Talk:Community Rail Network

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: in UK Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 October 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

Untitled

Article under construction. I will be adding more links. Biscuittin (talk) 14:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion 21 Oct 2015

Quote: "If the association itself is only worth a paragraph in another article, then why would a list of its members be a notable enough subject for a list? We have a list of British heritage and private railways, so it's not as if the lines aren't listed if this article is deleted".

This is incorrect. Community rail partnerships are related to certain National Rail lines, not to heritage and private railways. Biscuittin (talk) 20:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Community rail

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was merge. IamMattDavies (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I was thinking whether it would be sensible to merge both this page and the above mentioned, giving a reasonable explanation as to what ACORP is etc., then listing its members and so on.

It is likely I will do this, unless so many people want to object to it (don't push now!). Please consider this carefully. Thanks

IamMattDavies (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, it is one of the same. Wartzquart (talk) 06:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Please add your sources..

Boleyn (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]