Talk:Rolling stock of the Watercress Line

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).

File:U Class 31806.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:U Class 31806.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 23 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MHR30075.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:MHR30075.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 23 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:45379.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:45379.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 23 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:08288.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:08288.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 23 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:33053.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:33053.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 23 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:45132.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:45132.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Media without a source as of 23 June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I DON'T GET IT!!!

How come every time I try to fix it, the resident steam locomotives go under Pre-Nationalisation coaches!!!??? That's not supposed to happen!!! Thomasfan402 (talk) 18:28, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overhaul and update of Watercress Line articles

I'm under way with an general overhaul and update of the Watercress Line articles, starting with this one. I've already tackled the "operational" steam locos section, removing unsourced and outdated or non-encyclopedic / trivial information, and updating photos. I'm planning to slowly work through the later sections (although suitably referencing wagons etc is challenging if not impossible, let alone knowing whether some of the unrestored ones even still exist). Other than for steam locos, I'm planning to avoid "current status" as it goes out of date so quickly, is impossible to keep track of, and even more impossible to source appropriately. There are far too many steam locos listed in WP articles as "expected to return to steam in 2020" (but still not finished in 2024), or "boiler ticket runs until 2028" (when they are in fact out of use indefinitely awaiting major repairs).

If I ever get that done, I plan to tackle the "Locomotives formerly resident on the Watercress Line" article. My view is that this should be shortened to only locos with a significant history on the line (i.e. not gala/short term visitors), and incorporated to this article as a much smaller list.

Finally, I would like to update and tidy the main Watercress Line page, but I've reached the conclusion that's more easily tackled once the others have been sorted out.

I realise some of the above may be contentious - people may disagree with my approach, hence starting this talk topic for anyone to air their views. Equally, supportive comments and suggestions are appreciated.

Mwsmith20 (talk) 10:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From what you've done so far you're doing a good job, keep it up. For my part I would ditch the status columns, even for locomotives, as you say it goes out of date far too quickly. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed the update of the steam locos, where I've decided to keep the operational ones separated from the others. i've tried to just give each a concise, "non-enthusiast speak" summary. From here on it gets more difficult. I've started updating the diesels, where finding references other than the website is more of a problem. My proposal is to remove status information from these - they are more difficult than the steam locos to keep track of with suitable sources.

Once I get into the rolling stock sections, it all gets much more challenging - any suggestions gratefully received. My view is that it needs a substantial reduction, but I'm not sure I'm brave / bold enough.... Mwsmith20 (talk) 09:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm continuing to slowly update this page, and no one has reverted me yet, which as a relatively inexperienced editor I'll take as a good sign. However, I'm rapidly approaching the "Passenger coaches formerly resident on the Mid Hants Railway (partial list)" section, which suffers from multiple issues - lack of sources, pointless table columns (normally the 2nd one), status / current location info which is unsourced and unlikely to be kept current - I could go on. I'm just posting here again to invite any comments - failing that, I'll tackle it as I see fit, slowly at first to allow any feedback etc. Mwsmith20 (talk) 09:56, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep going, it's looking good so far. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've spent quite a lot of time removing unsourced info from the "carriages formerly resident" lists - mainly adding references from the Railway Heritage Register On-Line (formerly Vintage Carriages Trust) website. However, having reached the BR Mark 2 section, this is just a long tedious list of carriages that were present from the late 90s to early 2000s i.e. when the MHR were operating on the main line. All in all, it makes for lots of long tables of uninteresting info, which I suspect are of little use or interest, and which are almost solely dependent on that single source website.

On that basis, I propose the following "bold" approach":

1) delete all lists of formerly resident rolling stock (except maybe a paragraph or two about any notable ones)

2) make use of this page being shorter by moving the locomotives formerly resident, which are currently here, @Danners430 has recently done us a massive favour on that page, by removing the lengthy unsourced list of short term / gala visitors, making it much easier to tackle what remains - I'd had ambitions of doing this, but wasn't confident / bold enough!

3) the focus of this page will then be current rolling stock, plus significant former locos. Only locomotives will have any current status / location information, and even that will be mainly concentrated on steam locos.

Thoughts? I'll pause editing to enable any comments / suggestions. Mwsmith20 (talk) 13:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've no comments other than it would make sense to merge the two lists. Danners430 (talk) 15:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 October 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved - No consensus to move, no comments in the past week so no need to re-list. FOARP (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC) FOARP (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling stock of the Watercress Line → List of rolling stock on the Watercress Line – Article is a list article; bring title in line with other list articles Danners430 (talk) 11:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:14, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - no further comment needed Mwsmith20 (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose proposed title: Category:Lists of rolling stock lists many other articles which are not in the "List of rolling stock on/of XXX Line" format. "Rolling stock of ..." format has seen usage in other articles as well: Rolling stock of the Croatian Railways, Rolling stock of the Mid-Norfolk Railway. There are a rather high number of articles in the format "List of XXX line/system rolling stock" instead: List of Singapore MRT and LRT rolling stock, List of Isle of Wight Steam Railway locomotives and rolling stock, List of Welsh Highland Railway rolling stock. In addition, a significant number of articles are titled "... rolling stock" as well: Oslo Metro rolling stock, Chicago "L" rolling stock, Shanghai Metro rolling stock. There appears to be no consistency regarding how to name such articles of rolling stocks, so I don't think "bring title in line with other list articles" would be the best reason here. I'm more happy to go with the second and third format instead (List of Watercress Line rolling stock, Watercress Line rolling stock respectively) should the article be moved. S5A-0043^Talk 08:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps then a wider discussion should be held on deciding some kind of uniform format? Danners430 (talk) 08:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so. Perhaps a message can be left on WT:TWP. S5A-0043^Talk 06:26, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.