Talk:Oxted line

Oxted line is currently a Transport good article nominee. Nominated by Mertbiol (talk) at 21:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Short description: Railway line in southern England

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).

Kent Low‑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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-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.

Surrey Low‑importance

	Surrey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Surrey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Surrey 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.SurreyWikipedia:WikiProject SurreyTemplate:WikiProject SurreySurrey-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sussex Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sussex, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sussex 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.SussexWikipedia:WikiProject SussexTemplate:WikiProject SussexSussex-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Transport Low‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London 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.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Oxted Line.

Does anyone know how many platforms there are in Eridge? 86.132.252.194 18:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Originally two island platforms, four faces. One loop has now gone and until fairly recently the other has been used by by TWERPS (Tunbridge Wells and Eridge Railway Preservation Society) for storage of a diesel loco. They have a marketing site here with a bit about the station.--Old Moonraker 19:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs

I an relatively new to Wikipedia, but think that most stations on this line are now not stubs (?). Could someone please verify this. Squidnchips 18:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A quick looks shows only Hurst Green railway station and Oxted railway station haven't got stub tags next to them. All the articles for this line are stubs. There is some wiki polciy for classifying when an article is not a stub. I think the aim is to make them longer, have a a look a http://www.kentrail.co.uk/ for a site with the kind of level of info on each station really needed (ie photos, lots of history, etc). Pickle 15:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map

I have added a map and removed the 'mapneeded=yes' from the Wiki Trains tag. Miner2049er 20:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From north to south: Riddlesdown stn, Riddlesdown tunnel, Riddlesdown viaduct, Upper Warlingham stn., Woldingham viaduct, Woldingham stn, etc. I.e. Riddlesdown tunnel and viaduct are in the wrong place and Woldingham viaduct is missing. The map template looks a bit scary, or I'd try it myself - kudos to those who know how to work it!.--Old Moonraker 20:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--Old Moonraker 08:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monks Lane Halt

For the sake of completeness, Monks Lane Halt (1907-1939) should be added in just to the south of Hurst Green, before the Crowhurst spur. Ravenseft (talk) 22:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tunnel under the Redhill-Tonbridge line is only 330 yards (not the official figure). It's out of proportion with, for example, Oxted tunnel: if it were reduced on the map it would make more room for the Halt, or is this necessary to because there's something above it? --Old Moonraker (talk) 07:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the tunnel ought to be shortened - Mark Beech tunnel between Hever and Cowden at 1341 yards is longer but appears shorter on the map. More on Monks Lane Halt - on the 1912 map shown on p. 11 of Mitchell and Smith's branch lines to Tunbridge Wells West, it is shown as located just before the Redbridge to Tonbridge line crossover. The tunnel is referred to as the "Edenbridge tunnel", apparently 319 yards long. Ravenseft (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've answered my own question: Edenbridge tunnel is not to scale because it needs room for the "line over" map component. --Old Moonraker (talk) 22:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BS7-2 and East Grinstead Layout

I've put a BS7-2 diagram on the template, including a revised East Grinstead layout. Aquizard disagrees with me regarding this layout here and while understanding these doubts I still feel the advantages outweigh the drawbacks, but would appreciate feedback from others either way. Britmax (talk) 10:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst the diagram is an improvement in the sense that it shows more clearly the high and low level stations, I have to agree with Aquizard's point that it gives the impression that there were two stations at different locations, whereas, as he points out, one was directly above the other. To his points, I would also add two more - the article on East Grinstead covers both high and low level stations, reducing somewhat the need to distinguish between them, and it is highly likely that in the next five years East Grinstead will, in any case, be remodelled to allow the Bluebell to run services through to it. Ravenseft (talk) 12:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up the template a bit, and added conversions as per MOS. Mjroots (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing style

I would like to do some work on this article over the next few weeks. Principally, I would like to expand the history section, tighten up the remainder of the text and improve the referencing. (I have done this in the past few months for the North Downs Line, Brighton Main Line and Redhill–Tonbridge line.) Per WP:CITEVAR, would anyone object if I convert the reference format to use Template:sfn?
Thanks and best wishes, Mertbiol (talk) 21:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have made these changes. Mertbiol (talk) 21:15, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]