Jump to content

Talk:Herne Hill railway station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleHerne Hill railway station is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 25, 2012.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 8, 2012Good article nomineeListed
April 20, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
May 13, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

/Archive 1 - Resolved issues

Date template

[edit]

The infobox should use {{Start date}} for the |years1= parameter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:24, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

True, so  Done. I've also added three more rows to the same section of the infobox. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When did it open?

[edit]

When did Herne Hill station open?

--

21:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Er, the answer "25 August 1862" appears both in the text and in the infobox. -- Dr Greg  talk  22:18, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Herne Hill railway station. 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) 07:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Herne Hill railway station. 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) 04:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Herne Hill railway station. 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) 07:34, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Contents about the railway line

[edit]

@Redrose64: Contents regarding the railway line in general should not be placed in this article but in the article about the line.

See WP:FACR:

Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style.

What happens somewhere on the other end of the line is not the main topic of this article.--PhiH (talk) 11:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring minor changes, you removed six longer passages, as follows (refs omitted for clarity):
(the platforms at Loughborough Junction, now the closest station to Herne Hill, opened in 1872). By June 1864, the City Branch had been extended to Blackfriars Bridge railway station (on the south bank of the River Thames) via Borough Road. Blackfriars Railway Bridge was then built across the Thames and a terminus for trains from the south opened at Ludgate Hill on 1 June 1865.
Snow Hill tunnel opened on 1 January 1866, enabling trains from Herne Hill to reach Farringdon and completing the Metropolitan Extension. Later that year, the LCDR completed work to widen the railway viaduct between Herne Hill and Blackfriars Bridge, which included doubling the number of lines north of Loughborough Junction from two to four.
In 1900, it was suggested in The Contemporary Review that the City Branch should be replaced with an electric deep-level railway (i.e. a 'tube' line) between Herne Hill and Farringdon in order to remove Blackfriars Railway Bridge, which the author considered to be a blight on the Thames.
From December 2008 to May 2012, Thameslink trains serving Herne Hill did not run most weekends or after 22:30 every week-night because of construction work on the Thameslink route through central London as part of the Thameslink Programme.
During the initial planning in the late 1980s for High Speed 1, British Rail considered building the line to serve a low-level station at King's Cross via south London. An option for this route was via Herne Hill, which would have required quadrupling the tracks on the Chatham Main Line between Shortlands and Herne Hill and on the City Branch to Loughborough Junction; it was estimated that this would have led to the loss of 90–180 homes in Lambeth. Although both a different route and London terminus for HS1 were eventually chosen (St Pancras via East London),
Trains through Herne Hill were affected by World War II. Trains on the City Branch were reduced from September 1939 to once every 30 minutes during the week and hourly at weekends; and the line was cut twice during the Blitz. On the second occasion, the railway bridge over Hinton Road (immediately south of Loughborough Junction) was destroyed. The route between Holborn Viaduct and Herne Hill was disrupted by 62 incidents during the war.
With one exception (that is to say the sentence
Later that year, the LCDR completed work to widen the railway viaduct between Herne Hill and Blackfriars Bridge, which included doubling the number of lines north of Loughborough Junction from two to four.
which was added in July 2014), all of these passages are present in substantially the same form in the version that passed FA in May 2013. The FA reviewers did not ask for the removal of any of these passages; the nomination may be found at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Herne Hill railway station/archive1. If you feel that the article as it now stands no longer meets the FA criteria, you may send it to WP:FAR, but please do not carry out wholesale removals of stable content without consensus. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What do my edits have to do with the FA criteria? They weren't "wholesale removals" but a WP:SPLIT to their own article. It was of course not criticised in 2014 because at that point there weren't any other articles to add these passages to.--PhiH (talk) 11:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They have quite a lot to do with the FA criteria, which requires stability (criterion 1e). Also, you yourself mentioned the FACR in your first post here, concerning length, and that very firmly makes the FA criteria the topic of this discussion.
But since you mention WP:SPLIT, I will draw your attention to part of that page, WP:PROSPLIT, which has in its second note:
A note should also be made in the edit summary of the source article, "split content to [[article name]]". The {{Copied}} template can also be placed on the talk page of both articles. For further information, refer to the main Copying within Wikipedia guideline.
This is amplified at WP:CORRECTSPLIT, and I see no evidence that you did this. The edit summary where content was removed does not say where you moved it to, and neither of your posts above give any hint either. So it's vanished into a hole, and so counts as a content removal. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I quoted the FAR because I couldn't see how the fact that this is a featured article means that these contents shouldn't be removed. The criteria just underline that the passages do not belong to this article. You assumed that I removed contents because it is an FA (If you feel that the article as it now stands no longer meets the FA criteria [...] do not carry out wholesale removals of stable content without consensus) which is not the case.
My edit and my comments here gave a clear hint where I moved the contents to: the article about the railway line, which is the Holborn Viaduct–Herne Hill line. Unfortunately I forgot to link it in the ES but with the same edit I added a link in the article. If you weren't sure which article I meant you could have left me a message and I would have made a dummy edit to clarify.
If you have any objections with the split it can be discussed here, but at the moment I can't see any reason to leave the contents here.--PhiH (talk) 10:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Herne_Hill_railway_station&oldid=1201342342"