Talk:Headcorn and Maidstone Junction Light Railway

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).

More information:
/
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
	This article lacks references.
	It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Kent Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles

Mid

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

WikiProject Kent tasks:

Here are some Kent related tasks you can do:

Clean up an article: Here are automatically generated lists of articles needing cleanup sorted alphabetically and by category.
Edit the Top and High importance articles.
Refine/polish: Ashford, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Canterbury
Expand:: List of churches in Kent, Maidstone Borough Council
NPOV: K College
Citation needed: Unreferenced Kent articles
Cleanup/Copyedit: Kingdom of Kent
Expert attention: Channel Tunnel, Bromley Civic Society
Stubs: see Kent geography stubs articles

Note: These articles may overlap with those on other related lists. If you would like to make a change, either do so yourself, or make a suggestion.

Hold your Horses!

I've only just started this page, give me a chance to get some details in before you start tagging it! Mjroots 11:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template

I've had a go at a template but it hasn't worked. Would someone please correct this. Need to show the bits of line that were built differently to the rest of line. Mjroots 14:37, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template looking better now (thanks), but the Tovil end is not displaying correctly. Mjroots 20:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have almost bashed it into shape, just awaiting creation of 2 new symobls! Mjroots 19:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've revised the template to use the blue icon set intended for light railways. Out of use, planned and unbuilt lines are shown in the same way so you may want to add explanations in the text to identify which bits were built, and which were ever used. I also removed the repeated rows as these are redundant. For comments on the two needed icons see here. I've guessed about the way Headcorn station was laid out; was it a separate station for the K&ESR or did it run into the main line station? It may be useful to mention the other Tovil station on the Medway Valley line as well. --DavidCane (talk) 01:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Headcorn (K&ESR) as built had its own platform face on the up side of the line, and also a junction with the SEML to the west of Headcorn station.

What was proposed was a bridge to carry the H&MJLR over the SEML. Whether there would still have been a junction with the SEML or not is something that requires further research. The revised template does not show the situation as clearly as my original IMHO. Mjroots (talk) 07:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've redone the template to show the proposed line in blue. The Tovil Goods branch is shown in red as it was not (to my knowledge) operated under a Light Railway Order, but had actually been built before the H&MJLR scheme was granted its Act. I don't think we need to show Headcorn SE&CR station as it makes the diagram look too complicated at the top. I've put the extra spaces back in as I'm trying to show relative distances, and will have more icons to add in once I can work out their positions (Summit, further bridge, level crossings). Mjroots (talk) 09:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than put in blank rows, the correct way to show distances is by putting the mileage figure as shown below:

				4.0	Sutton Valence
				5.1	Chart Sutton

--DavidCane (talk) 00:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup?

I've removed the cleanup tag. The article was in pretty good shape anyway and I've given it a bit of a copyedit. My only real concern is that the RDT needs rewriting, but that is not a major item. Mjroots (talk) 07:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diagram redrawn and given its own template. Mjroots (talk) 07:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Headcorn and Maidstone Junction Light Railway. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081226051144/http://www.planefacts.co.uk/railway/named/pages/hegate_jpg.htm to http://www.planefacts.co.uk/railway/named/pages/hegate_jpg.htm

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) 18:05, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]