Talk:Pilning railway station/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Pi.1415926535 (talk · contribs) 18:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Starting this review now. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, the article looks very close to GA status - I mostly have minor nitpicks. Feel free to respond after each bullet, or in a larger reply. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:03, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pi.1415926535 sorry I missed this up until now. I'll look at this over the weekend. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:05, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pi.1415926535 I've gone through the list below and fixed everything I can. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:34, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, and I apologize for the delay - I was moving this weekend. All of your changes and explanations look good; I've left two comments (distance from Bristol, and a geographic map), but neither bloks he article from GA status. Well done! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Why are five years of ridership data given in the infobox? That seems excessive. If changes in ridership are significant (as they seem to be here) then the numbers belong in the prose.
Five years is standard, check out any of the other 2,500 GB stations that have been open for at least that long. There was a discussion on the matter three or so years ago, with opinions ranging from "show every figure for which data exists" (which in some cases, including Pilning, might be 15 years) through "show only the latest figure" right down to "show none at all". Five years was a compromise. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

The lede as a whole is rather short. A sentence or two about the platform and facilities would be advisable, as would several additional sentences about the history.
Oh I head lede-writing. Added some stuff. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:34, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The redlink to Pilning Station Group seems unnecessary; the group is unlikely to have any notability outside that of the station, so it would at most be a redirect to this article.
I wasn't quite sure how to deal with them as I don't think it's impossible they wouldn't eventually meet notability guidelines, so kept at redlink in case it ever becomes an issue. Can certainly undo that. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've temporarily commented out the template showing railways in the area, as it was forcing images below it. Is the template really necessary? It covers a rather large area and doesn't seem to have much specific relevance to the article. If it does need to be present, it needs to be placed so as not to interrupt image locations.
I'd note that you requested a map below. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:34, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Description

2 miles (3.2 km) north of the Bristol conurbation is confusing - the station appears to be about 7 miles away from Bristol itself. Is the 2 mile measurement the distance from the urban limit?
7 miles from the "Bristol" on Google Earth, but the boundary of the city is at Henbury which is about 3 miles south, and the conurbation continues into Patchway which is less than 2 miles away. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I think specifying the distance to the city center would be more useful, but not a big deal. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Three citations in this section are to a self-published blog, which does not meet reliable source standards. Is it possible to replace these?
The uses of the DiamondGeezer citations are analysis of the least used stations (to avoid WP:SYN and WP:OR), and some minor fleshing out of the station facilities. For the least used bits the latest stats did reference the user group, the colour bits of the facilities could maybe be dropped or cited from the All The Stations video (well-known rail video maker, wrote a book about the trip which was documented in Youtube). -mattbuck (Talk) 21:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to ORR only. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Service

Which days do the trains operate?
How on earth did I miss that! -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comma splices in the second and sixth sentences should be replaced by semicolons.
OK. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Are the frequencies of non-stopping services really relevant?
Potentially not, but I figure it shows that while the station is more or less unused it's on a busy route. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bristol and South Wales Union Railway

Is "New Passage railway station" (currently a redirect to the village) in the s-rail template the same location as the later New Passage Halt railway station?
No it was a different station (see the area map). -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
New Passage was west, not east.
Fixed. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It seems odd that the station was at Pilning Road, rather than the village (which appears to have been called Cross Hands, and didn't get a station until 1928). Is there any information why this was the case?
Well logically the High Level station was there because that was a flat bit, but why someone built the original station there I have no clue whatsoever. Maybe they wanted to go to the pub. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The intermediate stations between Patchway and Bristol don't seem particularly relevant.
That's why they're in a note not the body text. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Several citations, including in this section, have unneeded redlinks in the publisher field.
That's true, I take the principle that a redlink exists in part to highlight "this may potentially be worth an article". -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

High Level station

Would it be possible to create a map? (I may even be able to do it.) That would make it much easier to understand the relative routes of the New Passage, Severn Beach, and main lines.
You commented out the map which showed it. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That RDT covers a large area, and tends to mess up the article formatting. I was thinking along the lines of a geographic map covering an area about 2 miles east-west by 1.5 miles north-south, from Pilning to New Passage. I can try to do that tomorrow. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's confusing for the section to have this title when the "High Level" name isn't introduced until the next section.
Added comment that it came to be called High Level.
It looks like the pumping station was on a spur from the New Passage Branch - might be worth a few words to explain that.
Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If double tracking to Patchway wasn't completed until 1887, were both platforms in use until then?
I don't believe sources specified - there would have been crossover points for the goods yard, so they may well have had a double track station but single track line between. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The station buildings were of a standard GWR design with chimneys and a fretted canopy, which however bore no resemblance to other stations along the line. This wording is confusing - I'd suggest The station buildings were of a standard GWR design with chimneys; however, the fretted canopy bore no resemblance to other stations along the line.
That's not the meaning I was going for. I've reworded it The station buildings were of a standard GWR design with chimneys and a fretted canopy; however this design bore no resemblance to the other stations along the line. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The opening year of the Severn Bridge should be given.
Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pilning Low Level

The second sentence makes no sense - I think some words may be missing.
Fixed. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's worth noting that from 1922-28, Severn Beach passenger service was via Avonmouth.
Revised wording to clarify. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think the directions to Patchway and Cross Hands are reversed.
Fixed. Wow I was rubbish at directions that day. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

British Rail

A number of years is vague - wasn't it just four years from 1964 to 1968?
Removed. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence of the second paragraph needs rewritten.
Slightly revised, not sure what you want. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Any indication why services were so drastically decreased around 1973?
Source didn't specify. Most railway history books have great detail up until Beeching, then skip right to "when I visited in 2010 there was nothing left". -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At a guess locals were more likely to have cars by the 70s so passenger numbers dropped. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The two sentences about the governance of the village seem unrelated to the article.
Removed. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Post-privatisation

On what date in 2006 was service reduced?
It would have been either the May or December timetable change, but the sources I have didn't specify. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]