Talk:Portland Branch 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 Mid-importance).

Dorset Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dorset, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Dorset. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Dorset project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.DorsetWikipedia:WikiProject DorsetTemplate:WikiProject DorsetDorset articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Portland North Coast Details [1] Britmax 17:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Portland Branch 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.weymouth.gov.uk/main.asp?svid=351

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Printing

When I attempted to print out the article on A4 sized paper, to pass on to a colleague, all four pages of print were fine, but the line template has white speces every other line, spoiling the look of the article. Can something be done to correct matters?

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tried again at 0437 hours on 30 December 2018, but the "white space" problem on the line template section still remains when trying to print out the article.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 04:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is the "line template"? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is the item at the top right-hand corner of the article that shows the railway stations on the line. Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 10:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a railway person at all. (The only reason this came to my attention is because of my Jurassic Coast interest.) Nor am I a template person.

I think Xenophon's point is that the attempted diagram of the railway near the start of the article, which is done by a template, doesn't print correctly. (For instance when I tried "print preview" from Firefox, it looked incorrect. Yes, there does seem to be a problem.)

Looking a little more deeply (the "talk" about that template) it seems that this is an old template, with known, reported problems (not only in printing but also on small screens, apparently). So what seems to be needed is a railway person/editor with a working knowledge of the newer templates, already in use on other articles, to re-do the map.

I hope that helps and that you can find such a person/editor. Feline Hymnic (talk) 12:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The box concerned is a route diagram template (RDT). These are usually constructed so that the names of stations and other features are short enough to fit into one line, without wrapping, on an average-size device. In such circumstances, the various icons butt up to one another because the icons are 20px high, and a line of text that does not wrap is less than 20px high. With narrow media, the width of the RDT is constrained and so the longer names (like Sandsfoot Castle Halt) will wrap to two lines; the overall height of two lines is more than 20px, and so the line is taller than the adjacent icon, and so the icons are spaced out. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:49, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this most detailed explanation. That has made matters clear now.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Line extended beyond Easton station

The OS map in the article shows that the line extended beyond (north of) Easton station for about ½ mile and ended in a quarry. I think that this should be shown on the route diagram but do not have the expertise to make the change. Could someone please fix this? Exbrum (talk) 10:22, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't make out the extension you refer to on that map. On an OS map circa 1900 there are a number of what are obviously quarry lines shown but many of these would have been temporary tracks and none obviously connects to the line at Easton. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now found it on a 1930s OS map, I see now what you mean. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK I've had a go, really needs the whole template rebuilding properly as an embedded item. Later perhaps. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]