Talk:Lawrence Hill railway station

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lawrence Hill railway station article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Lawrence Hill railway station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 23, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Bristol Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bristol, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bristol-related articles 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.BristolWikipedia:WikiProject BristolTemplate:WikiProject BristolBristol articles

Mid

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

More information:
/
	At least one photograph is included in this article
	This article needs a map
	This article has an infobox

Trains: Stations / in UK Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
Sel	week 10, 2014

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 Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Bristol railway map.

Wikiproject

I have reclassed this article to start class, as it now contains more info. mark999 14:40 27/07/07 UTC

Orphaned references in Lawrence Hill railway station

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Lawrence Hill railway station's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Oakley":

From Bristol to Exeter Line: Oakley, Mike (2006). Somerset Railway Stations. Bristol: Redcliffe Press. pp. not cited. ISBN 1-904537-54-5.
From Bristol Parkway railway station: Oakley, Mike (2003). Gloucestershire Railway Stations. Wimbourne, Dorset: The Dovecote Press. pp. 29–30. ISBN 1-904349-24-2.
From Bristol Temple Meads railway station: Oakley, Mike (2002). Bristol Railway Stations 1840–2005. Wimbourne: The Dovecote Press. ISBN 1-904349-09-9.
From Shirehampton railway station: Mike Oakley (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840-2005. Redcliffe. pp. 103–106. ISBN 1-904537-54-5. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
From Bristol Port Railway and Pier: Mike Oakley (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840–2005. Redcliffe. ISBN 1-904537-54-5. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
From Taunton railway station: Oakley, Mike (2006). Somerset Railway Stations. Bristol: Redcliffe Press. ISBN 1-904537-54-5.
From Redland railway station: Oakley, Mike (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840–2005. Redcliffe Press. ISBN 1-904537-54-5. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
From Henbury railway station: Oakley, Mike (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840-2005. Redcliffe. pp. ^{&#91, page needed&#93,}. ISBN 978-1-904537-54-0.
From Hotwells Halt railway station: Mike Oakley (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840-2005. Redcliffe. p. 79. ISBN 1-904537-54-5. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
From Long Ashton railway station: Oakley, Mike (2002). Somerset Railway Stations. Bristol: Redcliffe. ISBN 1-90453-754-5. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
From Avonmouth railway station: Mike Oakley (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840-2005. Redcliffe. pp. 42–44. ISBN 1-904537-54-5. {{cite book}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
From Saltford railway station: Oakley, Mike (2006). Somerset Railway Stations. Bristol: Redcliffe Press. p. 104. ISBN 1-904537-54-5.
From Nailsea and Backwell railway station: Oakley, Mike (2002). Somerset Railway Stations. Bristol: Redcliffe Press. ISBN 1-904537-54-5.
From Worle railway station: Oakley, Mike (2002). Somerset Railway Stations. Wimbourne: Redcliffe Press. ISBN 1-904349-09-9.
From Winterbourne railway station: Oakley, Mike (2006). Bristol Railway Stations 1840-2005. Redcliffe. pp. 150–151. ISBN 978-1-904537-54-0.
From Filton Abbey Wood railway station: Oakley, Mike (2003). Gloucestershire Railway Stations. Wimbourne, Dorset: The Dovecote Press. pp. 8–10, 69–71. ISBN 1-904349-24-2.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead emphasis?

Would this be better as "Cross Country Route and Severn Beach Line", with possible related changes to follow?

My point is that Lawrence Hill exists, and still exists, because of its importance on the major route from Bristol to the major inter-city network via Parkway. Even if the majority of trains through it don't stop, it's an important route through an otherwise unimportant station stop for local traffic. The Cross Country Route should thus appear before the Severn Beach Line. Andy Dingley (talk) 03:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There wasn't any particular reason I wrote it that way round, it just came out that way - feel free to change it. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lawrence Hill railway station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 06:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. — Cirt (talk) 06:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Lawrence Hill station geograph-2913053-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg = image hosted on Commons, appropriately licensed and attributed. Y.
File:Lawrence Hill Station Bristol at night (1964).jpg = image from Flickr, hosted on Commons, appropriately reviewed at Commons. Y.
File:121135 at Lawrence Hill.jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:Lawrence Hill Station, 1979.jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:Railway line view to Lawrence Hill 2012 - Flickr - Greater Bristol Metro Rail.jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:Lawrence Hill Station Bristol 2000.jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:67002 Lawrence Hill Station, Bristol 2000.jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:Lawrence Hill Station in the snow.jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:Hugh llewelyn 153 305 (6702959723).jpg = flickr image, appropriately reviewed on Commons. Y.
File:170433 at Edinburgh Waverley.JPG = original image from Commons, checks out okay. Y.

— Cirt (talk) 06:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your listing of the Edinburgh Waverley image confused me - it took me a while to find where on the page that was! -mattbuck (Talk) 15:49, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no worries, — Cirt (talk) 15:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stability review

Upon inspection of article edit history going back over six months, no glaring issues. Y.
Looked at talk page edit history and present version of talk page. No outstanding issues. Only polite discussion observed. Y.

— Cirt (talk) 06:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review tabulation

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Wording is indeed clear and succinct throughout.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Good layout and style presentation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Proper use of references for information provided.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Nice use of in-line citations to WP:RS sources, standardized citation style is excellent.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No problems here.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Major aspects addressed appropriately.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	No issues here.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Neutral presentation throughout, with matter of fact wording given.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Passes here, see above.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Passes here, see above.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Passes here, see above.
	7. Overall assessment.	Great job overall!

Thankyou kindly. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/bristol-tramway/
Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
http://www.railway-technology.com/
Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 13:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lawrence 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) 18:19, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Lawrence 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) 15:27, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lawrence 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) 10:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lawrence 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130103135443/http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=258%3Awestons-rail-commuter-services-could-be-cut-warns-towns-mp&catid=48%3Acommunities-not-dormitories&Itemid=108 to http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=258:westons-rail-commuter-services-could-be-cut-warns-towns-mp&catid=48:communities-not-dormitories&Itemid=108

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) 18:08, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]