wolverhampton, via Streetly. Now, my sister-in-law lived in Streetly for many years, and the locals all say simply "Sutton" when referring to Sutton Coldfield. See Sutton Town railway station which I have just updated. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hammersmith & Chiswick railway station
I'm a bit puzzled by these wikilinks - the first takes you to a place in Virginia, USA; the second to a dab page; and the third to an article on the A4 trunk road. Generally speaking, on railway articles we link to the relevant station article. If you want to hide the words "railway station" (as is the normal practice), you should use either a piped wikilink: [[Rugby Road railway station|Rugby Road]] or the purpose-designed station link template: {{stnlnk|Rugby Road}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]
I have added to the listings Shield Row station which is shown on my pregrouping railway atlas on the North Eastern Railway between Leadgate and Beamish on the line closed in 1955. I have tried "google" which gives no other information on it. Can someone please confirm /amend or delete my entry as necessary.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Noted with thanks. Accordingly I have now deleted the listed entry for Shield Row. It needs including on list of still open and closed railway stations in Durham. There are others along the line as well that need to be listed .[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Carlton (Durham)
I have added an entry for this station but please add/amend or delete if readers have further information. My research is based on I found it marked on my "Pregrouping Railway Altas" situated on the former North Eastern Railway line between Ferryhill and Stockton between Stillington and Stockton but I have no other info on it. It would appear that local passenger services ceased in 1952 but the line is still open for freight and the occasional special passenger train.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
I am aware that it was in reality a the quayside terminal for the ferry from Kingswear. I am also aware that the line from Kingswear-Paignton was closed by BR and reopened as a heritage railway.Now the difficult questions-Was the ferry service actually withdrawn when BR closed the line or was it transferred to a private operator? Dartmouth station is listed as closed but if the the ferry service did stop when did it reopen?[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 19:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Have found it in "wikipedia" under "Dartmouth Passenger Ferry" which states the ferry service was sold to Dartmouth Council in 1972 since when it has changed ownership several times. It is my thought that the service was never actually withdrawn therefore I have deleted Dartmouth railway station entry.
Van Railway
I have included Van Station which was the terminus of the Van Railway in Mid Wales. Although opened in the 1870s I cannot find a closure date for passengers (but possibly 1920 or before?). There were intermediate stations or halts along the line but I am unsure of the names. Hope this OK . Article open for readers to add further info... [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 17:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Kidner, R.W. (1992) [1954]. The Cambrian Railways. The Oakwood Library of Railway History (2nd ed.). Headington: Oakwood Press. p. 40. ISBN0 85361 439 3. OL55.
The Van Railway had been opened on 14th August, 1871 from its own station at Caersws to a lead mine ... a passenger service was run until 1879 to a terminus at garth & Van Road, about ½ mile short of the mine.
Looking carefully at my Ian Allan Pre-Grouping Atlas, I see that the "stations" on the Van Light Railway are marked with black ticks, not green blobs. This suggests that they are not passenger stations, but goods or mineral sidings. For other examples, see the Liskeard & Caradon line (01 C4) or the Llanelli & Mynydd Mawr (07 A3). --Redrose64 (talk) 18:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have the Ian Allan Pre-grouping Atlas which would appear to show passenger stations at the time of grouping (1923)with green blobs and freight only stations (including those with withdrawn passenger services) with black ticks. For the Van Railway it shows the terminus station as "Van" and the penultimate station as "Garth Road". I recommend leaving the Van Railway Station entry as shown for a readers reference point and adding closure date of 1879 as you mentioned above. I will add also that the Cambrian Railway was a owner of it. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
In Butt, p. 101, I find an entry "GARTH AND VAN ROAD Van *26 F6 OP 1 December 1873; CL July 1879", which decodes as "A station named Garth and Van Road, on the Van Railway, is shown in Wignall's British Railways Maps and Gazetteer 1825-1925 2nd edition 1985 (OPC), page 26, section F6. It opened on 1 December 1873, and closed in July 1879."
I suspect that the end-of-line marked as "Van" was the mine referred to in Kidner, and that it was always freight-only; also that the black tick immediately before that, labelled as "Garth Road", was the passenger terminus for the short period that passenger trains were run, and is the station described by both Kidner and Butt as "Garth and Van Road".
Noted accordingly. I have deleted entry for Van railway station. I have linked the station listing entry for "Garth and Van Road" to the Van Railway.Thanks[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Southchurch station
There is a listed entry for Southchurch on the Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway-station closed in 1845. I cannot find any reference to a station with that name on the S&DJR. Secondly the S&DJR was formed 30 years later in 1875. Have you any info on this station..? [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Sorry- I have made an error in amending the Wimblington station entry. The railway company needs inserting.
Two errors, actually; you removed the |col={{GNGE colour}} which defines the colour of the vertical bars; and you inserted a | between the |route= and the [[Great Northern, which divorced the parameter name from its value. Now fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Park Drain station
From the article about the station it indicates that it was the junction for the Axholme Joint Railway however my "Pregrouping Atlas" shows the junction was at Haxey. Unsure whether it was Haxey Junction or Haxey and Epworth station.It needs clarification by a local expert....! Brian [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:44, 11 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
The junction at Haxey was, I believe, one that did not allow through running from the Gainsborough direction onto the AJ - a double reversal would have been necessary, something almost never done with passenger trains. This may expain why Park Drain is shown as having a service to both the Haxey stations. If you look at Haxey Junction you'll see that it is a terminal with two possible routes out - the AJ itself, and towards Doncaster along the GN/GE. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Brian; re these edits (1, 2): St Germain's railway station closed in 1850, and King's Lynn railway station didn't gain the two-word name until 1911, so throughout the life of St Germain's, the next station along was always simply "Lynn". --Redrose64 (talk) 19:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Noted-I was unware of this renaming. Can you please mention this renaming date in the article on Kings Lynn railway station. Thanks-- Brian aka [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 21:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Ashton (Oldham Road) or Oldham Road (Ashton-under-Lyne)
I have inserted an entry for the the former name but unsure what the official name was?? Suggest that all the entries and article be amended to refer to the same official name. Brian aka [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 19:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
I was uncertain whether to mention this station which was listed in "Private and Untimetabled Railway Stations" by G.Croughton. It is named as "Tivoli" closed 1876 which was situated between Margate Sands and Ramsgate Town on the former SER line closed in 1926. A quick check on "google" does trace it. Does the book by "Butt" list it?. Brian aka [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
I have reverted this and some similar edits. Cherwell Valley Line is a modern term, introduced since the closure of most of these stations, so is irrelevant when dealing with the events of the station when it was open. It is not an error for Oxford and Rugby Railway to be redlinked - one day the article will be written, we've just not got around to it yet, so pending that, the redlink should remain (see WP:REDDEAL). --Redrose64 (talk) 07:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Agreed--- noted with thanks [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
South Eastern Main Line
I tried to make the following alterations on the route map but was unable find how to do it.
1. I have no reference or any evidence of a branch line to Lympne and recommend it should be deleted.
2. Folkestone East station is wrongly position and should be sited the London side of the junction to Folkestone Harbour.
Brian aka [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 13:50, 20 October 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
The route map on South Eastern Main Line is a collapsible section within the infobox. If you go into "edit" mode, and look at the very top of the article, you'll see a template {{Infobox rail line}}. Within that are the parameters
The first of these uses the template {{Infobox rdt}}, which is a wrapper for a route diagram template, named by the first parameter to that. Thus, the route diagram itself is held at Template:South Eastern Main Line.
Agreed that Folkestone East is wrongly positioned - but I don't really know about Lympne. Mjroots (talk·contribs) is more likely to be of assistance here. However, I think that your concerns which are specific to this template should be noted at Template talk:South Eastern Main Line, where Mjroots, or one of the many other contributors to that template, should spot your comments sooner or later. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've had to put some kludges into the above because there is a formatting problem with your talk page. I think it's somewhere near the top, among all the "Welcome to Wikipedia" stuff; tables get opened (using {|) and closed (using |}) but these seems to be an imbalance - more tables get opened than closed, which screws up the formatting of certain elements later on, particularly everything from immediately after the words "Within that are the parameters". You can fix it quite simply, by adding one line - a |} to close a table - immediately before the heading "Reading Southern railway station". There may be one or two </div> missing as well, but they're less crucial. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted this edit, because since the line through Hertford Cowbridge is lifted, it cannot be open. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC).
Apologies - I recognise that I misread it as Ware station was on a line that was closed..[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:21, 22 October 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Waveney Valley Line
The article on this line states that a Light Railway Order was obtained in 1954 as a private line run by enthusiasts and some special trains were run. Can you please advise me the source of this information as this is the first information I have seen on this. It was my impression that the first heritage standard gauge lines run by enthusiasts were the Middleton Railway and Bluebell both opened in 1960. Brian aka [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
You're probably best asking this on the talk page of the article concerned, where it's likely to attract the attention of those with knowledge of the line. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted your change to the Midland Main Line article on this station, as although it is open on the Hope Valley Line this station no longer has platforms on the Midland Main Line. I hope to adjust the diagram to show this. Regards, Britmax (talk) 13:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC) OK-agreed[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 13:42, 26 October 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Shepperton Branch stations
I, in my WP salad days, unwittingly set a trap. The article said "Stations on the line, whose Wikipedia articles are linked on the map, are at ....", not "named" but "at". Partly because the rumours on the track were that the full time opening of the station at Kempton was subject to SWT's whim (as suggested by the strange lack of rush hour ups). And partly in my real salad days no-one knew Kempton Park as a district but only as a racetrack with waterworks so named for lack of any closer geographical feature. Now I'd never say that the links to the stations were on the map but would link them directly. I've place names to stations' and linked them.--SilasW (talk) 23:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC).
What is "WP salad days" or "real salad days"? There at many names of (disused and still open) stations around the country that are given names of places/districts that do not exist- some pub names are Bricklayers Arms, Bat and Ball, Berney Arms or try -Dovey Junction and Bala Junction as two stations with no districts/places or settlement nearby. Some stations are named after the name of manor house nearby Hampton Court station is actually in East Molesey but try finding settlements such as Baynards, Rowfant or Kingscote except for a few railwaymans cottages.![[Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
I was trying to explain why the article's list (since emended) said it was of Places served and not of Station names, I was not calling for an essay about The Naming of Stations. Surely "WP Salad days" is not too difficult to be read as "When I was starting in Wikipedia", (Real= before 1950)--SilasW (talk) 17:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Inveruglas
In the listings of station it shows "citation needed" I have found an entry in "Private and Untimetabled Railway Stations by G. Croughton and others" which shows-
located between Arrochar and Ardlui map ref NN317094
purpose-for workman..... used for construction of Loch Sloy Hydroelectric Scheme
opened 29.10.1945 closed later in the 1940s
Butt (p. 127) has it in light type, suggesting that the station was "private, or was in some sense open only to restricted traffic, such as miners or railway workers ..."; he also shows it as opened 29 October 1945, closed c. 1948 but these in no way imply public opening.
Personally, I would be in favour of private/occasional stations appearing in the list. I've always thought that it would be useful to add two extra columns to this list - one for comments (e.g. private station) and another for the line. This would obviously require substantial work and so it's a long term aim. Lamberhurst (talk) 08:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Midland & Great Northern Joint Railway
Hi, Brian; I have reverted this pair of edits because although the LNER took over operation of the M&GNJ in 1936, it didn't acquire the railway itself: the infrastructure remained M&GNJ right up to Nationalisation. The M&GNJ is mentioned in Schedule 3, p.145 of the Transport Act 1947 as a "body whose undertaking is transferred to [the British Transport] Commission". There is a PDF copy linked from here end the relevant page in Acrobat Reader is p.151 --Redrose64 (talk) 19:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
OK- noted with thanks... Brian aka[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 19:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)]][reply]
Hi Brian; when you make edits like this, please place a pair of <ref>...</ref> tags immediately after the fact that you changed, and put your source inside those (see WP:REFBEGIN). For example, you might have put
and closed on 2 January 1961.<ref>Daniels, G. ''Passengers No More''</ref>
It's also recommended that you give the year of publication and the page number as well. However, we have had a similar discussion before, please check through that.
The track layout consists of a single line from Tunbridge Wells West using the former Down Line from Birchden Jn, running parallel with the Uckfield single line to Eridge Station. At Eridge trains will run into the former down platform. the former down bay will be used as a siding. Beyond Eridge the line terminates at buffer stops thus no connection with the Uckfield Line (accordingly please amend your track layout to sever any connections with the Uckfield line) To illustrate this please see www.spavalleyrailway.co.uk which has recent photos of Eridge Station showing some of their test trains which have run within the last few days. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)]]
Excellent- looks good. I have tried to update the diagram map for the "Oxted Line" article to show a similiar layout between Birchden Junction and Eridge but regret unable to coomplete it. Note I have included Forge Farm level crossing. Thanks[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
Noted with thanks. It was my incorrect impression that after 1923 there were legally only the "big four" companies but joint companies names continued in existance for continuity or local use. Apologies for the error.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 13:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
In the article on Exmouth Junction it mentions there were three stations in the area opened at the beginning of the 20th century between Exeter Central and the Exmouth Junction area saying that only one is open today at Polsloe Bridge. It does not mention St James Park Halt which I consider should be included. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
Hi Brian; re this edit - please note that the statement is cited to Vallance, Clinker & Lambert 1985, p. 161. That book is considered a reliable source, and the actual text in the book is "On 13 June 1960, passenger services were withdrawn from all the intermediate stations between Inverness and Bonar Bridge, except Dingwall, Invergordon, Fearn and Tain". It's not a good idea to amend reliably-sourced content unless you provide another source. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have amended the route of some of the stations on the line Northampton-Nottingham to read Market Harborough- Nottingham but recognise that there were through trains Northampton-Nottingham . In my opinion they should all read from Market Marborough to correctly read Radcliffe-on Trent[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 10:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)]].[reply]
The problem with many disused routes is that they often formed part of a much longer route, and these longer routes varied over time. Although one of the southern termini of the GN/LNW joint line was quite possibly Market Harborough at some point, the northern terminus is unlikely to have been Radcliffe on Trent: trains almost certainly ran through to Nottingham, if not further. See
where we find that the line concerned gave the GNR access to Leicester, and the LNWR access to Nottingham. The GNR used the southern half of the route for a Leicester-Peterborough service, and the northern half for a Leicester-Grantham service. The LNWR used most of the line for a Northampton-Nottingham service, and the GNR seems to have done so too. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the North Yorkshire Moors Railway article refers to Farwath railway station but there is no entry for this in the lists of closed stations. Have you got any info to add an entry? Keith D (talk) 11:27, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
According to "Private and Untimetabled Railway Stations by G. Croughton and others" trains stopped at Farwath (or Farworth) to pick up platelayers wives but unsure whether there was actually a platform there. North Yorkshire Moors Railway also for a short time reopened the line to there but it may have been just been the temporary "end of track" but without a station or platform. I leave it too others to confirm the actual existance of any platform.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
My books on the Lynton & Barnstaple Railway seem to refer to the name of this station as plain "Blackmoor". Can you confirm if so then amend page heading and entries accordingly. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 21:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
The history and listing of closed stations in the Bridgeton area of Glasgow was so complicated that I have left entries as you have shown. Perhaps someone with an in depth knowledge of Glasgow's railways can check them...![[Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
My reference books refer to the station name as plain Clifton or Clifton (Derbyshire). "Railway Passenger Stations" by ME Quick refers to it as Clifton. Can you confirm if so please amend page heading and entries. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
Butt shows that the station was opened as plain "Clifton" by the North Staffordshire Railway on 3 May 1852, and was renamed "Clifton (Mayfield)" on 22 August 1893, and was shown as "Clifton for Mayfield" in some timetables. Closed to regular passenger traffic 1 November 1954; full closure to passengers after April 1958. Applying Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations) means that we should use Clifton (Mayfield) railway station. Have moved page. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Port Glasgow Upper
There is a page on this passenger station closed in 1959 however there are notes on the page asking for varification. It is not listed as a passenger station in "Passenger Railway Stations " by ME Quick. Research in "google" has stated it was a goods only station. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 21:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
It would appear that this was the loco yard and goods station of the L&BR. Please amended heading to read Pilton Yard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steamybrian2 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 11 October 2011
My records show that the station was spelt "Pittenzie" Halt. Can please amend page heading.
I will amend other entries accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steamybrian2 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 11 October 2011
I have referred to the "British Railways- Pregrouping Atlas and Gazeteer"by Ian Allan plus the tickets I have my collection from the line none of which state halt.
Possibly not, but I'm not sure if that's a necessity or not. Looking again, Mitchell/Smith don't use Halt, but Oakley definitely does, so it's a bit confusing. Revert if you wish, but please make sure you're not liking to other stations. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:57, 18 November 2011 (UTC) It would appear that Col. Stephens did not generally use the word "halt" although in practice most stations were little more than a basic platform and simple nameboard. It is typical of the many stations he operated particularly around where I live here in the South East such as the Kent & East Sussex Railway, East Kent Rly, West Sussex Railway, Rye and Camber, etc. Only stations such as Junction Road and Salehurst had the word "Halt" added much later in possibly BR days. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
Unnecessary full stops
Hi, with these edits, you have added two full stops which are completely unnecessary. The first is after the closing </ref> - there is already one before the opening <ref>, and per WP:REFPUNC that is the correct place. The other one that you added is immediately after the {{rail line}} template, and I don't see why this may be required - route boxes consist entirely of sentence fragments, not complete sentences, so there should be no terminal punctuation. I have fixed up both of these errors, see here. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC) Noted with thanks [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 19:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
I note you have changed the closure date. The only doubt I have is that it is still referencing {{Butt-Stations}} which gives a different closure date, which in turn has been compiled from a multitude of references. It would help if date and its associated reference coincide. Can you obilige as I have Butt and but not the book you reference. RAILSCOT confirms your edit --Stewart(talk | edits)15:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A check (traced through "google") on the calendar history reveals that 19th Sept.1955 was a Monday and 19th Sept. 1958 was a Friday. Closures normally take place with effect from a Monday. The book I have taken reference from was "Passengers No More" by G. Daniels and L.A. Dench and both 1st and 2nd editions agree on the dates. The ISBN number is 0 7110 0438 2 182 CM 674 [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 17:29, 31 December 2011 (UTC)]][reply]
The map on this page requires two amendments which I cannot do-
1. The junction at Margate between the closed line from Ramsgate Town and Margate Sands faces towards Margate and not Margate East.
2. There was a station at Tivoli on the closed line between Margate Sands and Ramsgate Town.
Thanks [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 19:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Regarding this branch - please see WT:UKRAIL#Reculver railway before removing it again. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
As the evidence of this line would appear to rely only on a reference in one book. Occasionally references in a book can be wrong (as well as right!). I have noted that the other correspondants cannot find trace of it either. Accordingly I still have my doubts and leave the matter open for debate. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 23:25, 24 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
South Western Main Line
There is a small error on the map which needs correcting but I am unable to do it myself.
The line to Southampton Docks is a branch off the line between Northam and Southampton Terminus and runs around the back of the former Southampton Terminus station. The map indicates it was continuation through it. This is mentioned in the "wiki" article on Southampton Terminus station.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Hi, the South Eastern and Chatham Railway didn't take over the South Eastern Railway, and nor did it open any stations. The SE&CR was somewhat akin to the modern Train Operating Companies, in that it owned the locos and rolling stock, and ran the trains, but the lines and stations continued to be owned by the South Eastern Railway and the London, Chatham and Dover Railway. New stations were built and opened by either the SER or the LCDR, depending on whose lines they lay. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC). Information noted and I agree it was a "joint managing committee" . You have listed examples such as Bexhill West, Sidley, Snailham Halt, Teston Crossing Halt as opened by the SE&CR. Just trying to be consistant. Thanks. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Lullingstone
Can I suggest that an article be started on the constructed but un-opened station at Lullingstone.
Here are a few words to start. It was planned to be a 4 platform station with 2 platforms on a branch to Lullingstone Airport to the west. First two platforms on Swanley-Otford line Completed in 1939 to serve anticipated planned development. The introduction of the post war Green Belt Act (1947?) stopped further development. Station abandoned and demolished in the 1950s with the canopy to Canterbury East. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your draft submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted. Please take a look and respond if possible. If there is no response within seven days, the request may be declined. If this happens, please feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it when you believe the concerns have been addressed. (To resubmit the submission, add the text {{subst:submitdraft}} to the top of the page)
To edit the submission, you can use the edit button at the top of the article, near the search bar
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Help desk or the reviewer's talk page. Alternatively you can ask a reviewer questions via live help
Hi, I'm a bit confused about your message re Lullingstone, as you implied you were new but there seem to be many articles above. However, let me just say the obvious - the article like all articles must have citations to reliable, independent sources, as original research is forbidden on Wikipedia. You may cite more or less anything written on the station, though the best sources are reliable books, magazine articles or websites which themselves are based on primary (research) sources. Please see WP:N and WP:V as a start. I have no personal opinion on the matter and no particular format or layout is mandated. with best wishes Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The word "new" meant I have never submitted an new article myself but I have corrected many articles.
I was unaware that original research was forbidden but I can trace all my information if necessary from sources. If for example "What to see in January 2012 is...." is not what I quoted from a book but what I have personally seen.... which is original research because nobody else has said it. Many of the locations I have corrected above are also not what I have read but able to disprove wrong because the originator has been wrong information or made a typing error. Occasionally I have even found newspapers or books that have given wrong information which I have corrected in "wiki".[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Yes, the WP:OR rule is severe but necessary. Have you seen WP:42? Says it all really. BTW the fact that there's a lot of stuff in WP which shouldn't be here doesn't prove it's ok to do it too! cheers Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The wiki article on "Lullingstone" (village) mentions the construction of the station. wiki aricle on Canterbury East railway station mentions the station canopy. There is a very good article on "Kent Rail" which can found through "google" which details the whole history.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Excellent- well done! Two small comments. Under "History" third line- the distance "two miles from South East London" is misleading and would prefer it to read xx miles from Victoria for example Swanley is quote 17.4 mls from Victoria. Second point- the remains of the platforms requires citation however when I am next in the area I can take a photograph and email this to you if you can provide instructions how to send a photo to you. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:42, 12 February 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
I could give the distance as 19m 36ch which is what is shown on the route map in the Maidstone Line article. But I'm not sure if this is measured from Victoria. Any thoughts? As for photos, it would be good to have the two shown on the Kent Rail page, i.e. the footbridge entrance remains and the platforms. If you can get them, it would be best to upload them here to avoid the copyright problems. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:40, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mileages on Maidstone Line match those shown in Quail vol. 5, diagrams 6A & 7, which state "Miles from Victoria via Herne Hill". However, the same diagrams each have a brown dot marked "19.39 (Lullingstone)", i.e. 19 miles 39 chains, not 19 mi 36 ch. These brown dots indicate "a former Jn, Station or Signal Box". --Redrose64 (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on showing the mileage from Victoria of 19 miles 39 chains. If the weather improves later this week I plan to travel the 10 miles from home to take the photos as suggested [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:25, 13 February 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Now done & route map on the Maidstone Line has been amended. I found the Quail template a little confusing as it does not distinguish between editions. As I don't have a copy, I've assumed the reference is to the most recent 2002 edition. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It now allows selection of specific editions by year, as in {{Quail-5|year=2002}}. The most recent edition is not the 2002 (2nd) but the 2008 (3rd): but the crucial information, that of 19 mi 39 ch, is the same in both of these, with the same diagram numbers, so it doesn't matter which you quote from. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Today, I visited the site of Lullingstone station and have submitted four photographs into the wiki system. I saw the station entrance gates at the entrance of the original approach road. The original approach road is still in situ after over 70 years of disuse. The entrance to the footbridge is still there but there are no other remains of the footbridge. There are still substantial remains of the platforms but difficult to photograph as there are located in a cutting lined by hawthorn bushes. [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 21:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Presumably you mean File:Lullingstone 001.JPG... somebody has raised some serious issues here, mainly to do with the total lack of licensing. They're very hot on copyright at Commons, and it may well get deleted unless valid licensing is added pretty soon. I've partially fixed up the broken template {{Information}} but you should ensure that all the other important parameters are also present and vaild. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, your first edit removed some Wiki markup which is important because Commons is a multilingual project (I have reverted that edit); and your second edit merely amended the description. There is still no licensing. As Lamberhurst stated, you need to add the proper licensing tag yourself: {{cc-by-sa-2.0-uk}} is suggested, and I don't disagree: further information on this license may be found at commons:Template:cc-by-sa-2.0-uk (personally I use {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} but there is a lot of similarity, see commons:Template:cc-by-sa-3.0 and commons:Template:GFDL). You need to add the licensing tag on a line of its own, somewhere outside the {{Information}} template: I would suggest putting it just above the categories. Presently there is this:
|other_versions=
}}
[[Category:Disused railway stations in Kent]]
insert one line with the aforementioned license tag so that it becomes
|other_versions=
}}
{{cc-by-sa-2.0-uk}}
[[Category:Disused railway stations in Kent]]
It's fine now. Just out of pure curiosity, I guess that it's not possible to get any closer to the line than the fence shown in one of your photos? I had been hoping that the cutting was reasonably accessible, but it seems not. I imagine that KentRail must have had some kind of lineside permit to get their photo? Lamberhurst (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kent Rail must have had a lineside permit to get their photo. At the site there were some new sections of lineside fencing plus hawthorn bushes which precluded any attempt to get any nearer. The surrounding sloping ground is wet and slippery and a ploughed field up to the boundary fence made walking difficult.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Fort George
When I click on the listed entry for Fort George it directs me to the article for Gollanfield Junction which was the original name but was renamed when a station with that name opened.
Can this link be corrected please?[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
Listed entry where? If you believe that a link is incorrect, but you are unsure what would be the correct fix, you should raise a thread at the talk page of the article where you found the bad link. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the map for Oswestry and Newtown Railway (and elsewhere) it mentions the next station south of Oswestry is named Weston Wharf (closed 1965). I cannot find any record of a passenger station with this name considering it is not on the "wiki" list of closed stations. I do however consider there may have been a goods depot or sidings with this name.
Can anyone confirm ? [[Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:27, 26 March 2012 (UTC)]][reply]
It was a goods station, see
Kidner, R.W. (1992) [1954]. The Cambrian Railways. The Oakwood Library of Railway History (2nd ed.). Headington: Oakwood Press. p. 95. ISBN0-85361-439-3. OL55.
Hi, regarding your edits to St Leonards West Marina railway station: please be careful when removing text. First, the Tonbridge-Hastings line was dieselised at the end of steam in 1967 - it was not electrified until the 1980s. Second, the item in the infobox about the station being resited in 1882 wwas sourced to Butt, p. 204. I have checked this book, and it does state that the first station was closed in 1882 and "replaced by 2nd station due east". --Redrose64 (talk) 22:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I disagree The Tonbridge-Hastings line was fully dieselised in 1957 and not at the end of the steam in 1967. It was electrified in 1986. This station was not on the Tonbridge-Hastings line but on the Eastbourne- Hastings (Coastway East) line. The station closed due to declining receipts and the need to incur expenditure to modernise the station which was not felt justified.
I accept your views on the resiting of the station as upon reflection none of my reference books show this.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)]] It would appear that my previous comments have been rejected although the wiki article on the Tonbridge-Hastings line clearly confirms my comments. Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:33, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Original company
Hi, I've undone this edit: all available information shows that the station was opened by the GWR, therefore |original=[[Great Western Railway]] was correct. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Brian. Although I don't doubt (and haven't reverted) the information you added in edit, your own personal experience is not a reliable source, and as you've been asked before, please do not put citation information in edit summaries. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Redrose64. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Devonshire Street railway station, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Regarding this edit: you changed 1843 to 1840; the date of 1843 has a source, and I have checked it, and it definitely does state 1843. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The closure date of 1840 was taken from "Forgotten Stations of Greater London" by J.E.Connor and B.L.Halford. Perhaps I should introduce myself as my real name is Brian Halford and I was the co-author of the book. Mr.J.E.Connor has done extensive research into the book particularly as he was a East Londoner. Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that you add or change information without stating where it came from. Unless you give your sources, we have no way of checking that what you add is correct or not, per the policy on verifiability. I have asked, several times before, that you please cite your sources: the page WP:CITEBEGIN describes some methods. If two books disagree, there are methods for overcoming that: see the two birth dates given for R. J. Billinton. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Order of parameters
Hi, re this edit - changing the order of the parameters won't make any difference, because in a template, the order in which named parameters is given is irrelevant: the only two considerations are that (i) a blank parameter is not the same as one which is absent; and (ii) if the same named parameter occurs more than once, all except the last one are ignored - even when the last one is blank.
The order of display is governed by how the template is constructed internally; in this case {{Infobox GB station}} shows the value from |platforms= on row 14, that from |gridref= on row 9, the date in |start= on row 53 and the text from |original= on row 57. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pentrecourt Platform railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pencader (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of closed railway stations in Norfolk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reepham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hiya, you removed some text stating that South Eastern do not divert via the East Coastway Line from Hastings.
I have to say that in extreme circumstances they do, there is even a photo I took in April that is on the page to show that this happens.
EddersGTI (talk) 00:45, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
In extreme circumstances occasionally services do take unusual routes such as this. On the occasion you took your photograph it may have been a "once only" occasion but I will be monitoring to see if further occasions occur particularly as I live in Kent.Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:04, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gunhouse Wharf railway station
There is an article describing this as a passenger station. My research does not indicate this as a passenger station but a goods only station. Can anyone confirm this.? Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Was the swing bridge at Keadby (which preceded the present rolling-lift bridge) brought into use after the opening of the Trent, Ancholme and Grimsby Railway? If so, there may have been temporary passenger facilities on the eastern bank of the river. Note that Gunhouse is also spelled Gunness. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:51, 11 December 2012 (UTC). Noted with thanks.Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Coombe Road railway station and Lloyd Park tramstop
The history of Coombe Road station and Lloyd Park tram stop have been combined yet they are not even on the same site in fact their locations are about 200 hundred yards apart. Lloyd Park tram stop was built on literally a "green field" site as being built over part of Lloyd Park. Can their histories/articles be separated.?Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:26, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, re this edit - Tackley has had a bus service for many years. When I was small, it was the X59 route, which was a long Oxford-Rugby service operated jointly by Midland Red and City of Oxford; the northern terminus became Banbury in the 1980s - about the same time, Midland Red gave up their interest. It's changed operator at least twice since, and in the last few years it's been renumbered S4, but it still runs once an hour. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for supplying false information but it was advice given to me by a friend who regularly travelled by train to visit a pub in Tackley. Steamybrian2 (talk) 10:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Uxbridge Road tube station
Firstly it should be renamed Uxbridge Road railway station as it was a surface station and never a tube station.
It opened in 1869 by the West London Railway and was only served by Metropolitan Railway trains from 1909-1940 so in my opinion the emphasis should be on West London Railway services but the article has has little mention of this.Steamybrian2 (talk) 12:34, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hale Bank railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LMSR (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of closed railway stations in Britain: H-J, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LMSR (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cliffe railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Eastern Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
railways were nationalised in 1948. The station closed when local trains were withdrawn during the [[Beeching Axe|Beeching Closures], taking effect on 3 October 1966.<ref name=Butt />
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lullingstone railway station, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:30, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The page I created was a preliminary draft which was used as a base for an wikipedia article on Lullingstone Station which has now been completed.Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:11, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Steamybrian2. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Lullingstone railway station.
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lullingstone railway station}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
I see you have removed this label from the Wrexham, Mold and Connor's Quay template. I know they were merged but how is someone not familiar with this going to realise the significance of the disused blob at the left of Wrexham Central station on the diagram? Without the label it has no apparent reason to be there. Britmax (talk) 07:59, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion it is not closed but still open. I was unable to remove the disused blob as I could not understand which part of the computer language to delete. If you would wish the "disused blob" to stay then I suggest words such as Wrexham Exchange (now combined with Wrexham General). Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As the station was opened by the North Eastern Railway (and not LNER) I amended it but overlooked the fact that it should have read North Eastern Railway (UK).Apologies Steamybrian2 (talk) 10:09, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
South. The steam "push-and-pull" passenger service ran to [[London Paddington station|Paddington )]], the line was shared with freight, and express trains to [[Birmingham Snow Hill station|
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Forest of Dean Central Railway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blakeney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Missing from the map is a short branch line from Caldicot to Sudbrook. (adjacent to River Severn). It carried passenger trains in the 1800s after which it was freight only. I am unsure now whether it is still open for freight.?
I do not know the computer language to add it to the map so rather than make a mess of it I would suggest one of the editors add it.Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:46, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Never Constructed railway stations in UK
In my opinion the title of this page is misleading. Both the stations listed Crowlands and Lullingstone were partly built in fact the latter was virtually completed. I suggest this page is renamed as "Stations built or started but never opened in the UK". Accordingly will then add others. Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sandgate railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southern Railway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Between Leamington Spa and Didcot there were six stations that closed on the same date of 2nd November 1964- Kidlington, Bletchington, Fritwell, Aynho, Fenny Compton and Southam Road. That closure date is stated on the article page in Wikipedia for each station so therefore the source of information is from within Wikipedia which I thought irrelevant to state. I have rechecked it from "Passengers No More " by G.Daniels and L.Dench which agrees with the dates shown. To correct the article I have narrowed the location to between Oxford and Banbury.Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:04, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First, prior to your edit, the material was sourced to the Railway Magazine (December 1964, p. 920), which is normally considered a reliable source. This states From November 2, the London Midland Region of British Railways withdrew ... local services between Leamington Spa and Didcot—involving Kings Sutton (remains open as unstaffed halt), Southam Road & Harbury, Fenny Compton, Aynho for Deddington, and Fritwell & Somerton Stations. By altering the article from "between Leamington Spa and Didcot" to (in the first case) "between Banbury and Oxford" or (in the second case) "between Oxford and Banbury", you altered sourced information to contradict the source. Second, the policy on verifiability states that "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation": I challenged your edit: you must not reinstate it without providing a source that is better than (or no worse than) the Railway Magazine. Third, Wikipedia must not be used as a reference source, see WP:CIRCULAR. If you draw information from "Passengers No More " by G.Daniels and L.Dench, you should add a reference, preferably including page number. I have explained about referencing before, several times: please review that advice. If you want somebody else to explain about referencing, please add {{helpme}} to this page. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diggle. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
The map diagram shows separate branch lines to St. George and Faenol Bach which are stations not shown on the listing of "Closed Railway Stations in the UK". I have been unable to trace any record of such lines existence in any other publication. Can you either confirm or remove these lines. Steamybrian2 (talk) 20:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the OS 1:2500 map of 1962 and the 1:10560 map of 1964, there is a branch line marked "Mineral Railway", to Parc-y-Meirch Quarry (grid referenceSH969761)), situated just east of Nant-ddu Road and west-north-west of St George. Part-way along this branch, there is a works (SH983762) on the northern side of St Asaph Road; just to the south of that road is a junction, from which there is a very short branch to the east, terminating nowhere special (SH983759) - a point to the south-west of Faenol Bach. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:58, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have now researched further and found that part of it was built to serve Kinmel Camp which was used by the military during the period 1916-1918. I have noted that you have altered the terminal points from passenger stations to goods stations. Thank you for the information.Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bala and Festiniog Railway
The map diagram shows incorrectly the Festiniog Railway has branching south west from Blaenau Festiniog Central (GWR) station. The correct showing on the map is for the Festinog Railway to be shown running (north) adjacent to the Trawfynndd Link to adjacent to the LNWR station before heading "north west". The Trawsfynndd Link was actually built by BR along part of the original Festiniog Railway trackbed of the line to Dinas. I regret I am not able to correct the map myself as I cannot amend the computer coding .Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:35, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of private railway stations in Great Britain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carlisle. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. In particular, MOS:BADDATEFORMAT says "Do not use ordinals (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.)". --Redrose64 (talk) 23:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shoscombe and Single Hill Halt railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southern Railway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I was uncertain whether the alteration I made was acceptable as it was "borderline". It is now been rescinded by "Redrose" with two similar alterations that I made last night which I fully accept.Steamybrian2 (talk) 12:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For information--I have noted from the Wikipedia article that Meldon Quarry is now "currently out of use and mothballed" . As the Dartmoor Railway have built a small halt called "Meldon Quarry" the line to Okehampton and beyond is only used for heritage railway passenger services. Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Belgrave and Birstall
I would recommend that the new page/ article is created separating the history of Belgrave and Birstall closed in 1963 and a new page is created illustrating the history of Leicester North built by the "Great Central" Heritage Railway society which is on a different site.Steamybrian2 (talk) 13:45, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited St James Deeping railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Northern Railway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I recently deleted the entry stating that the stations were closed between the 1940s and 1978 however the entry was rejected by Redrose and the entry remained with the closure dates without stating the source of the information. I have rechecked many web sites such as History of Railways in Birmingham plus books such as "Passengers No More" and cannot find any reference to such closure. I have in my possession a British Rail system map of 1968 which shows both stations open. On the website Timetable World (www.timetableworld.com) it illustrates a Western Region timetable from 1965 and on table 42 it shows the train service serving the stations. Can you please re-examine.Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:49, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The closure dates match those of the line between Birmingham New Street- Kings Norton via Camp Hill which the line is still open for freight and occasional passenger trains. Accordingly my opinion stands that the Birmingham- Kings Norton service via Selly Oak and Bournville remained open although in May 1978 the Cross City service was introduced with a vastly improved train service. Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Quick (2009) pp. 94, 347, doesn't show the closure, however it does indicate that Selly Oak was re-sited on 13 April 1885 and known as Selly Oak & Bournbrook between 22 November 1898 and 1 April 1904. Something to add to the Xmas list, Redrose? Lamberhurst (talk) 19:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eardington
I recently deleted that this station was a "Beeching closure" however this edit was declined by Redrose and the entry has remained. The station did close in September 1963 and was mentioned in the Beeching Report that the closure of the station (with the line) was under consideration before the Beeching Report was issued in March 1963. I will mention that if this station is considered a "Beeching " closure then so should all the other stations on the Severn Valley Line from Shrewsbury- Kidderminster.Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Croxley Green railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LMS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I assume you meant to put it in the category of railway stations closed in 1931, not opened ? RGCorris (talk) 14:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC). Apologies for the error which I have now corrected. I copied it from Ffridd Gate which had the same error (now corrected)Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Perivale Halt
My revision of Paddington (Bishops Bridge Road) to Paddington was that the suffix Bishops Bridge Road not being added to the name Paddington station- in fact I cannot find any reference to the full name of Paddington (Bishops Bridge Road) being used. To the name of Birmingham was added the suffix Snow Hill because simply Great Western Railway trains ran to Snow Hill.Steamybrian2 (talk) 10:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
At the time, Paddington was two separate stations, the main one and Bishop's Bridge Road (or Bishop's Road). The latter was a small station with four through platforms, and was the boundary between the Metropolitan Railway and the Hammersmith and City Railway (a joint venture of the Met and GWR). The two stations were merged in 1933, but the former Bishop's Road platforms remained somewhat autonomous, known in working timetables as Paddington Suburban until 1967, when two platforms were handed over to London Transport, and two became terminal platforms - which they still are, numbers 13 & 14. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information and my research confirms that Bishops Road station was renamed Paddington in 1933. I cannot find any reference to the use of the middle word "Bridge" being used. I have Metropolitan Railway tickets in my collection which just refer to "Bishops Road". Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:29, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the article's history to see where the term arose - it's in the original version. We could ask the article's creator, Domplacid,osb (talk·contribs), but that was their only edit. It mentions
Connor, J.E.; Halford, B.L. The Forgotten Stations of Greater London. Connor and Butler. p. 77. ISBN0-947699-17-1.
Connor, J.E. (2000). GWR Disused Stations in Greater London. Connor and Butler. p. 77. ISBN0-947699-31-7.
and it would seem that the original editor was under a misapprehension. At page 34, it is said that "At the time of its construction [Paddington], the surrounding district was semi-rural, with a footpath passing through open fields. With the advent of the railway however this was rebuilt to become Bishops Road and it has since been renamed Bishops Bridge Road." There is no indication that Paddington was ever known as Bishops Bridge Road and this is confirmed by Quick, p. 256. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:48, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What does Quick say about Paddington (Bishop's Road) - i.e. omitting the word "Bridge"? Various authors, MacDermot included, use the suffix "(Bishop's Road)" specifically for what are now platforms 13-16. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reference:::*Connor, J.E.; Halford, B.L. The Forgotten Stations of Greater London. Connor and Butler. p. 77. ISBN0-947699-17-1.
- do you have that book? I have the book which states on page 120 Bishops Road renamed Paddington 10.09.1933
I have "Chronology of London Railways by H.V.Borley (ISBN0 901461 33 4) which states Paddington (Bishops Road) renamed Paddington 10.09.1933. I do not now have the book by M.E.Quick.(I did have it recently !)Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Quick (p. 256) states that Paddington (Bishops Road) [no apostrophe] opened 10 Jan 1863, was amalgamated into the main station 10 Sept 1933 and was known as Paddington Suburban from 1936. No mention of "Bridge". Lamberhurst (talk) 22:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salt and Sandon railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Northern Railway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Skellingthorpe railway station, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lincoln and Gainsborough. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I have made a number of amendments altering entries dated after 1933 from London Transport to London Passenger Transport Board. It was my impression that LPTB was introduced in 1933 and LT was formed in 1948. The tickets from my collection between this period are headed LPTB but have found in my archives a 1936 map headed LT. Accordingly I have researched this further and quoting from the articles on Wikipedia it states that LT was used as a brand name from 1933. Apologies for causing extra work but I have noted this for future reference.Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:14, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
London Transport was the trading name of several organisations, and these included the London Passenger Transport Board. The body created in 1948 was the London Transport Executive, which like the parallel Railway Executive, reported to the British Transport Commission.
I have been trying to research the opening date of this halt on the Market Drayton to Wellington line closed 1963.
One reference states it opened in 1867 whilst another states it opened in 1930. It does not appear in the "BR Pregrouping Atlas and Gazetteer" published by Ian Allan. Can anyone quote from M.E.Quick or R.V.Butt books so that I can refer to them.Steamybrian2 (talk) 12:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No halts opened as early as 1867 - it's a twentieth-century term. However, some stations were downgraded to halts (usually by losing most if not all staff) and renamed at the same time, but this was not one of them. Butt shows that Wollerton Halt opened 2 November 1931, closed 9 September 1963. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
After several months work I have examined every entry of the Closed Stations as listed in the index. With the information I have available I have examined the information as given although some entries I could not complete such as unable to find some station opening dates. Some items that require further information added are - numbers of platforms on M&GN Joint Rly stations between Yarmouth/Norwich to Peterborough/Bourne. Add companies to categories of the Joint line Bottesford- Market Harborough also Whitehaven, Cleator and Egremont Railway. The closure dates shown in categories I was uncertain whether to use passenger or goods closure dates so in most cases I have altered to passenger closure dates but a few I have left as the complete closure date particularly where regular specials used it. If I still come across any further corrections then I will amend them Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Renaming date of Paddington (Bishops Road)to Paddington in 1933 was a date we agreed in earlier correspondence confirmed also by editor "Lamberhurst" -- see earlier item headed "Perivale Halt" on my user talk page. Occasionally reference books and web pages do give wrong dates which are then copied forward. Please reconsider my original submission of the 1933 date Steamybrian2 (talk) 20:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For a very long time, Wikipedia has had a policy on verifiability - I have mentioned this before, on several occasions. If something in an article carries a reference to a reliable source, you should not alter that information without either discussing it first on the talk page, or providing a source that is more reliable; preferably both. As far as Underground dates are concerned, Douglas Rose is one of the best that there is. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have known Jim Connor for many, many years who is a well known historian, lecturer and author on London Railways. I have met Nick Catford many times who is author of "Disused Stations" web site. I give both of them my full support with their original research and I have contributed towards their publications when they publish my real name.Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You removed sourced information (including its source) and replaced it with a completely unsourced date. You may have got your information from Connor and/or Catford: but we have no way of telling, because you did not cite your source. It should not matter whether you have met them or not (I've met a few railway authors myself but I never say so when citing one of their books): what matters is the policy on verifiability, and closely linked to that, the reliability of your sources. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SKLR
Please see Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing_pages. In particular note that: "In addition, each categorized page should be placed in all of the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. This means that if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C." "Heritage railways in Kent" is a subcategory of "Heritage railways in England", therefore the SKLR should not be placed in the latter category. I'm about to revert your change for this reason, if you disagree please take it to the talk page and discuss it there. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is this exactly the same station but with a different spelling as Strap Lane Halt, that closed in 1950? I note that mention is made above of the East Somerset Railway RDT, but there appears to be no mention made on that of the station you have named. Are you awaiting clarification before entering this station on that line template?
I hope you realise that rather than show open and closed railways this RDT show ex IoWCR metals as dark red and the rest as light red? Britmax (talk) 16:05, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
While the Bridport line was listed in the Reshaping (published 1963) the line hung around and closed in 1975. Do you think this much delay (and this also affects the Alston line which closed in 1976) means there is a discussion to be had as to whether they still qualify as Beeching closures? I would think that Alston was the last Beeching closure, but that does place it thirteen years after the report was published... Britmax (talk) 18:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC).[reply]
I was surprised that the Bridport and Alston lines were mentioned in the main article as the last two "Beeching" closures. BR continued to close lines into the 1980s which were listed in the Beeching Report. I will leave it to you to discuss with other Editors whether these qualify as a "Beeching" closure or what they classify as the latest date. Do consider that the planned closure in the 1960s of both the Bridport and Alston lines were postponed several times (arranging substitute buses) before they were finally closed in the 1970s. Steamybrian2 (talk) 18:40, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Britmax: Afaik, the last such closure was the Woodside and South Croydon Joint Railway in 1983. The thing with Beeching nominated closures is that once proposed for closure, they generally never really went away. If the first attempt was unsuccessful, a second was made. This was the case for both Alston and Woodside. As for whether these are "Beeching closures" depends on what is meant by that term. As Beeching was not directly responsible for any closure, it could be seen as a closure following a recommendation made in the report. This could cover a closure such as Bridport where the line closed on the fourth attempt after Beeching. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fair points all. I don't think it was me who added the Bridport and Alston lines as the last Beechings. I can remember the Woodside line closing. Britmax (talk) 21:03, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware that it is UK only, although UK railways have the benefit of a legal definition of what is a light railway. As the NFR article states, it was clearly a light railway in construction and operation. Mjroots (talk) 18:32, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for August 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of private railway stations in Great Britain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crofton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
The [1] beside the closure date means it is confirmed in "Directory of Railway Stations by R.V.J.Butt" which is stated lower down the page . This date is also agreed in other publications such as "Passengers No More" by G.Daniels and L.Dench. Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:12, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the ref, but didn't have a copy of Butt to hand at the time to check that the article matched the reference. I just wondered why you changed year the station closed to 1968. I've just checked, and Butt definitely states 1967. Optimist on the run (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Please recheck my alterations carefully because I did not alter the year when the station closed in 1967..! Express trains continued to pass through the station until the last express train ran 30 June 1968 when the line through the station was closed which is what I added (ref- Passengers No More by G.Daniels and L.Dench-- second edition page 33).Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit here changed the text to read "The station closed in 1968 but trains continued to pass through the station until 1968 when the line was closed" (my emphasis). As I stated, I presume it was a typo. Optimist on the run (talk) 17:06, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have added Grove Hill Tunnel "was concrete slab tracked in 1985" (# 1. I have photographs taken in 1985 of the last trains to Eridge passing the work in progress. # 2. It is stated in the Wikipedia article on Hastings Line -paragraph on "Electric era" first paragraph last line).
Reference I have deleted closure of St Leonards Warrior Square between 1870- 1917. If in doubt please reexamine.
I know the tunnel is slab tracked, but I didn't consider it important enough to add to that section. As you have added it, the burden is on you to prove it - or it goes. BTW, I was on the very last service from Eridge to Tonbridge on 6 July 1985. Mjroots (talk) 05:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
You wrote a very good article on the Hastings Line for which I have no comments to make. As previously mentioned above you actually stated in the paragraph "Electric Era" in the last line that the tunnel was slab tracked in 1985. You have not stated yourself where this information came from. As a final correction I was also on the last train between Tunbridge Wells West- Grove Junction on 6th July 1985 which terminated at Tunbridge Wells Central (not Tonbridge) and there was another later train between Eridge and TWW only. I was working for BR (Southern Region) at the time.Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:50, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"As previously mentioned above you actually stated in the paragraph "Electric Era" in the last line that the tunnel was slab tracked in 1985. You have not stated yourself where this information came from." - Are you sure about that? Re last train, I was travelling back to Tonbrigde, so quite likely there was a change at TWC, although the regular service was Tonbridge - Eridge, the remant of the former Tonbridge - Eastbourne via Heathfield service. Mjroots (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is discussion point on whether a station closure date is the day when the last train ran or the first date when services ceased to operate. The dates I normally quote are the first date when services were withdrawn and are taken from books such as Passengers No More by G.Daniels and L.Dench, Chronology of London Railways by H.V.Borley and the various books on Disused Stations by J.E.Connor and B.Halford. In the past I have referred to the book with the name of (or similar) Register of Closed Stations by M.E.Quick which in the past I borrowed for reference however I do not have the excellent book by R.V.Butt. Some examples of dates I have used are the Crystal Palace High Level branch on which the last timetabled service ran on Sat. 18th September 1954, an enthusiasts special ran on Sunday 19th September and the BR official date of closure was Monday 20th September 1954. On the Woodside- Selsdon line the last train ran on Friday 13th May 1983 ( I was on it!) as there were no trains on Saturdays or Sundays so the effective closure issued on BR notices and official documents was Monday 16th May 1983. Accordingly I have tried to be consistent with the official date on when no trains ran which so far you have accepted. It appears that the policy has been changed by the books issued by Rose. Please discuss/clarify.Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:16, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is repeated twice - On page 64 as Arundel & Littlehampton open 16 March 1846 closed 1 Sep 1863. On page 79 as Littlehampton original station on main line (dates as shown in previous sentence). Steamybrian2 (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It was a book issued in 1964 by The Oakwood Press. It contains a large number of facts and figures specifically relating to lines/stations in the former BR (Southern Region) including lines west of Exeter to Padstow, Bude, Ilfracombe, etc. Such entries includes the dates stations opened/closed or renamed. The dates lines opened, closed, resignalled, electrified or widened (e.g. from 2 to 4 tracks). Principal Parliamentary Acts and Orders and a selection of unusual train services and named trains.Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This infobox appears to be for open railway stations on heritage railways, both Ruddington & East Leake are closed stations. --palmiped | Talk 13:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
My apologies for copying across the wrong template from another article. For both stations I have now amended info box from "UK heritage stations" to "UK disused stations".Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Marston Vale line
Thanks for your work to improve the datings on stations on this line. Are you associated with disused-stations.org? [V good material there!] I see that stations on the Varsity Line are the current task.
Have you any source to support the stated opening date? [Is it in Clinker's Register of Closed Passenger Stations and Goods Depots in England, Scotland and Wales 1830-1977?] The en.wp article at Fenny Stratford makes uncited claims and the Disused-Stations has two different dates, neither is cited.
Is there a citation for the Duke of Bedford insisting on Gothic Revival?
I do contribute towards the Disused Stations web site where my real name is credited as a contributor to many of the articles written by Nick Catford who I have met on many occasions. He lives only a few miles away from where I live in Kent.! I do not have Clinkers Register of Closed Passenger Stations but did borrow M.E.Quicks book which lists closed stations which I used to undertake research for other articles on the Wikipedia web site.
In regard to Fenny Stratford there is a misprint in Nick Catfords article which at the top of the page states open 1905 but further down the page shows a plan of the station in 1881. In the main article it states open 1846 which agrees to this article.. http://www.mkheritage.co.uk/wsc/docs/1846%20railway.html. I would therefore suggest as citation you use the aforementioned web site in addition to Nick Catford's Disused Stations web site (forgetting the typo error of 1905).
Please note that other Wikipedia editors have used Mr. R.V.Butt "List of Railway Stations" but even this has proved to be incorrect with a recent example giving a station opening date before the line was constructed. Steamybrian2 (talk) 14:31, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At present Nick Catford is compiling Disused Stations website by writing articles on several stations together along the same route. He is also trying to spread the routes evenly around the country so that they are not biased towards any one area. I have scanned some tickets from my collection for him to illustrate in his next article on Birmingham Snow Hill- Wolverhampton Low Level..!.Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:22, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dungeness. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of private railway stations in Great Britain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Strathspey. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
My apologies for upsetting the RDT for the Ipswich- Ely line as I tried to amend the entry for Cambridge North station. Can the Editors please correct it.Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Steamybrian2. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The following trains are timetabled over the line- Mons- Sats 1M76 1935 Newcastle-Birmingham, Saturdays 1E68 1747 Southampton-York, Sundays 1V48 0810 Leeds-Plymouth [1]Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:41, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can I please discuss this matter with another editor as in my opinion the line between Lichfield Trent Valley (HL) and Winchnor Jn is officially classed as "open" albeit the regular stopping train service was withdrawn in 1965.Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:34, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I am somewhat irked by the title of this article. For 105 years the station was know as Alton and for the last 11 years only as Alton Towers. Personally I've always thought of it as simply Alton. Do you know if there is a set rule on Wikipedia as to what stations with several names have to be called? Many thanks Cls14 (talk) 21:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Redrose64 (and the policy I use) that the stations are referred to by the name at the time of closure. Another example is Folkestone Junction which held that name for over 100 years to be renamed Folkestone East 4 years before closure in 1965.Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:21, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Marland Works railway station (aka Peters Marland)
I have found reference to this station (for staff only) only when it was the terminus of the 3 feet narrow gauge railway. I am surprised that the references listed can confirm its existence. It was not used when the line was reconstructed for standard gauge trains and certainly did not close in 1965. I would recommend that this article been heavily modified or deleted.Steamybrian2 (talk) 23:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Opening dates
I notice that you have changed some dates of station openings to match line openings. I would advise you to check that they are the same as simply altering the date to that of the line opening in another Wikipedia article risks using Wikipedia as its own source. If you are already doing this, apologies. Britmax (talk) 12:47, 15 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Such alterations are normally cross checked from several sources to confirm that the dates all match. In the case of the opening date of Hemsby then it matches that mentioned in the article on the M&GN.Steamybrian2 (talk) 15:36, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Steamybrian2. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Given that you were last to have edited Portpatrick and Wigtownshire Joint Railway, I'm guessing that you might be in a better position to clean up a small mess? The article A75 road has a section called 'Port Road railway line' that an anon editor has cleaned up and then, rightfully IMO, questioned why it is in a road article in the first place. My inclination is to just delete it but perhaps you might consider it worth rehoming this stray cat? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:16, 20 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Upon further consideration I have decided to deleted the entry as it duplicates the information elsewhere. I have no further knowledge of the A75 Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:31, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I only asked because I believed that it would be highly presumptuous for someone from the south-east of England to change information about the west of Scotland never even having been there. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]
I fully agree. In principle I do not like getting involved in subjects (such as A75 road) for which I have no knowledge. Accordingly I wanted another editor to deal with it.Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I agree with you being the shortest branch line but the Waterloo & City Line is entirely self contained in having its own depot and not connected to the national rail system.Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:52, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Stourbridge branch also has its own depot, and is self contained inasmuch as trains do not run through from the main system. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:05, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As part of the EastWest rail project these lines are planned to reopen for passenger services in 2025. This has been inserted into some of the articles in Wikipedia particularly the article on the East West Rail. I have made two attempts to insert articles that the line THROUGH the other closed stations will be reopened but these have been rejected as requiring references. The Wikipedia article for one of the closed stations Verney Junction states that the line THROUGH the station will be reopened. Please can a senior editor note that the line through the stations at Launton, Marsh Gibbon, Claydon, Swanbourne, Calvert, Quainton Road and Waddesdon will also be reopened. Accordingly my entries should be accepted. Steamybrian2 (talk) 09:15, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please refer the matter to a senior editor. Firstly- I would recommend you first look at a railway atlas such as Ian Allan Pregrouping Atlas page 10 which shows the route and the stations it passes through. Secondly look at the Wikipedia article on the Varsity route which also shows the route and the closed stations. Steamybrian2 (talk) 11:41, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not wanting to state the obvious, but if there's such a thing as a senior editor when it comes to UK railways myself and Redrose would be it, and we've now both told you to knock it off. We have no interest in what East West Rail's press releases say, as transport scheme promoters are notorious for announcing unapproved or unfunded schemes as faits accomplis to try to build public support (how many times have the Croxley Rail Link or direct London-Germany rail links been announced now?); if you can't cite a fact to independent, third party, reliable sources, Wikipedia doesn't want it. (With particular regard to this edit, Quainton Road isn't going to "remain closed" as it isn't closed now and there are no plans to close it; it no longer has scheduled passenger service but it still gets regular charter passenger traffic.) We make allowances for new editors who don't understand Wikipedia's rules, but you're not a new editor and have had our requirements on sourcing and on what's appropriate for inclusion explained to you repeatedly. ‑ Iridescent15:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have the Ian Allan Pregrouping Atlas (four copies, to be exact, in two different editions) and this says nothing whatsoever about any plan to reopen the line, let alone which stations will or will not be reopened. I have asked you to read WP:SYNTH: have you done so yet? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:45, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Ian Allan Pregrouping Atlas states the stations and lines open in 1923 and shows the stations mentioned above which the reopened route between Bicester/Aylesbury and Bletchley will pass through but the only station proposed to reopen will be Winslow. The Wikipedia article on the EastWest Rail also shows the route. I have not yet read WP:SYNTH: but will do when I have plenty of time. Finally I travelled over the line between Bicester- Bletchley before the line closed end of 1967 and took photographs and have tickets from some of the intermediate stations.Steamybrian2 (talk) 08:35, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Steamybrian2, let me put this more plainly. You've been active for a decade and have over 16,000 edits; WP:BITE does not apply to you, and if you're not willing or able to comply with our most basic policies on sourcing, you'll be treated no differently to any other disruptive editor. Unless you can find an independent source that specifically states whatever information you want to add, and unless you then cite that source in the appropriate place in the article, then Wikipedia does not want that information regardless of whether or not you personally believe it to be true. We're not a blog or a hobbyist site, we're a tertiary source, and we only reproduce information that already appears in reliable sources ("reliable sources" by our definition, not yours). ‑ Iridescent19:08, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have received little or no thanks for over a decade of work with over 16,000 edits. Of those a very small number have proved to be incorrect. My sources of information have been from a variety of sources from British Railway records to my own personal diaries, photographs, tickets and records dating back to 1966. Some of this information is issued in web sites such as Nick Catford's "Disused Stations" and Gary Thornton's "Six Bells Junction" web sites for which the authors are very grateful. It is easy in such work that errors creep in and both web sites as well as published books contain some errors or misprints. It is therefore unwise to merely cite a book and its page and copy such information into Wikipedia without first cross checking. Occasionally I have deleted these "cites" as incorrect particularly when it contradicts information issued elsewhere. In one instance I travelled on the last train over the line and recorded it in my diary, got issued with a correctly dated ticket took photographs but subsequently found that the closure date was wrongly shown in Wikipedia because the date had been misprinted in a magazine. I subsequently altered it but such edit was refused as it cited the magazine article..! Another example recently was closure date of Framlingham to goods. The date given was 1963 as quoted from a CAMRA Good Beer Guide. I cross checked three sources of information as being 1965 including British Railways records but as per previous instructions I did not delete 1963 but left it as quoted by the Good Beer Guide( maybe this is more reliable information than BR Records...). The moral of the story is "cite your source" but first check that the source is correct.Steamybrian2 (talk) 20:05, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Re this edit - I'd like to create the Tivoli article, but am having no luck finding anything on the station. All I can find is that it took its name from Margate's Tivoli Gardens. Do you have any sources that can be used? Mjroots (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time ATM but there may well be the citation for demolition at one of the two EWR Alliance progress reports cited at Bletchley Flyover. Sorry, I should have thought of that first before I reverted your edit but I've already spent too long on it. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]
As you know, YouTube is not an RS. Yes, in all probability it is exactly what it says on the tin, but we can't be certain: it could be anywhere. Per wp:NOTNEWS, I suggest we can afford to wait until it hits the local newspapers and I'll do it then.
Interesting. Could you please cite this in the template as a source that is not quoted is the same as a source that does not exist. Britmax (talk) 11:40, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Rather than starting a new thread, I'll append to this one. In the case of the edit on Marshlink line, removing the statement that all lines except the main and Dungeness freight closed in 1967 would give the reader the impression that the Rye Harbour branch is still open (which, of course, it isn't). I also don't understand why you wanted to remove the claim that the line was slow to be modernised. The detail for this is in the article, stating how the station was gas-light well into the 1970s and stands out now like a sore thumb as one of the few non-electrified railways in the South East, causing all sorts of wasted potential. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)15:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]
During the late 1950s/early 1960s in preparation for the aborted electrification a lot of modernisation work was done in advance. Many of the station platforms were rebuilt in concrete and lengthened. Colour light signalling was installed. A new signal box was built at Appledore and the level crossing here and other locations modernised. Sections of the track were relayed with f/b rail and concrete sleepers. A new footbridge was installed at Rye. Economies in expenditure meant that not all work was completed but it was not forgotten resulting in this line and Tonbridge- Hastings not being electrified at the time. In fact Tonbridge- Hastings line suffered more as virtual no modernisation work was done until the mid- 1980s. In addition the Hurst Green- Uckfield line also saw little modernisation now it is a dead end branch line. Tunbridge Wells West station retaining gas lighting until its closure in 1985. Victorian signalling lasted until 1990 when the Uckfield line was resignalled. The Uckfield line is a wasted potential but would be more useful if the line was opened to Lewes. Anyway we are not here to discuss or speculate but I question your decision in publishing your opinion on a subject rather than sticking to facts.Steamybrian2 (talk) 20:39, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any sources for that? The principal driver for saying the line was slow to modernise was that it was listed for closure in the Beeching Report and it was more luck than anything that it didn't. The facts I stated are all in the main body of the article, mostly cited to books published by Ian Allan and Middleton Press, which (IMHO) are about the best sources for the topic. The inability to close the line cites several speeches in the Parliamentary Hansard. The state and potential of the Marshlink line is also backed up by sources such as Hastings Observer, Rye News and several Network Rail reports. As for Uckfield - Lewes, don't hold your breath on that, there's a major problem in that the original line into the station has been built over and the only alternative is to force trains to continue to Newhaven or reverse. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)21:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not want to discuss the matter much further. Suffice to say that I worked for British Rail, Southern Region, Operating Department at Waterloo and in some cases actually planned projects that happened. I do not use Newspapers as sources of information as they are not always accurate. Steamybrian2 (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whether you wish to discuss it or not, you are in breach of two of Wikipedia's core content policies. I have pointed out before - several times - that we have a policy on verifiability. This states, in a nutshell: Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations. Personal knowledge (regardless of the company that you worked for) does not meet this requirement because it cannot be attributed in a manner that is verifiable by others. We also have a policy on primary sources which, amongst other things, explicitly statesDo not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material. The information that you have added in your edits has been challenged: therefore, if you wish it to be retained, you mustcite your sources in a manner that enables Mjroots, Ritchie333 or myself to verify that what you added is accurate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The station closed to passengers on 6 July 1985. I know, because I was on the very last passenger service to depart from there. Mjroots (talk) 04:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mjroots: I think that the problem here is that whilst Saturday 6 July was the last day of service, that's just one of two conflicting conventions that exist for station closures: most RSs use the "first day without service" convention, which would be Monday 8 July (assuming that there had been no regular Sunday service). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, in this edit to Shipley railway station you have added a reference to Railway Passenger Stations by M. Quick with a page number. The problem is which edition of this book does the page number refer to? Could you please update with appropriate edition & other details such as ISBN. Many thanks Keith D (talk) 21:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
.JPG){kind=link}
