User talk:Lamberhurst/Archive

Welcome

Hello Lamberhurst, and welcome to Wikipedia! We're really glad you've chosen to sign up for an account; it offers numerous benefits in case you weren't already aware of them.

Thankyou for your contributions if you've been editing before you got this message. If you haven't, don't worry: there are numerous ways you can contribute to Wikipedia if you're not sure where to start yet. Either way, we hope you'll like the place and decide to stay. We all remember what it's like to be new, so don't let others scare you off.

Useful links

Here's some useful links that will help you get started.

•   Wikipedia:How to edit a page - it's a lot easier than you might think.

•   Tutorial - a collection of pages explaining the most important things for contributing to Wikipedia.

•   Sandbox - the best place for trying things out. If previous edits you made to articles have been reverted because they were experimental or unconstructive, this is the place to make test edits.

•   Wikipedia:Where to ask a question - Wikipedia has numerous places for you to put your questions and comments forward.

•   Wikipedia:Five pillars - Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines are summarized here.

•   Wikipedia:Manual of Style - our style guide outlines our standards for ensuring that we present information in a consistent manner that promotes cohesion and professionalism.

Contributing

With these references at hand, we hope you find it easier to contribute to Wikipedia. Here's a brief synopsis of some ways you can:

• We obviously wouldn't have an encyclopedia without articles. This page shows how you can help them grow.

• Removing vandalism and keeping the integrity of articles intact is a great way of contributing. More information on how to do so can be found here.

• Fixing typos, correcting poor grammar and repairing broken links are just some examples of useful, behind the scenes contributions. Even just making things look nice makes using Wikipedia more pleasant for everybody.

• If you like working with images, you might be interested in the Graphic Lab. Similarly, this page shows you how to work with images in Wikipedia articles.

• This page lists the many types of tasks you can do to maintain Wikipedia.

• There are numerous WikiProjects that aim to provide coordination and collaboration on particular subjects. From this list, you can join a project and contribute within an area that interests you.

Of course, there are many ways of contributing, but I hope that this message is helpful to you, and that you'll enjoy editing Wikipedia and continue to do so. You can respond to this message by clicking here if you have a comment or need help - don't forget to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), or you can place {{helpme}} on your talk page and write your query there. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! WilliamH (talk) 16:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Warren Halt

Thank you for your contributions to the Warren Halt railway station article. However, I have removed the photograph from the article, as you have got the wrong location. The article is about a station on the RH&DR near New Romney. Your photograph shows a station on the SE&CR near Folkestone; I will add your photograph to an appropriate article for that station. Both stations had the same name, both were in Kent, and both have closed. Actually, this is my territory - I lived the first half of my life in that part of Kent, and know both Warrens well. Alas, there is no remnant of either station today. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 03:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I've got a reference for the SE&CR's Warren Halt so will add that later today plus opening/closing dates. It would be useful to have a grid reference for each station - if you know their former respective locations, could you add this in? Lamberhurst (talk) 09:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Isfield railway station

On 31 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Isfield railway station, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

My sincerest apologies

I am very sorry I didn't get back to you far sooner about your query for where the topic of the disused station articles had been discussed before. I hope my response on the talk page has satisfied the issues that you had taken with my edit. I'm afraid I don't know I can work the grid references into the article as it stands, if you can tell me how I will gladly go through all of the former stubs and copy the information across to the new article.Grizzlyqi (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Wow.

I've just seen all the work you've done on Wolferton railway station and I'm blown away. Awesome job. Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 11:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hassocks railway station

Thanks for clarifying the acronym and adding the link. Autarch (talk) 12:21, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

GCR

Heya, thanks for your comments. It can be a little debatable on how to order the GCR, since in the later years (and indeed, at present) "up" was towards London, but mileages were from Manchester via Woodhead and Sheffield Victoria. Since most of the more complete pages were adhering to this latter arrangement, I thought it made a little more sense to alter the stub pages to be consistent with the others. However, YMMV!

As for Eydon Road / Eydon Road Halt, I wasn't sure whether to append 'halt' or not. For this area of the line I only have signalbox diagrams rather than station diagrams, so again, feel free to alter - I just added Eydon Road and Chalcombe Road so that it didn't go straight from Woodford Halse to Banbury.

It would be nice one day for there to be a near-complete entry for each major location on the GCR - I tend to add bits here and there. I never did finish the fully annotated history of Rothley station, but hopefully the Belgrave and Birstall article I did will act as a nice template for others to fill in details sometime.

Cheers, Ronstar308 (talk) 10:03, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Haddiscoe High Level / Herringfleet Junction

You seem to have created a redirect loop with these two articles. Mjroots (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Brackley railway station

On 1 January, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brackley railway station, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 09:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for comments

Hi there,

Is a bit long, but can you comment at Template_talk:Euro_adoption_future#I_propose_to_change_the_name_and_the_structure? It will be very much appreciated.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Hellingly Hospital Railway

Just to let you know that my pre-emptive closure of the peer review isn't any attempt to avoid further discussion! While I was restructuring it following your (very helpful!) comments, I realised that we're coming up to the 50th anniversary of the line closure in a couple of months. Because of that, the topic might actually start getting significant coverage for the first time in 50 years; thus, I've deliberately closed the peer review early and taken it to FAC to try to hot-house it through prior to that. Given the shortage of sources, I strongly suspect the Sussex press will use the Wikipedia article as their main source for any features, so I want it in as good a shape as possible by then. Ideally it could even be TFA for March 10 or March 25 (the last service and official closure anniversaries) but I won't hold my breath on that one. – iridescent 18:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Railway stations missing coordinates

I just thought I'd let you know that I've added more stations to User:The Anome/Disused UK railway stations still lacking coordinates as of Nov 2008. Thanks for all your efforts! -- The Anome (talk) 11:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

That Postcard

User:Durova has made a point that hadn't occurred to me at all; that if it's taken off Commons and hosted on Wikipedia, then it's covered by Florida law and not country-of-first-publication law, and since it can be demonstrated to be pre-1923 it is public domain in the US. If it winds up deleted on Commons, that's probably the best way round it. – iridescent 21:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

That's a very good suggestion. When it's deleted on Commons, should it be reuploaded on Wikipedia with the same license? Lamberhurst (talk) 12:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd go with Durova's suggestion, to actually include an explanation that the platform was demolished in 1922 so it must predate the 1923 date which is the "magic" cut-off in US law. The usual arguments for keeping material on Commons instead of on Wikipedia – that other projects can't access it – don't apply in this case, as realistically it's vanishingly unlikely that any foreign-language project will ever cover Cuckoo Line. Once it's on Wikipedia than it takes the pressure off. (Don't upload it to Wikipedia until it's deleted on Commons, though – it's certainly possible that the Commons discussion will end in "keep", which would set a useful precedent for similar images.) – iridescent 14:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Thorne Lock and Thorne (Old)

Are you sure about those dates for the two stations? Because to me the text in the articles seems more plausible -- Thorne Lock opening first, and then the line being extended to Thorne (Old) nearer the town centre, as the S&YR built its canalside line onwards towards Keadby.

Thoughts? Jheald (talk) 23:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Good, so your map agrees with our text that the one to the west came first, then the one nearer to the centre of town. That does make sense, I think.

So we know what was where, and when it was built, we just need to decide what to call them :-).

The 1853 Ordnance Survey map at OldMaps.co.uk seems to only show one actual lock, which is very close to the first station. So it does make sense, I think, to call that one Thorne Lock. The name Thorne (Old) was presumably sourced from the book Franks, The South Yorkshire Railway, that Tudorminstrel (talk · contribs) cited when he created the article; and it doesn't seem an unreasonable name for that second station. But if your map calls it "Thorne Lock (2nd)", then let's note that and add it to the article text.

Does that seem reasonable? Jheald (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Bala Junction railway station‎

Are you disputing that this station has any history - the information is Historical whether or not the station still exists. Look at where the {{Historical Rail Start}} or {{Historical Rail Insert}} is used elsewhere, it provides the historical data as to the original company that built the station, and in most cases the pregrouping company. This applies whether or the station is disused. Using the {{Historical Rail Start}} or {{Historical Rail Insert}} does not infer that the station is open or closed - see Johnstone North as an example of a closed station with associated line closed (in fact a Morrison's store has been built on the site), and then compare with Johnstone which has the National Rail and Historical details.

Now look back as Bala Junction, the route box information is Historical, there is no National Rail, Heritage Rail, etc section - so qed Historical is correct. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 15:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

With respect, I believe you are confusing the {{Historical Rail Start}} and {{Disused Rail Start}} templates. The former only applies to closed stations on open lines, whereas the latter applies to closed stations on closed lines. The issue of the reference to the previous operator is neither here nor there, as there is no rule about what company should be indicated in the routebox; furthermore the information about which company constructed the line is (or should be) contained in the infobox as will be the subsequent operators. Johnstone North is imho wrongly categorised, but as it's north of the border, I'll leave it. Lamberhurst (talk) 16:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

OK we leave it as is with the disused template. Most of my work has been in on Scottish lines and the Johnstone example is the way that most of the Scottish stations have been dealt with. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 18:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Stations missing geographical coordinates

Thanks for adding the missing stations to the list. The reason they were not picked up by the bot was that it only looked 3 levels down the category tree (UK/country within the UK/county), and the stations in question had an extra level of subcategorization, below the county level. I've now set the bot to look 4 levels down the tree, and running it after doing so has now added a substantial number of new entries to the list: see this diff. -- The Anome (talk) 10:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Shakespeare Cliff Halt railway station

On June 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shakespeare Cliff Halt railway station, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Giants27 09:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Chrisbot

This bot changes the CONT icons so that they follow the naming decisions (as decided here). The icons may face the wrong way for a day, but this is really minimal and only temporary. ChrisDHDR 18:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Issue has been raised at WP:AN regarding this bots edits. Mjroots (talk) 21:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Icon request

A while ago you added an icon request (Wikipedia_talk:Route_diagram_template/Catalog_of_pictograms#Icon request) - did you ever get your icons? -mattbuck (Talk) 11:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Watlington and Princes Risborough Railway halts

Thankyou for your Lewknor Bridge Halt railway station and Kingston Crossing Halt railway station articles. I hope you won't be too offended that I have slightly condensed both articles, for example by rearranging sentences from the passive to the active voice and so on to say the same thing in fewer words. In each article you had two sentences saying that the halt was closed in 1957, plus the infobox also gives 1957 as the year of closure. In each case I therefore removed one of the sentences and amended the other.

If you are writing one for Wainhill Crossing Halt railway station as well, please accept my thanks in advance. There's not yet an article about the hamlet that it tried to serve. I've added Henton, Oxfordshire to the "South Oxfordshire" place-names template, and whenever the article is created I'll try to make sure it gets a link to Wainhill Crossing Halt.

Have you photo's of any of the halts? You could try asking User:Bruern Crossing, who has added historic photo's of some of the stations on the Witney Railway and works as a guard on the Chinnor and Princes Risborough Railway. Motacilla (talk) 23:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou for the message on my talk page. Thankyou too for creating the Bledlow Bridge Halt railway station article, which I failed to notice yesterday. The Chinnor & Princes Risborough Railway website agrees with the photographs you have seen, including the word "Crossing" in "Wainhill Crossing Halt". The name could have been changed during the 51 years it was open, but it seems unlikely. I would be inclined to believe the photographs of the station signs, as even an otherwise authoritative written source can include inadvertent errors. Have you asked User:Bruern Crossing, who works on the C&PRR? Motacilla (talk) 21:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Mitchell & Smith (Branch Lines to Princes Risborough) have a photo (fig. 104) of the station showing "Wainhill Crossing" on the board, and a ticket to "Wainhill (Halt)". In the introduction is a 1956 timetable showing "Wainhill Halt". OS one-inch (6th edn) sheet 159 shows the station at grid reference SP765013 - it's unnamed, shown merely as "Halt" - nearby are "Hempton Wainhill" and "Wain Hill". Somewhere else, I've seen Wain Hill spelled as two words in the context of the station, but cannot find the instance. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Railway stations templates for Oxfordshire

I didn't find time previously to answer your suggestion of a template for closed railway stations in Oxfordshire. Bedfords, Bucks, Cambs, Cheshire, Essex, Herts, the Isle of Wight, Kent, Lincs, Norfolk, Northants and Suffolk already have them, so I guess it might be remiss for Oxon. not to! Cornwall, Cumbria, Devon, Gloucs. and Norfolk have templates for railway stations that are open, so this might be worth doing as well. Currently an urgent project in the real World is limiting my Wikipedia time. If you want to create either or both of the templates for Oxfordshire, please go ahead! Motacilla (talk) 15:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I was considering getting something together rather like {{Railway stations in Berkshire}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I have created {{Railway stations in Oxfordshire}}, it shows all 22 open stations in Oxon, and is based on what's already been done for Berks & Bucks - please check, and comment. In particular, I've twigged that the stations are listed alphabetically, and that junction stas like Oxford get listed multiple times; but have I got the lines in the correct order? If OK, I'll add it to the 22 open stations. Also, who should I inform of its existence, and how? --Redrose64 (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I have also created {{Closed stations Oxfordshire}} but so far there's very little in it. I'm going line by line, and want to ensure each line is complete before moving onto the next. In this case however, I have been adding it to articles. The presence of a station in the template usually means that the template is in the relevant article. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:05, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Redrose64, the orders of lines in the {{Railway stations in county}} templates is not precise. I think the others are loosely ordered by their geography. At least I think that's what I did for Bucks and Berks! Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 07:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

You added the Varsity line to {{Closed stations Oxfordshire}} about 2 minutes before I was going to! However, you put the stations in route sequence order, rather than alphabetically - is that the defined standard? I used alphabetic on both of the Oxon templates, to match {{Railway stations in Buckinghamshire}}.

Also, you missed out Oxford Road Halt; whilst there is a proposal for Water Eaton Parkway, that won't be on exactly the same site but somewhat to the east - the A4165 bridge goes over the Oxford Road Halt station site, and I doubt there's enough room to build a new platform. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

That's a good question - I don't know and I was following what User:Efficacy had done on his templates for other counties. There's no reason why it shouldn't be alphabetic order - I'll change it including Oxford Rd Halt. By the way, were there any stations on the Wantage Tramway which should be mentioned here? Lamberhurst (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Only Wantage and I've included that under "Short branches". The situation at Wantage Road is odd, because of the tramway neither having its own passenger station nor sharing Wantage Road GWR - passenger trams picked up in a siding in the goods yard. Have a look at my sandbox - I'm trying to work out the best way of representing it. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:03, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The first diagram looks right - you could try contacting User:Sameboat as he's done most of the CPIC icons which you're probably after. What about stations on the Bicester Military Railway? There were army stations at Arncott and Piddington, but these were only open for a short time, perhaps too obscure for the template? Lamberhurst (talk) 20:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Rightly or wrongly, I've always considered the Bicester Military Railway to be "off limits". I acknowledge its existence, but don't ask too many qs in case the Redcaps arrive. I think the fundamental q is: was there ever a public station within the complex? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

No public stations, but i've included private stations on other templates, e.g. Cardington Workmen's Platform in Beds. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wantage Tramway, I have discovered, had just one station which actually looked like one (with platform and roof), ie Wantage; but several others (see my updated sandbox) where trams would stop for passengers. Tickets were printed for "Grove Bridge" etc. so these must have been official stops. Now, the Wantage Tramway was built under the Tramways Act 1870, so should other similarly-authorised tramways within Oxfordshire be included? Admittedly, the only one which springs to mind is the City of Oxford and District Tramways Co. Ltd. who are what you might describe as a typical city tram system rather than the country roadside line serving Wantage. This being the case, there will be no stations as such, but a plethora of stops - Cornmarket, High Street, Queen Street, St. Aldates etc.; see Oxford Bus Company#History --Redrose64 (talk) 22:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I think a distinction has to be drawn between tramways like Wantage, Wisbech and Brill which operated pretty much like rural branch lines or light railways and "ordinary" exclusively-passenger carrying urban trams which had more in common with trolleybuses than railways. So no, I wouldn't include the Oxford Bus Company. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Route box direction

I see that you've inverted the routebox for Iffley Halt. Is there a W-E convention for routeboxes then? When I created the article, I merely went with precedent of Littlemore as it stood at the time. I see that you've exchanged Littlemore too. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

DN&S improvement

If you check Talk:Disused railway stations (Didcot, Newbury and Southampton Railway) you'll see that I already have some ideas about that article. Further, I have been through every station in modern-day Oxfordshire, and have noted that:

• every one of the 22 open stations has an article in its own right;
• two closed stations (Upton & Blewbury and Churn) are merged into a general article for that line;
• 49 closed stations have individual articles
• 13 closed stations (Towersey Halt, Horspath Halt, Morris Cowley, Wainhill Crossing Halt, Abingdon Road Halt, Hinksey Halt, Kidlington, Bletchington, Fritwell and Somerton, Shipton-on-Cherwell Halt, Blenheim & Woodstock, Cropredy, Faringdon) have no article at all.

Stations where the location has changed seem to have no firm consensus. In the case of Abingdon Junction, there are separate articles for both it and Radley; whilst for Moulsford, that's covered by Cholsey. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

DN&S - I've replied on that page. Closed stations - Wainhill Crossing Halt and Towersey Halt are now done. Morris Cowley and Horspath Halt should be done soon; ditto Blenheim & Woodstock and Shipton-on-Cherwell. But I have very little on any of the others. I think there's still scope for a Moulsford article given that it's far enough away from Cholsey to merit its own article. Upton & Blewbury and Churn should both (eventually) have individual articles as per my comments on the DN&S page. I think that the bottom line is that every station gets its own article except where a new station has reopened at the same location or has been rebuilt within a short distance of the original station, as was the case with Quainton Road and Hurst Green. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Kingham railway station

I saw what you did this morning to Kingham railway station. I looked at the rest of the article and realised that not only was it a bit scanty, some things were downright wrong - built in the 1840s? Extensions to King's Sutton and Cheltenham in the 1870s? Hmmm. Anyway, have a look now. Is it still "Stub" class, or can we upgrade to "Start" (maybe even "C", he hopes...)? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Good work on Kingham, looks much better. The red link to Cheltenham - does that refer to Malvern Road or Spa? I hope I was right in thinking that it saw OWW services. Classing articles is not an exact science and most either get "stub" (really basic) or "start" (a bit more) from me. Going any higher would I think need somebody unconnected with the article to have a look. Imho, Kingham is at least a "B" now, maybe even more if Wolverton to Newport Pagnell Line is anything to go by. There's also the wider question of how high a rating a station article can get: I've put just about as much as I can into Tunbridge Wells West and it's still a "B" like St Pancras, the only higher rated stations I know being Temple Meads, Cromer (undeserved imho) and Jordanhill (also). Maybe once you've feel that there's no more to add to Kingham, you could post a message on the project page and ask for somebody to assess it? Lamberhurst (talk) 18:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The line diagram on the B&CDR page implies that it was possible to run into Cheltenham Lansdown (the Midland station), which agrees with (a) the Railway Clearing House junction diagram of 1910; (b) the Midland Railway Distance Diagram of 1911-23 (sheet 51); (c) the OS 1:2500 plan of 1923. However, the Ian Allan pre-group atlas, and and a different large-scale map that I've seen (but can't now find) suggest otherwise: a double reversal would be needed. Perhaps this only became necessary after the quadrupling between Lansdown Junc and Standish Junc.

Thus, the Cheltenham station would initially have been St. James's Square, and Hemmings agrees; Cheltenham (Malvern Road) opened 30 March 1908 and is also likely to have been served. Cheltenham High Street Halt opd 1 October 1908 but I doubt if Banbury/Kingham services ran that far. See diagram on Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway to see how the stations in Cheltenham lay with respect to each other; however that omits High Street, so see also Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway.

According to MacDermot and also Hemmings, Hatherley Curve was opened at the same time as the Kingham flyover, so Lansdown Junction became a triangle, thus giving direct access to Gloucester and enabling a direct run from Banbury to South Wales. Is that worth noting on the Kingham article, or does it belong on the B&CD art? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Probably best left to the B&CDR article, except for the flyover which is probably worth a mention. I'll change the Cheltenham red link to St James. Lamberhurst (talk) 07:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

It would appear from Railway Magazine December 1965, p.728, that the final names for the two Cheltenham stations redlinked above were Cheltenham Spa Malvern Road and Cheltenham Spa St. James, note lack of parenthesis on the former and punctuation on the latter, and presence of "Spa" on both. Do we have enough to create stubs? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:21, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Just about enough for stub status if you add in Butt as well. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

People keep saying "Butt" to me (or is that "but ... but ..!"). Anyway, I bought two relevant books yesterday, one was published just a few days beforehand:

• Butt, R.V.J. (1995). The Directory of Railway Stations. Yeovil: Patrick Stephens Ltd. ISBN 1 85260 508 1. R508.
• Mitchell, Vic; Smith, Keith (2009). Banbury to Cheltenham. Country Railway Routes. Midhurst: Middleton Press. ISBN 978 1 906008 63 5. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

--Redrose64 (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Butt appreciation society, you may find {{Template:Butt-Stations}} handy (now you need Clinker for the goods withdrawal dates). Back to Reading South - if your hesitation is that Butt contradicts Matthews, I would go for the dates contained in Butt. The reason is because this Countrywide Books series is nice but contains quite a few errors, esp. the books written by Oppitz. Re the new Mitchell publication, does it have anything on St. James or Malvern Rd? Lamberhurst (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I am aware of Template:Butt-Stations (and also Category:Rail transport book citation templates in general) but find these templates somewhat inflexible - if you use them for one-stage referencing, they don't allow the page, chapter etc. to be specified; if used for two-stage referencing, there is no link from the short note to the citation template. I'm considering adding code like this:

| ref = {{{ref|}}}

which will allow something like |ref=harv to be specified, and which will be passed through to {{cite book}} without being changed.

Butt amplifies Matthews; the former gives precise dates whereas the latter just states "when nationalisation came ... it was decided to rename the SER station as Reading Southern to avoid confusion with the GWR Reading station, which became Reading General". I've used the dates from Butt; Matthews now provides the inspiration for "to distinguish it from the adjacent Western Region (ex-GWR) station (which became Reading General at the same time)". I have encountered Oppitz, but as yet have not drawn anything from his works.

Mitchell & Smith cover several stations. Final names (according to Butt) are:

• Cheltenham Leckhampton railway station (closed 15 October 1962) - figs. XIX, 105-107
• (figs. XX, 108, 109 cover Lansdown Junction)
• Cheltenham Spa Malvern Road railway station (closed 1966) - figs. XXI, XXII, 110-114  stub created
• Cheltenham Spa St. James railway station (closed 1966) - figs. XXIII, 115-120  stub created

The latter two are also covered in

• Mitchell, Vic; Smith, Keith (1998). Stratford upon Avon to Cheltenham. Country Railway Routes. Midhurst: Middleton Press. ISBN 1 901706 25 7. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

which also covers Cheltenham High Street Halt railway station (closed 1917) and Cheltenham Racecourse railway station (closed 1968, reopened 1971, closed 1976). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Whoopps, I have cited Oppitz (see Maidenhead Boyne Hill railway station#History, ref. 3), but luckily he's backed up by others. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I should have something on Boyne Hill - I'll try to dig it out. Btw, I've managed to get hold of a copy of Audie Baker's history of the Cheltenham - Stratford line, so once it arrives, I may be able to help you out on any new Cheltenham articles. Btw 2, if you've never seen Vic Mitchell in the flesh, this short BBC clip about the Cranleigh Line is worth a gander: [1]. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Salehurst halt

Are you sure that the track is being laid from Robertsbridge? I thought it was being extended from Bodiam. Mjroots (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

From what I understand, track (or at least ballast) is (or was) being laid from both ends. The initial plan was from Robertsbridge ([2] see Sept entry), and when the RVR received the recent cash injection, track-laying began from the Bodiam end. That said, I was at Junction Rd Halt today and saw no sign of activity and from your image of Salehurst, nothing much seems to be happening there either. A sign has nevertheless appeared nearby at Northbridge Street [3] and the RVR has confirmed it owns the line between there and Robertsbridge [4]. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Uffington

I see that you've recently edited Uffington. Please see Template talk:Great Western Main Line diagram#Uffington and the Faringdon Branch and comment if you can. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wealden Line template

Can I ask a favour? Would you re-write the {{Wealden Line}} so that Lewes is at the bottom? I'm currently rewriting the Ouse Valley Railway article and it's too confusing trying to work out where the line would have joined and left the Wealden Line around Uckfield (don't want to get directions wrong etc). Mjroots (talk) 06:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Diagram expanded, I think I've got it correct. Have a look and make any corrections needed. Mjroots (talk) 09:51, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Re the diagram, I'm not sure all the icons exist to show the line in light blue. I've no objection to a change. The legend at the bottom of the diagram should make it clear - it's a similar principle to the Réseau des Bains de Mer diagram. Mjroots (talk) 16:55, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Ouse Valley Railway recent edits

Well, that's weird. As far as I know all I did was put a disambiguation link to a village after inserting a missing symbol that affected the format of the article. Any idea why all that text changed? Thanks for spotting and correcting, by the way. Britmax (talk) 15:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Magdalen Gate railway station

I'm not sure I quite understand your comments against Magdalen Gate railway station, and certainly TheAnomebot doesn't. Would you fancy taking this up directly with The Anome, or else amending your comments to make them either human or machine understandable. Great work on the 1850 stations, btw. -Tagishsimon (talk) 11:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

oops. Thought I'd checked, but obviously not. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, my rambling comments which only just about make sense to me now :-) Please delete as required. I had looked at the 1906/1907 "old-map.co.uk" and saw text that may have been station related at a point where the line and a road crossed, and suggested that point by means of coords from the npe map. Your npe coords are to the east of mine on another road/line crossing nearer the river. What did you use as a source? (I'm on the lookout for books to put on the Xmas list).Efficacy (talk) 19:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to respectfully leave it to the two of you to decide which of the two coordinates should go forwards. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

So much for that. I followed Efficacy's trail, and the 1907 map at old-maps shows the station ... what ... underneath and probably to the left of the road bridge. I found the 559272, 310416 reference more compelling and went with it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I use Colonel Cobb's atlas as my source [5]. I find that there's just no comparison with Jowett or Crowther, as every line and station is plotted on OS maps, including opening and closure dates, plus the company which built the line. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Cobb is expensive; however, some portions of it have also been printed in smaller volumes at GBP 20.00 each. I have three of those, of which one is directly relevant:

• McCarthy, Colin; McCarthy, David (2007). Norfolk and Suffolk. Railways of Britain. Hersham: Ian Allan. ISBN 978-0-7110-3223-1. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

Map 17, section A1 shows Magdalen Gate, and in the appendix (p.110) we have opd 1 March 1848, closed 1 August 1866. Notes on the East Anglian Rly. are on pp.10-11 --Redrose64 (talk) 22:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Kidlington railway station

Nice expansion. According to Awdry, the original junction (nb not junction station) for the Woodstock branch was at the point of divergence 1 mile N of Kidlington station, and "on 4 August 1890 the GWR obtained powers to extend the branch, parallel to its own line, from the junction to Kidlington (Woodstock Road) station, the same Act authorising it to work the line" - I don't think you mentioned that.

• Awdry, Christopher (1990). Encyclopaedia of British Railway Companies. London: Guild Publishing. p. 53. CN 8983.

DYK that it's possible to get the short refs under "References" to link to the full book titles under "Sources"? There are several ways. The two I've had most success with can be seen by examination of Abingdon Road Halt railway station - which uses well-documented methods - and also Hinksey Halt railway station - which uses newer but less well-documented methods; these are shorter and somewhat easier to code than those used in the former. Would you like me to apply such a technique to Kidlington railway station? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Jenkins would seem to disagree with Awdry about the junction - (p. 62) "The Blenheim & Woodstock branch was linked to the main line by a scissors crossover at the north end of Kidlington's down platform [...]". Jenkins also refers to Kidlington as a "junction station". Do we have a similar situation here as with Uffington? Re the system of referencing - yes, your approach is much better and I must admit that I was just too lazy to do it here, but will make more of an effort in the future! Lamberhurst (talk) 21:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

It's not the same as Uffington (below), rather it's more like Moulsford because the junction and point of divergence were far from each other (about a mile I think). Mitchell & Smith "Didcot to Banbury" have a OS 25 inch:1 mile map as figure XIV, where there is indeed a scissors crossing - the eastern side of this is the down main; the western side has at the southern end the bay platform, and at the northern end there are points leading to the Woodstock line and also a goods loop. Caption reads

... It is often stated that the station opened as "Langford Lane" in 1850 and became "Woodstock Road" in July 1855. However, recent research points to the 1850 station being further north, on the road to Bletchingdon, and named "Woodstock". The station shown here was recorded in the local press as opening on 1st June 1855 as "Woodstock Road", having inexplicably stood empty for two years. ...

The "Woodstock" referred to here is the original name of the station at Bletchington.

Referencing: there you go. I used the {{sfn}} method as per Hinksey Halt railway station which additionally scores in that it has automatically decided that only 15 entries needed to be put into the {{reflist}} as opposed to 21. Unfortunately that method wouldn't handle the {{cite web}} for the simple reason that the website has no author credited; accordingly I kept that single one as <ref></ref>, but added an internal link which works in the same way. Luckily, neither Butt nor Jowett have inline references; they wouldn't be linkable unless those templates were modified. I've an idea how to do that...

The Uffington situation I'm still unhappy about. I shall stick my thoughts on Template talk:Great Western Main Line diagram#Uffington and the Faringdon Branch. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Wolvercot Platform

Only one platform? There were two tracks, so 1 plat is unlikely unless there were single-direction services (see Denton or Reddish South). Further, see Mitchell & Smith "Didcot to Banbury", fig. 65; careful study shows two: examine (a) the fence posts and rails; (b) the station nameboards; (c) the lamposts; (d) the pagoda, on the right-hand side of which the roof corner of a second pagoda is just visible; (e) through the open frame of one platform deck the other may just be made out. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry - most stations which "platform" in their name tend to be in my experience single-platform structures. This would appear to be an exception to that rule! Lamberhurst (talk) 17:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll lift a passage from Booker, Frank (1985) [1977]. The Great Western Railway: A New History (2nd ed.). Newton Abbot: David & Charles. pp. 112–113. ISBN 0 946537 16 X.:

Following closely on the halts and designed to meet a somewhat similar need came the 'platform' (a term the GWR borrowed from Scotland where it had been in use before the end of the nineteenth century), the difference between the two terms providing a nice distinction in railway terminology which time later blurred ... they were mainly on branch lines where the rail motor services were not suitable. Providing longer platforms than halts, they were served by short trains formed of ordinary coaches. Halts were generally unstaffed; platforms were usually served by senior grade porters who booked passengers, parcels and sometimes milk.

Page 112 also explains why the early GWR term for a Halt was "Halte", see Trumpers Crossing Halt --Redrose64 (talk) 17:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I've expanded Train station#Halts accordingly --Redrose64 (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I've found two unidirectional stations on the GWR! On the Machen-Caerphilly route (ex-Brecon & Merthyr Rly) there was a place (grid reference ST1988) where the up and down lines diverged from one another, with separate stations 660 yards apart, one on each line. They appear in this:

• British Railways Pre-Grouping Atlas and Gazetteer (Map) (Fifth ed.). Ian Allan. 1976. p. 43. § B3. ISBN 0 7110 0320 3.

Waterloo (ref. 28 on the Ian Allan map) was at ST195883 on the up (east-west) line, and Fountain Bridge (ref. 27) was at ST190885 on the down (west-east) line. A photo of Waterloo appears in:

• Lewis, John (1991). "Haltes". Great Western Auto-Trailers. Vol. Part One: Pre-Grouping Vehicles. Didcot: Wild Swan. p. 7. ISBN 0 906867 99 1.

It was a series of boards laid on a gravel base, with one lampost and a station nameboard reading simply "Waterloo". Fountain Bridge was probably the same. They are not shown on this map File:Barry Juncn, Caerphilly, Enerurglyn & Penrhos Brynamman RJD 94.jpg (and neither is the up line) but Fountain Bridge was positioned between the junction for the Tin Works and Machen junction. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Fascinating - would be worth an article if you've got enough material. Cobb shows both on the short section of parallel track between Gwaunybara Junction and Machen. Interesting, as well as Waterloo Halt and Fountain Bridge Halt (both 1908-1956), the map also shows a White Hart Halt (1947-1952) at grid reference ST204891 which had a platform on each line, the northernmost marked "Down" and the other "Up". It seems as well that the Down platform saw services on the adjacent Machen - Rhymney Lower line. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I have found a photo of Wolvercot Platform taken from a bridge. It's in

• Lewis, John (2004). Great Western Steam Railmotors and their services. Didcot: Wild Swan. p. ii. ISBN 1 874103 96 8.

Most definitely 2 platform faces; but 3 tracks. One track - the up goods loop - has no platform face. Each platform has a wooden deck, corrugated iron pagoda, nameboard, fence and at least 5 gas lamposts. Nameboards state "Wolvercot Platform", singular, no "e" on "Wolvercot", words are one above the other. Photo is uncredited, but probably the copyright of the book applies, so not available to scan in. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:34, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You could try and upload a reduced-size version under a fair use licence - see Christ's Hospital and Bramber for two that I've done. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Library

Your library appears to be better organised than mine. Not fair. Boo, hoo hoo... --Redrose64 (talk) 16:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, although I've got to hand you the credit for giving me the idea to put it together. I'm about half way through and am thinking about adding a section for useful articles from journals.

I note you've altered some of your books' publication dates from eg. |date=February 2007 to eg. |year=February 2007 - I'd like to mention that if you intend to link shortened footnotes to full citations, with either {{harvnb}} or {{sfn}}, it probably won't work. Try |month=February |year=2007. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering how to deal with those particular cases. I made the changes after seeing a bot alter date to year in a few cases. Lamberhurst (talk) 08:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Braunstone Gate Bridge

Thanks for your kind comment. I've since added another photo of the bridge that I took eight days after the last - even less of it remains. Now it's gone altogether. Another piece of mindless vandalism on the part of a city coucil that should have known better.

I've had a fascination with the old Great Central line for over 30 years now. Although I never travelled on it (I was only 11 when the section through Leicester closed and I lived in Gloucestershire at that time), my grandfather used to tell me stories about times when he used the line. In May 1978 I walked the entire length from Aylesbury to Woodhouse, Sheffield in six days. I've been back to most of it since, a stretch here, a stretch there, taking hundreds of photographs. Eventually I would like to compile my own website on the remains of the line. There are other excellent sites like this already - I'm not saying mine will be better or worse that any of these - just another one to choose from, really. We're all mad I'm sure, but this is one type of madness I'm glad to say I suffer from!

Kind regards Tonythepixel (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Great Central

Hello Lamberhurst

Back in May 1978 I took a fair number of photos when I walked the line, mostly of station sites and other major features such as Brackley Viaduct and Catesby Tunnel. At that time Brackley Viaduct still stood (minus its parapet walls) but they'd just started drilling the holes for the explosives. I was back there on 4 July 1978 to see part of it come down (they did an arch at a time), and photographed it just as it went. So much more has gone since then - Willoughby Viaduct, the Avon Viaduct and Birdcage Bridge at Rugby, most of the Leicester and Nottingham Viaducts, the bridge over Nottingham Midland station, Bulwell Viaduct etc etc etc.

Between 1978 and 1982 I attempted to compile a photographic record of the whole route from Aylesbury northwards, photographing almost every bridge (and I'm not the only one to have done this, honest!) I managed to complete Aylesbury to Quorn & Woodhouse, plus the whole of the route through Nottingham, when the family moved to North Wales and this made such expeditions less financially attractive and so they largely ground to a halt. Many of the scenes I photographed have changed beyond recognition in the years since, but might be useful in "before and after" comparisons. Also, I wasn't exactly using a state-of-the-art camera.

My situation has much improved in recent years. Now that I can get back out there a bit more, and I can still scrabble about on overgrown embankments and paddle along waterlogged cuttings in the middle of nowhere and kid myself that I'm still young and fit (I'm actually 52), then these things are not going to photograph themselves!

And as for the water tower at Woodford Halse...I haven't seen it with my own eyes since 1980, but it appears on Google Earth and I've seen a photo of it taken only last year. In theory it should still be there, although the industrial estate that occupies the site of the locomotive depot is being extended northwards towards its location.

Hope this is of interest to you

Cheers now Tonythepixel (talk) 20:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Brackley Central

Hello Lamberhurst

I've done some work on the article on Brackley Central station, expanding the article to describe the station layout, adding three photographs (one shows the remains of the viaduct), and touching on the unbuilt branch line to Northampton. Although there is a source of sorts for this info, this is quite sketchy and so I'm keeping a lookout for something more substantial. Please look also at the article's "Discussion" page. If anything shows up, feel free to add it to the article.

Regards Tonythepixel (talk) 01:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Railways Barnstar
		For attending to the referencing of the Hawkhurst Branch Line article, which is now fully referenced instead of having just one reference in the whole article. Mjroots (talk) 17:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Rugby-Leamington line

Hi Lamberhurst, I'm replying about the Leamington_to_Rugby_line article.

Regarding the change of article name, I'll give a few more days to see if anyone else responds.

Re merging Weedon to Leamington Spa line into the asrticle, that makes sense I think. I've got some additional text already written about th Weedon-Daventry-Marton jct line - I'll look it out. (This is a copy of my replay on the article's talk page. Cheers, Andy F (talk) 18:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Hawkhurst Branch Line

Hi, I was thinking of rewriting this one, but realised it was a big task once I started trying. Once the article is fully referenced, it could possibly make GA class. What do you think? Mjroots (talk) 15:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I've added in the 1922 timetable, but can't get the ref to link. No ISBN is given for the book that I can find. Mjroots (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I've managed to sort the ref out. Mjroots (talk) 09:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Further sources - Railway Modeller, January 1989 and February 1994. Mjroots (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Track plans are all externally linked from the relevant station articles. It may be worth adding a subsection under "Traffic" giving brief details of each station and its facilities. Mjroots (talk) 08:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Re the "Background" section, do you have a ref for no large landowners or wealthy industrialist. It's not on Harding p4 or p5. Mjroots (talk)

Re the track diagrams - the station ones can go in the station articles - once they are in a fit state to do so. The diagrams for Churn and Pattenden sidings are ready to use, but I'd really like them to be normally collapsed. I'll ask over at the template talk page about this. I've added a bit more info from the Railway Magazine article but can't get the ref to link to the sources. I'm not really familiar with this method of referencing but as you added all the refs in the first place I'm not going to throw my toy out of the pram over it. Maybe you'll be able to fix it? Mjroots (talk) 08:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I did notice that fact about the C&PWR article, but that editor only edited for a short time. By all means give Redrose64 a shout, the more eyes on the article the better. No doubt you've noticed I nominated the article for GA status. 09:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

What do you make of this? Anything that can be usefully incorporated into the article? Mjroots (talk) 13:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

An editor has now started the assessment for GA status. No comments yet though. Mjroots (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

A challenge

June 10, 2011 (50th anniversary of closure) - Todays Featured Article - Hawkhurst Branch Line.

We've got 18 months to get the article to FA status and then get it booked in as the day's FA. What do you think? Mjroots (talk) 08:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that I don't like long deadlines. I'm always saying "well, it's not due yet, I'll look at it tomorrow" - but tomorrow never comes.

Anyway, I have fixed up the ref linking so that all the short notes now link to the relevant book or journal, here's a composite diff of my changes. There were four; I shall explain from to to bottom (which is not the order in which I did them).

• Removed "February" from the {{sfn|Vallance|February 1955|p=125}}. The Harvard-style linking does not use months - it's built up from surname(s) and year.
• Changed the 1998 to 1999 in {{sfn|Garrett|1998|p=49}} because the only book credited to Garrett has |date=1999.
• Changed |date=2003 to |year=2003 in the {{cite book}} for Oppitz (see below).
• Added |ref=harv to {{cite journal}} for Vallance. Whilst doing that, I also split |date=February 1955 into its components |month=February and |year=1955 which was possibly unnecessary, a note on that later.

Of these, the real puzzle was Oppitz. The way that the {{cite book}} and {{citation/core}} templates work, if there is no |year= they attempt to extract the year from |date=. In this case it was failing; a check of the HTML source showed this:

<span class="citation book" id="CITEREFOppitz2010">Oppitz, Leslie (2003). <i>Lost Railways of Kent</i>. (etc.)

look at the id attribute of the <span> tag - for some reason, it believed the book to be "Oppitz 2010"; my assumption is that it couldn't get a year either way, and fell back on the current year. It's a mystery why the same problem does not affect Course, Garrett, Harding and the others where |date= was used instead of |year=.

Regarding the splitting of |date= into |month= and |year= on Vallance - that might not have been necessary, but it's my belief that |date= should only be used if you have a full date - if you just have year and month, or year only, use the relevant fields. I have found in the past that using |date= for a non-full date can cause problems, and Oppitz above is an example of it occurring.

Some more observations on the {{cite book}} templates:

• On the Hart one only one of |date=2000 and |year=2000 need to be specified. Since there is no full date, I suggest dropping |date=2000
• Hart doesn't come up in any {{sfn}} templates, so really it should be under "Further reading", per MOS:APPENDIX
• On the Scott-Morgan one, |id=ISBN 978-0-86093-616-9 is not the best way, instead use |isbn=978-0-86093-616-9

Regarding the use of {{ref}} and {{note}} for the Sectional Appendix notes - I expect that it was done that way because there is no author. However, it's possible to do it in similar style to the others, using the {{SfnRef}} template (note capital R in SfnRef).

• Move the existing {{cite book}} to be with the others, I suggest either first or last because there is no credited author; and to it, add this field: |ref={{SfnRef|Sectional appendix|1960}} and remove the |page=p35
• In the text, instead of {{ref|1|1}}, use {{sfn|Sectional appendix|1960|p=35}}

I think that's all. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Before I start making other suggestions, book lists etc. - I'm concerned that other editors might not notice them - so why are we discussing this here rather than at Talk:Hawkhurst Branch Line? --Redrose64 (talk) 10:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I've copied the discussion over to the article talk page. Mjroots (talk) 07:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

This user helped promote Hawkhurst Branch Line to good article status.

A reward for all your hard work. Mjroots (talk) 18:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Cheltenham Spa Malvern Road railway station

Starting a fresh thread, although some stuff is still at #Kingham railway station.

Re the routebox. I'm not too happy with mentioning the B&CD and Honeybourne Line whilst omitting the C&GWU; here's why:

• The first line through Malvern Road was the C&GWU (opened 1847), from Swindon & Gloucester via Churchdown to Cheltenham St. James.
• The next line to connect in was the B&CD (opened 1881)
• The line to Honeybourne was opd in 1906
• MSWJ services arrived in 1958

Is there a form of rail line template which will give something like this:

Cheltenham (St James)		Great Western Railway Banbury and Cheltenham Direct Railway		Cheltenham Leckhampton
		Great Western Railway Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway		Churchdown
Cheltenham High Street Halt		Great Western Railway Honeybourne Line

--Redrose64 (talk) 22:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You caught me whilst I was just in the middle of tweaking the routebox to add in the C&GWU. The problem with your proposed template above is that Honeybourne services went no further south than Malvern Road. Secondly, were C&GWU services pathed via Leckhampton? On another point, I assume I will need to find an author/editor name in order to make the Railway Times reference operate using the sfn template? Lamberhurst (talk) 22:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The local Honeybourne line services (whether to Honeybourne or Stratford-upon-Avon) mostly terminated at Malvern Road, yes; and of these, about one a day reversed there and ran to St James. However, the through services to/from Birmingham Snow Hill along that line mostly ran on after Cheltenham (Malvern Road), to Bristol. These were introduced on completion of the Birmingham & North Warwickshire line in July 1908.

Not sure how you read the diagram as showing C&GWU services running via Leckhampton; reading the row across, we have

Cheltenham (St James) - Great Western Railway Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway - Churchdown

after which they either ran via Gloucester (Central), or direct avoiding Gloucester; in both cases, they ran to Stonehouse (Burdett Road).

To use an anonymous source, see how I did it at Cheltenham Spa St. James railway station, the sentence beginning "In 1904 the station was able to handle goods ..." Basically, on the {{cite book}} or {{cite journal}}, instead of using |ref=harv, you use |ref={{SfnRef|desc|year}} , and make the parameters of {{sfn}} match those of {{SfnRef}}, plus either |p=, |pp= or |loc= as applicable. Incidentally, I prefer to use "anon", instead of "Anon", because it's not a proper name but an abbreviation for an adjective. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

That was what I was trying to say (not particularly well), what do you think of this routebox:

Preceding station		Disused railways		Following station
Cheltenham (St James)		Great Western Railway Banbury and Cheltenham Direct Railway		Cheltenham Leckhampton
		Great Western Railway Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway		Churchdown
Cheltenham High Street Halt		Great Western Railway Honeybourne Line		Terminus
Stratford-upon-Avon		Great Western Railway The Cornishman Express		Gloucester Eastgate

I've implemented the anon possibility which I spotted on the St. James article. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Routebox has most of the essential details, except that it has no indication of through services from Birmingham Snow Hill via Honeybourne to Bristol.

The Malvern Road and St James articles both mention "Murphy 1994" in the footnotes, but there is no full citation. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Well spotted - ref fixed and I've tweaked the routebox above. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

They wouldn't have run via Gloucester Eastgate, that was the Midland/LMS station. If not calling (and reversing) at Gloucester Central (GWR), they would have used the direct route, see yellow lines on this diagram, and gained the Midland (green) at Standish Junction, leaving it again at Yate South Jc, see this diagram, next stop Bristol Temple Meads.

Also, The Cornishman was, according to Cecil J. Allen (Titled Trains of Great Britain, 2nd ed. 1947, p.194), a Paddington-Penzance service, introduced in summer 1890 (ie in broad-gauge days): 10.15am down from Padd, and 11.15am up from Penzance; later on it became the 10.30am down. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I took the info from the timetable published here: [6], in the absence of information about the route, perhaps it would be better to rework it as a BR service? Lamberhurst (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Mmm. Only one train out of five; the other four appear to have avoided Gloucester. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Found a 1910 GWR flyer reprinted on p. 63 of Christiansen's Regional History of the Railways (Thames & Severn, 1981) which shows three daily services all calling at Malvern Rd before going on to "Gloucester" (presumably Gloucester). Interestingly, the service isn't named "the Cornishman", but rather "the Shakespeare Express". Lamberhurst (talk) 09:01, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Closed Stations navbox

I'm still building Template:Closed stations Gloucestershire and I'm up to 17 rows, so there are only 3 available (the navbox allows 20 max). I now only have the ex-Midland Railway lines still to go; by my reckoning these comprise:

• Birmingham & Gloucester - Cleeve, Cheltenham High Street, Churchdown
• B&G Tewkesbury branch - Tewkesbury
• Bristol & Gloucester - Berkeley Road, Coaley Jct, Frocester, Stonehouse (Bristol Road), Haresfield, Gloucester (Eastgate)
• Stroud & Nailsworth branches - Ryeford, Dudbridge, Stroud, Woodchester, Nailsworth
• Dursley branch - Cam, Dursley

which is five groups. Should I look at combining two or more pairs from both these and the existing 17 groups, or split into two navboxes? If split, my suggested division would be a simple one: east or west of the Severn.

I'm also uncertain about whether to include those stations which were in areas transferred from Gloucestershire to Avon in 1974. That "county" no longer exists, and part now comprises South Gloucestershire unitary authority. If included, that would bring in the Midland from Charfield southwards, incl. some of the Bath line and the Thornbury branch; also the GWR main line from Badminton to the Severn Tunnel, and some to the north of Bristol; the GWR line would need at least one group. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to have two navboxes (east and west of the Severn) taking in Gloucestershire as it existed prior to the 1974 reorganisation. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Abingdon Junction

A lot of the info that you've added to Abingdon Junction is more relevant to Abingdon. For example, the stuff about the train shed, land for the station and engine shed, houses being demolished, Stern Street (sp for Stert Street). I must disclose that not only do I live 5 miles from Abingdon; I used to work there, I go shopping in Waitrose, which was built on the station site, and I'm also a member of Abingdon & District Model Railway Club, another member of which has put this page together for all to see. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:09, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, I've re-read the relevant pages and I've mixed up the two stations. Changes have been made, but if there are any inaccuracies, please do remove them. I'm guessing that you took the "three platforms" statement from the 1875 OS map reprinted on p. 5, which does show an island platform plus a side platform on which the 'main' station building stands. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:41, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The three platforms I referred to were definitely at Abingdon Junction: single-sided platform on up line, and double-sided island between down line and branch. It is from a map, definitely in Trippett & de Courtais, possibly on page 5. I don't actually have the book: somebody else showed me his copy, but wasn't prepared to let it out of his sight. I scribbled down some notes, and then copied those scribbles verbatim to Talk:Abingdon Junction railway station, intending to write them up properly later.

I think that you may have been confused because I put material intended for four or so different station articles onto one station's talk page. For instance, the hatnote re "not to be confused with Abingdon Road Halt" was intended to go on the Culham station article, because that station was formerly "Abingdon Road". --Redrose64 (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Ellerby Railway station

Hello. Don't attempt to describe the merging of non-notable stub articles as controversial.

The station has little or no coverage anyway either in specialised literature and definately not significant coverage anywhere. Even in books that are specifically about the Hull to Hornsea line it gets about one sentence of coverage.

The guidlines are pretty clear about merging articles that aren't notable - it's impossible to write a proper article with out doing lots of original research. I've already explained to User:Scillystuff that I find such reinstatement of stub articles disruptive - not all changes to the encyclopedia need to be ratified by you or wikiprojectUKrailways - you, nor the project make basic policy and you should try to follow basic policy.Shortfatlad (talk) 16:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Norfolk and Suffolk Joint_Railway

Do you think it would be worth replacing the basic Norfolk and Suffolk Joint Railway the coastal section map with your new Template:Yarmouth_to_Lowestoft_RDT? Scillystuff (talk) 09:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Good idea - I hadn't spotted that routemap. I must say that I don't like articles about short-lived railway companies being used to describe the entire 100yr+ history of an line, it just creates confusion. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Please see my talk page re Corton station Efficacy (talk) 21:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Station categories

Hi - I've reverted your removal of the station categories for Llandre, as (at present), there is no separate article for the station. The article describes both the village and the station, so IMO the categories are appropriate. However, it's not a big deal, and if you feel strongly about it, I'm not going to edit war. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 13:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, I just hadn't seen a non-station specific article in the railway station categories before. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:06, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

On second thoughts, I see you've added the catergories to the Llandre railway station instead, which is probably a better way of doing it. I'll revert myself. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 13:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

There isn't a separate article for Llandre railway station - that link just re-directs to Llandre. There seems little point in having separate articles for railway stations serving hamlets and for the hamlets themselves RGCorris (talk) 16:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Please see the consensus reached by project members on the notability of all railway stations here. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Garneddwen railway station

Garneddwen railway station was on the Ruabon to Barmouth main line. You have re-directed the entry to Garneddwen, on the narrow gauge Corris Railway. The difference was obvious from the original article. Please reinstate. RGCorris (talk) 16:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

No, the station on the Ruabon-Barmouth line was Garneddwen Halt which has its own separate article. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Beeching closures

Is that the lot? Can I start watching pages again? I see that you've got close to 1000 edits in a month. Keep at it - my best was 1452 in March this year. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

That gives me some incentive to continue with Wales and maybe even Scotland! Incidentally, I had some questions for you concerning the approach which should be taken. I'm going to post them on the main category page. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

If you do 12 more edits in next 3 hours you'll have 2000 for May. I only have 1726... --Redrose64 (talk) 20:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Up to 2001 after some stub-sorting. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 03:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Hellingly Railway Station.jpg

Not sure if you're already aware, but that postcard was previously deleted after a rather riduculous discussion on Commons. Don't be too surprised if it suddenly vanishes again at some point. – iridescent 20:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

This is a slightly different postcard to the one which was deleted as a result of that discussion. The second difference here is that I actually own the postcard and have uploaded the reverse, as had been requested for the other one as "proof" of age. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't have Shannon

... so can't verify this change to refd material. Please do so, and poss inform the user how we work. I've given him a {{subst:welcome}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Shannon only shows an image of the station site and not the steps. I don't doubt that what he is saying is true, but it's not referenced. If he's a CPPR volunteer, perhaps he might be able to supply a photo at some point. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Eridge railway station

Hi Lamberhurst. It's great that you've updated the information about the future of Eridge railway station, but I've tagged the section as it currently reads like a press release rather than an encyclopaedia article. It would be good if you could edit it so its tone is more in keeping with Wikipedia's style. Regards ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 15:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll work on it, but as you've probably seen there certain editors who consistently remove all references to extensions beyond Eridge (in whichever direction). I've let these deletions go in the past, but now that there is a website up and running to support an extension, I think it deserves a mention and shouldn't be removed. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed there's been a bit of an edit war going on! As you say, the new website will probably serve as citable evidence: has there been any coverage in the K&S Courier or other established local media which could be used as a further source? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

my bad --Redrose64 (talk) 15:13, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

S-rail

Re this -  Works for me. Since the template transcludes itself, sometimes you need to WP:PURGE the template to get the colour to show in the documentation. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I saw your last correction and tried to find where I was going wrong! Great work btw on creating the colour templates which really come into their own with s-rail. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Need any more? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:28, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I think that should do for the time being, although you could just check whether the LNWR colour(s) is correctly shown. On a different point, I followed a discussion you had with User:Iridescent in which you mentioned your intention to tweak, at some point in the future, the {{Infobox Closed London station}}. If and when you do that, it would be good if you could also modify the infobox to allow usage values to be shown (ditto for {{Infobox UK disused station}}) so that usage data is not hidden/lost when a station closes. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The LNWR really only used two colours after about 1873 - black and white, although neither was a pure shade: both included a proportion of blue, so that the yellow varnish would be neutralised (I may have mentioned this before). Carter (p.124) states "This colour was not an absolute black, but a very intense blue-black". Thus, the green and the brown shown here rather puzzle me. I'll knock up {{LNWR colour}}, set it to something just off black (say #040010), and we can twiddle it later. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Just in case you hadn't already spotted it - there's already {{L&NW colour}} (which you've already edited) and perhaps nominated for deletion if its completely wrong. Lamberhurst (talk) 14:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, rats. Seems like it's used on about five pages though... --Redrose64 (talk) 14:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Update - the usage parameters seem to have been added to {{Infobox UK disused station}} - see here. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have all four UK/GB/London station infoboxes (and their doc pages) watchlisted. On a related note, there's a thread started recently at Template talk:Infobox London station#Coordinates. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Blaenau Ffestiniog

On a completed unrelated note, it would be good if could you have a look at Blaenau Ffestiniog and see if it's me who's misunderstood Butt or if what was known as Blaenau Festiniog North became the 1982 joint station, or if it was the closed GWR Central station which did. My reading is the former. What do you think? Lamberhurst (talk) 20:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Neither. Butt has 6 entries for Blaenau Festiniog on pp. 36-37 and 2 for Blaenau Ffestiniog on p.37; let's number them 1-5 (p. 36) and 6-8 (p. 37). These 8 entries are 5 stations, two of which bore the suffix "Central", and three form a "chain of replacement":

• Entry 1 is the original Ffestiniog Rly station, closed 1939 (with the cessation of passenger services on the line)
• Entry 2 (ex-Duffws) became entry 5 (GWR Central)
• Entry 3 (original LNWR station) was replaced by entry 4, which became entry 6 (LNWR's North), which was replaced by entry 8 (the 1982 joint station, and the second Central) which later became entry 7. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

That's how I read Butt anyway. Of course Butt could be wrong: he says that Three Counties became the current Arlesey: a comparison of 1950s vs present-day OS maps proves him wrong there. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:45, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

And Blaenau would seem to be the second error - This page explains that the North station was closed in '82 and a new station was built on the site of the former GWR station. Tut tut. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't know how much this helps but the Quail/Trackmaps diagrams (part 4, London Midland) show, on diagram 37D, the position of the "old station" on the LNWR line, but there is slight variation. In the 1st edition (1990) we have: tunnel mouth 26 mi 48 ch (from Llandudno Junction station); ground frame no. 1 27.07; old station; ground frame no. 2 27.33; Blaenau Ffestiniog 27.40; ground frame no. 3 27.51; ground frame no. 4 27.53 (LNWR), 25.25 (GWR). The 2nd edition (2005) differs in omitting GFs nos. 1 & 4 (but still records the change of mileage at the position of the latter), and places the new station at 27.41. A 1982 book "Miles and Chains 2 London Midland" shows the old station at 27 mi 10 ch (from the actual junction east of Llandudno Junction station), and the new at 27.25 --Redrose64 (talk) 17:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Bletchley

Resolved

Re this edit - surely (a) Fenny Stratford is still open; (b) that part of the Varsity Line was LMR - in 1967 the ER/LMR boundary was btwn Bedford St. Johns and Willington. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Now fixed x2. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Er, all I see is a change from "Disused" to "Historical" - it still says "Eastern Region of British Railways" and "Fenny Stratford Line open, station closed". --Redrose64 (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, yes of course I didn't read your message properly. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks --Redrose64 (talk) 16:29, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Better late than never! Lamberhurst (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hereford

I see that in {{Shrewsbury and Hereford Railway RDT}} you've drawn a triangle where the Midland (HH&B) comes in from Hay-on-Wye. However, examination of the relevant RCH Junction Diagram shows that what appears to be a west-to-south curve on such a "triangle" was actually the MR's short branch to their Moorfields Goods terminus. The Ian Allan pre-group atlas (map 9 square C1) also shows a small gap. Do you have something which definitely shows a triangle? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

When you have a decision, one of us should fix the position of the Hay line on both {{The Railways of Hereford}} and {{Hereford, Ross and Gloucester Railway}}, but the junction shape depends on the above. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

You're quite correct, the triangle should have a west-to-south curve. I omitted it in the interests of getting the Hay junction in the right place. The problem is that there is no corresponding icon, and experimentation with the M&GN/GE&GN junction at Spalding has not produced very edifying results. The northern end of the diagram is also incorrect as Severn Bridge Jct is particularly complex. Note also that {{Newport, Abergavenny and Hereford Railway RDT}} also needs to be amended. Lamberhurst (talk) 07:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

And the {{Welsh Marches Line}}. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hold on. I'm saying that my paper maps don't show a triangle to the north of Hereford Barton, where the Hay line comes in, but you're agreeing with me and also saying that there was a triangle? I'm confused. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

What I meant by "triangle" is that there should be another station alongside Barton from which the Hay line proceeds in a north-west direction, a curve from this line headed east to rejoin the Hereford loop, thereby forming a triangle. Cobb then complicates matters by adding in a further curve which is not shown on the RCH diagram. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear. I'm afraid that I don't have Cobb; I first heard of his work when he got his doctorate (2008), by which time my job was threatened with redundancy and I was not willing to lay out two weeks rent on anything, let alone this substantial work. I'll adjust the others to match {{Shrewsbury and Hereford Railway RDT}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Cobb is still available if you're thinking of an early birthday/Christmas present. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I spotted it in Ian Allan's shop in Cardiff, all shrink-wrapped to avoid greasy thumbprints, and carefully stacked on the counter to discourage thieves. Anyway, templates 1 2 3 4 amended. The last one I could only do neatly by widening it from BS3 to BS5. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's one of the problems. The other is that the spine of the larger volume is not strong enough to withstand frequent referencing. Re the changes, I fear we may need to amend them still further as the junction was partly via Hereford Moorfields and partly from a point just north of Barton. Lamberhurst (talk) 14:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Bexhill West Branch Line

Hi, do you have a copy of Peter A. Harding's book on the Bexhill West Branch Line. If so, could you expand the article please? Mjroots (talk) 18:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Will do - I have the Harding book, but not with me at the moment. I do however have other books which could be used. Btw, I also have a colour slide of a train at Hawkhurst which I should upload one of these days. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Northampton

Following the attention of an IP who believes that Northampton railway station opened in 1859, I'm fixing up the names and dates of the various stations mentioned there (I'm unable to trace any 1859 station). According to Butt, Northampton St. John's Street railway station had a predecessor named Northampton (opd 1 October 1866, closed 10 June 1872). Since the MR branch from Bedford was opened in 1872, any idea what the first station served? I'm guessing it was for MR services from Wellingborough (via the Northampton and Peterborough Railway), but can't source it. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:51, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

You are both right. According to Leleux, the station opened on 16 February 1859 as part of the Northampton to Market Harborough line and was rebuilt in 1881 when the Northampton Loop was opened. A glaring omission by Butt. The 1866 station was the original terminus of the Northampton and Peterborough Railway and the later site of a loco shed at grid reference SP755596, some way from St John's Street. I've next to no other info on it, so didn't refer to it in the St John's St article. I'll update the Castle article with refs. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Fivemile House railway station

Hello. Somebody has changed Fivemile House to Five Mile House in the above article. You seem to know about these things - do you know which is correct? Because if the latter, the article should be moved. My OS map has Five Mile Lane. Ta, Chris (talk) 10:35, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• Don't worry. I found several sources saying Five Mile House so have moved the page. Chris (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Your move was correct. I'll try and expand the article a bit with what I've got. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:14, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:Lincoln Lines

Hi, did you mean to do that to the live version? Scillystuff (talk) 19:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, no I didn't, but I'm working on another version now. Should be done in 10 or so mins. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Nice job, It's a wonder anyone ever found their way through. Which bit was the 1985 BR spur? Scillystuff (talk) 20:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It's the line curving westwards to Nottingham! I had to create  (exkKRZo+l) to show it. I haven't included the bridge that replaced the Pelham St Crossing, not sure it would be really worth it. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Grainsby Halt railway station

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Leamington Spa

Re this edit - my Ian Allan pre-group (10 B5) has first station out of Leamington Spa (both the GW and LNW [Avenue] stations) toward Coventry as Warwick (Milverton), with Kenilworth next after that. The relevant RCH Junction Diagram agrees. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

You're right but I couldn't resist tweaking the template before I get home this evening to check Cobb! Will modify later. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:11, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done see {{Coventry to Leamington line}}. I'm open to offers on the names that should be used for the various Leamington stations as well as the services indicated on Leamington Spa General. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Er, I think it was you who told me that for closed stations we should use the final name given in Butt; ie Leamington Spa Avenue and Leamington Spa (Milverton), with the GWR station remaining as Leamington Spa. That said, Warwick (Milverton) was in use for a lot longer than Leamington Spa (Milverton). --Redrose64 (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes; "The last official name should be used for closed stations". That's one Wikipedia guideline which does make sense IMO—otherwise, we open the door to endless "well, it was called Ramsgate & St Lawrence-on-Sea railway station for longer" arguments. – iridescent 22:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Good point, I've been pulled up about this before. Will modify now. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Coventry-Leamington RDT

Re this edit - not sure why you put Coventry North Jct (for the Nuneaton branch) facing Berkswell, so I've reversed it to face Coventry. As for the continuation icon, I guess you used  (tCONTg) because there wasn't one in Luecke style. I've now created one,  (LCONTg), and used that instead, see here. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you're absolutely right about the junction, I've checked again in Cobb. The icon is also useful, just what I had been looking for at the time. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:32, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:East Lincolnshire Railway

You said "Modify station names following page moves; note: this template needs serious work". As I created this template, I'd be happy to do the "serious work" you want. What do you think needs doing? Scillystuff (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The diagram is largely correct as it is, but could be improved by lopping off the branches that have been added which don't strictly form part of the ELR, e.g. Spilsby, Mablethorpe and Cleethorpes. The junction at Grimsby needs to be reorientated west-east and detail added to show for example Garden Street Junction as in File:Frodingham & Grimsby RJD 142.jpg. The Boston junction also needs checking. This will need detailed track diagrams of the area which I have. I also wonder if it should be changed from BS3-2 to BS3. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with just about all of that. Most of what you mention was added by another user - see User talk:Bedders#East_Lincolnshire_Railway. I would have preferred a simpler layout be retained (see my version just before he started editing) and a new map be produced for the other lines. For the Cleethorpes branch there is already Template:Barton Line to fix and Barton Line to expand. Scillystuff (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I've amended the junction at Grimsby to a triangle, based on RJD 142 linked above, but have not reorientated it. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Stratford upon Avon Racecourse Platform railway station

Great work on the above page! 86.176.27.178 (talk) 23:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

North Staffordshire Railway RDT

Thanks for that. Something I had been meaning to get round to but had kept bottling out of. I've made a couple of revisions. I can't find any source that gives Waterhouses any other name e.g. Caldon Low Halt and I've removed the loop round Burton as that was a section of the GNR not the NSR. NtheP (talk) 19:29, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

It was something I had been meaning to do for a while now and the imminent reopening of the Caldon Low branch finally got me into action. You did a pretty good job in getting the whole system into a routemap and the logic was quite easy to follow. Re the Burton loop, it simplifies the diagram as well. There was a Caldon Low Halt just south of Waterhouses, but that's a minor point. I checked Waterhouses station and you're right, there were LMVLR and NSR platforms. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, you wouldn't believe how many false starts there were before I managed to get it all in. I think that's why I left out a few halts. Is there a symbol to show that a station was dual guage other than using the cross platform sysmbols which I think would be OTT for Waterhouses? NtheP (talk) 09:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Other than how it's shown in the LMVLR RDT, there are no other symbols which could help us out for Waterhouses. Any idea btw what was the official NSR "colour"? I'm going to standardise the routeboxes for NSR stations and this colour seems to be used for the CVR. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:17, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Locomotive livery was Madder Lake described as being slightly darker than MR Crimson Lake so the colour you have is close enough. NtheP (talk) 13:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Re two gauges: you can avoid using CPIC symbols by using half-width symbols as I did for Altrincham and Navigation Road on {{Mid-Cheshire Line}}.

Re colour: E.F. Carter in Britain's Railway Liveries gives the 1915 NSR coach colour as his no. (28), which is the same as the MR loco/coach colour. The 1915 NSR loco colour is his no. (31), "lake", and on his colour chart (31) is slightly lighter than (28), and (28) is slightly bluer than (31). These "energy saving light bulbs" are real swines for colour matching (try putting the beam from one through a prism, it's a discontinuous spectrum), so when I can get some true northlight (Saturday, or midweek if I get laid-off again), I'll check properly. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:34, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Those half-width symbols look like they could do the job, but unfortunately it's no quickfix as there isn't yet a disused half-width blue symbol. I've started on the routeboxes, but am working from a rail atlas, so please do correct me if I go wrong. Mow Cop and Scholar Green is shown as part of the Potteries Loop, but the line article indicates that it only went as far as the NSR main line at Kidsgrove. Also, I've shown the track through Chatterley as lifted despite what is shown on Crewe to Derby Line. My atlas (Cobb's Railway Atlas) shows Harecastle tunnels as having closed in 1966 and a new line being opened by BR slightly to the west. Chatterley was situated just to the south of the tunnels at SJ848518. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

1) The half line symbols might work, my only reservation is that they all indicate a major station, not the small terminus that Waterhouses was - but they might be better than nothing. Ideally a small disused blue half circle is what's needed.

2) Mow Cop. It all depends on how articles get split. The loop line as a piece of engineering ran from Etruria Junction (north of Etruria station) to Loop Line junction (north of Kidsgrove Station), so both ends were junctions off the Stoke-Congelton-Macclesfield-Manchester line (today what we call the WCML). However train services over the loop line tended to run from Cresswell or Blythe Bridge to Congleton so Mow Cop was served by Loop Line trains even though it wasn't physically on the Loop Line. The same applies to all the stations on the Derby line between Stoke and Cresswell but Longton, for example, would not be considered a Loop Line station. Perhaps the answer is for the route articles and the individual station articles to reflect this.

3) Harecastle diversion. This was indeed built in 1966 to bypass the Harecastle tunnels as the tunnels prevented electrification of the route due to limited overhead clearance. The diversion also includes a tunnel but this was built with enough headroom.

4) One last point, perhaps we ought to agree on what date we are baselining this RDT on. I've seen you renamed Talke & Alsager Road to Alsager Road which isn't wrong but for example by that time the Longton, Bucknall & Adderley Green line i.e. the one you have running through Hulme Colliery had been truncated at Adderley Green and Weston Coyney as I had the diagram. This was a very cynical move by the NSR. The LB&AGR was an independent company the NSR bought out, then realised that it reduced the mileage that coal from the pits at the south end (Mossfield, Hulme) had to travel over to go north, so the company deliberately severed the line to ensure maximum revenue by routeing coal via Normacot.

5) Kidsgrove - It might just be me but having it described a terminating station on the Macclesfield - Stoke line looks a bit incongruous when it's neither Stoke nor Macclesfield. Perhaps the stations to Stoke south of and including Kidsgrove need to show both the Crewe-Derby line and the Stoke-Macclesfield in the succession boxes? NtheP (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm certain that I read an article on the Harecastle diversion in Railway Magazine. Without much digging, I can't give issue and page unfortunately. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I've now created  (uexdKBHF-Le), so see Talk:Leek and Manifold Valley Light Railway#Route diagram suggestion. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:39, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Just to come back on the points above: (2) Agreed. (3) Would be useful to modify the Crewe-Derby RDT to show the diversion. (4) This is probably the most difficult point - what date did you have in mind when you originally created the diagram? According to my atlas the whole line was constructed by the Longton, Adderley Green & Bucknall Railway in 1875 and taken over by the NSR in 1895. It's also shown that the NSR, in 1895, closed a small section between Weston Coyney Goods and Adderley Green Colliery, followed by the branch to Hulme Colliery in 1900. My concern when modifying your original layout of two distinct lines was that it gave the impression that they had never been connected. However, if what is intended is to show the NSR as it was c1895 (prior to the renaming of Talke & Alsager), then yes - let's go back to the way you had it. This would also mean ensuring that other stations are shown as they were originally, i.e. dropping Liverpool Rd from Kidsgrove and Wheelock & Sandback becoming Sandbach (Wheelock). (5) Agreed - is there any sense in linking the Stoke/Macclesfield line to the Stafford to Manchester Line?

Great work on the icon - I'll try to integrate it. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Tried the icon - there isn't the space for it on the NSR RDT, it could however work with a left-facing blue half! Lamberhurst (talk) 21:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Er, I think it'll fit - see {{North Staffordshire Railway RDT/sandbox}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Great and  Done Lamberhurst (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Redrose, great work on the icon. It still jars slightly with me that it's a major station rather than minor but hey can't have anything.

Both. When I originally created the map I went for the NSR as it was extant in 1922 just before grouping. That gives the maximum growth e.g. includes the Waterhouses branch which didn't open until 1905 but would miss things like the closure of the section between Adderley Green and Weston Coyney. So unless we have a series of templates showing development then we're stuck with having to compromise. I'd go for 1922 but I'm not going to die in a ditch over it. Perhaps we need a caption on the template giving the date? I suppose it's a shortcoming of the icon system that it doesn't allow for situations like this.
Yes linking the Stoke/M'field to Stafford/Manchester makes sense. NtheP (talk) 12:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I think the RDT should be fine now for 1922. I haven't changed Alsager Rd back to its original name as it was renamed in 1902. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:07, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I created a "major station" version because I wanted to save time - I took an existing icon   (udKBHFre) and changed the colour from dark blue to light blue. I used that one as a basis because it was a suitable shape - all the half-width icons intended as a partial station seem to be for major stations only - I couldn't find any minor.

I guess similar could be created for minor stations, say by sawing  (vHST) in half, removing the bottom leg from the left half (and changing it to light blue), remove the top leg from the r/h half (and colour it pink). I'd need to carefully consider the name - I felt that my new icon had to be named uexdKBHFre because the existing one was udKBHFre, and you normally indicate light blue by "uex" instead of "u". Would the minor versions be uexdKHST-Le (left) and exdKHST-Ra (right)? I'm not sure. I'll try and create them tomorrow, since I'll have time: I've been laid off again.

I have seen RDTs used to show development... the most extreme example that I know of is {{Gloucester railway stations}}, but even that is incomplete, because it doesn't show the "T Station" (1847-51, see MacDermot 1927 pp. 188-9, and dia. on p. 187). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:11, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

n.b. uexdKBHFre has since been moved to uexdKBHF-Le --Redrose64 (talk) 23:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

With the Churnet Valley Railway now running services to Caldon Low again perhaps we should make that stretch of line as open again, although none of the stations are. And, the line between Stoke and Leekbrook never formally closed, it just went out of use in 1988 but Moorland & City railways intend to run freight trains from Caldon Low over it so should that show as open too? NtheP (talk) 21:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Just to be clear what we're talking about here, it's the section from Stoke via Fenton and Bradnop to Caldon Low as shown on the map here, right? Lamberhurst (talk) 22:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

via Fenton Manor, yes. NtheP (talk) 22:58, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Have now created  (uexdKHST-Le) and  (exdKHST-Ra), see {{North Staffordshire Railway RDT/sandbox}}. Have fun! --Redrose64 (talk) 13:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Changes now implemented. I hope that Leekbrook Junction is correctly shown - I assume that it must be only the south-facing curve that has been reinstated. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks great. I'm not aware of any plans to reopen the north curve yet although City and Moorlands are talking about reinstating a sation in Leek. All the work the two of you have put in on this spurred me to write an article on Waterhouses. NtheP (talk) 00:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Line cats

I can see no reason for removing the line cats that group stations by the line that they were on and would propose revering your removal of these categories from a number of station articles. Please explain this move as this is a useful grouping of information as otherwise they just get mixed up in other categories that are not so useful. Keith D (talk) 23:51, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Now replied at: Category talk:Hull and Hornsea Railway, Category talk:Hull and Holderness Railway and Category talk:Victoria Dock branch line. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hull and Hornsea Railway

Please stop emptying this category. C1 is only for categories that have happened to become empty: you may not empty a category and immediately tag it for C1 deletion. You're always free to take the category to WP:CFD, but deletion policy says that you mustn't empty it before or during its time there. Nyttend (talk) 12:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, it's the first time I've ever proposed anything for deletion. I have now taken the category to CFD. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hatfield and St Albans Railway

Hi. I'm puzzled by a sentence in this article (see Talk:Hatfield_and_St_Albans_Railway#Confusion). The edit history suggests you wrote it originally and I'm sure your point is very valid but I'm afraid it's lost on me and I don't have access to your cited source so I can't check for myself. Can you shed any light, please? —MegaPedant 02:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Disused railway stations in Vale of Glamorgan

Category:Disused railway stations in Vale of Glamorgan, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bencherlite^Talk 22:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Great Northern and Great Eastern Joint Railway

Thanks for the note about my work on the above line. Would you mind if I copied and pasted your version over to mine to work on? Britmax (talk) 11:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I have placed the diagram for the above line in the article. Thanks for the help and please let me know what you think. Britmax (talk) 21:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments on this. I'm working on something else at the moment but will see what I can do regarding your suggestions. Britmax (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

None of the sources I have found show a south to west curve at Murrow. Could you please point one out for me? Thanks. Britmax (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

• Wrottesley, A.J. (1981) [1970]. "Chapter Nine: Closure - Surviving Freight Services". The Midland & Great Northern Joint Railway (2nd ed.). Newton Abbot: David & Charles. p. 166. ISBN 0 7153 8173 3. In order to retain access to the Dogsthorpe and Eye Green brickfields, and to Wisbech North and the harbour line there, and avoid the expense of retaining for limited traffic the bridge over the Midland and GN lines north of Westwood Junction, Peterboro', it was decided to make a junction at Murrow between the M & GN and the March—Spalding line. The connecting line left the latter just south of the level crossing of the two lines, and turned west to join the M & GN so that trains could run direct between March and the brickfields, and reach Wisbech North after reversal at the new West Junction. The connection was laid in on 17 December 1960, and first used on 2 January 1961. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:22, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

That post dates all the sources I have but now I know I will put a link on the diagram. Thanks for the information. Britmax (talk) 20:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hello there - you've been away for almost 6 months - I hope it was nothing serious. Your watchlist must be well into WP:TLDR territory. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:23, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Nothing serious - I've had some professional exams to study for and I should really have used the special absence template which exists for that. I'm glad nevertheless to see that my absence did not go completely unnoticed. I should be back up to full speed towards the end of June when everything is over. I've been following your contributions with interest. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I suspect you've not followed them all (if only out of boredom: there has been an awful lot of dull categorisation) because if you had, your swotting would have suffered; I don't want to cause you to fail your exams. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I was referring to the halt articles; can we find the station which was open for the shortest period of time? (excluding of course "temporary" stations) Your categorisation has introduced some order into the chaos; perhaps we'll know one day exactly how many stations were opened by BR? I'm also determined to find an opening date for Braintree Freeport, which must be in one of my RAIL magazines from that time. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I recently found one which was open for just 14 months. I did much googling for Braintree Freeport but couldn't turn up anything regarding the opening. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Routeboxes involving NXEA

Hi, re this - you'll have plenty to do. In recent weeks a certain user went through many stations on the NXEA network and added the box detailing the stopping patterns with its curious "Material" column, and usually also changed the routebox style, not always successfully. Sometimes the historic/disused routes went right out of the window, much to my annoyance. Still, that's three down, less than 176 to go... --Redrose64 (talk) 23:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd be tempted to revert the lot. Surprised that this hasn't been picked up by others yet given its scale. Lamberhurst (talk) 23:14, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Uttoxeter

Hi, you did a lot of work last year on the Knotty - please could you look at the section Uttoxeter railway station#North Staffordshire Railway where the station names, routes and dates don't square with Butt (p.238). --Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm missing two of my main works on the West Midlands at present, but I hope to get them back in mid-July. Looking simply at Cobb, the following can be established:

• the line west to Stoke opened in 1848 as did that south to Burton;
• there is no record of a temporary station at Hockley Crossing;
• Uttoxeter Bridge Street (1848-1881) appears to have been the first station. It was resited closer to the junction to the east in 1881 to become the present Uttoxeter station;
• both Dove Bank and Uttoxeter Junction were open between 1849-1881;
• the line north to Rocester and beyond opened in 1849;
• the line south-west to Stafford opened in 1867.

The text is therefore correct in that all 3 stations were open simultaneously, but the reference to 1880 as the year when all closed is not supported by Cobb. Hockley Crossing needs a reference, but could be correct. The rest seems fine. I realise that the dates from Butt don't tally, but this wouldn't be the first time. You may wish to check with User:Nthep, our resident NSR expert. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:20, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, very flattering to be called and expert :-) Glad to help if I can.

Line openings were as follows:-

Stoke - Uttoxeter 7 August 1848

Uttoxeter - Burton 11 September 1849

Leek - Uttoxeter 13 July 1849

The first two formed the NSR main line Stoke - Derby. The last is the Churnet Valley line. When the lines first opened there was no curve North to West i.e. Churnet Valley line towards Stoke, this short chord opened October 1881.

As to stations none of my references make any mention of a station temporary or otherwise at Hockley Crossing, Bridge Street is not the same road as the Hockley Road. That said it might be possible that there was a temporary station for a month in between the opening of the Stoke and Burton sections but it's such a short period it's almost irrelevant. I think Butt might be wrong on two counts 1) in saying Bridge St didn't open until 1867 and 2) giving the opening date for Junction as being September 1848. Christiansen and Miller don't give specific dates for opening but Basil Jeuda gives the opening dates for both Dove Bank and Junction stations as 13 July 1849 concurrent with the opening of the Churnet Valley line. This would suggest that Bridge Street opened in 1848 and for a year was the only station in town. All three closed on 1 October 1881 when the new Uttoxeter station opened, but between 1849 and 1881 there were 3 stations is what was and is a fairly small town. The "new" Uttoxeter station was not built on the site of Bridge Street station as File:Uttoxstn.svg suggests but was some distance further east. Have a look on http://www.old-maps.co.uk at the 1887 1:10560 map to see how far the new station is from Bridge Street. From comparing this map with one shown in Jeuda's book on the Churnet Valley line, the Bridge St buildings were west of Bridge Street and may have become the Uttoxeter goods station buildings post 1881.

Hope this helps, give me a shout if you want any more info. NtheP (talk) 21:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

@Nthep: re this edit: the article seems to cover not just the current station but its three predecessors, at least one of which was not opened by the NSR but by a railway later absorbed by the NSR. Since I did not wish to overburden the infobox, I put |original=See text in the hope that the complicated situation would be suitably explained there, hence why I started the above thread. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

All four stations were opened by the NSR. The Churnet Valley Line wasn't a separate company but one of the lines authorised to the NSR in 1846. In fact the Churnet Valley line and the Stoke-Derby via Uttoxeter line were authorised by the same Act - the North Staffordshire Railway (Churnet Valley) Act 1846. The Stafford and Uttoxeter Railway eventually became part of the GNR and only ran into Uttoxeter via running powers. I'm wondering if this is where Butt went wrong by listing the opening date of Bridge St as 1867 as that was the year the S&U started running not the original opening date of the station. NtheP (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Toddington

Hi, re Toddington - you've cited three items to Mitchell & Smith 2005, p. 44 -

• The goods yard was the largest on the line and accommodated three main sidings which were each capable of holding 30 wagons.
• Two more sidings led into the fruit shed.
• Passenger tickets sold at Toddington fell from 11,580 in 1913 to 6,050 in 1933; during the same period goods forwarded and received dropped from 5414 tons to 1802 tons.

Unfortunately my Mitchell & Smith (2001 reprint of 1998 edn) doesn't have page numbers, only figure numbers. At first I thought it might be fig. 44; but that does not mention these facts; then I thought that you and I might have different editions with different figure numbers - but the others seem to match. I now see that the map opposite figs. 53/54 is where the relevant text is to be found. Perhaps using one of the following might be better: |loc=caption for map "Toddington" |loc=introduction to section "Toddington" |loc=map facing figs. 53/54 --Redrose64 (talk) 21:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Good point, I had been looking for a better way of citing that page. In some of their editions, Mitchell & Smith use roman numerals for such maps, but unfortunately that is not the case here. Lamberhurst (talk) 07:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

St Lawrence for Pegwell Bay station

The last sentence of the history section doesn't make sense. Is Ramsgate the correct location? Mjroots (talk) 09:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Well spotted. Now fixed. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you

Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 15:51, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Reculver

Thanks for your recent edit to Reculver. My apologies for omitting to wikilink Ramsgate to the station - I had linked other stations this way, and, in a previous version, I had linked to Ramsgate Harbour railway station for historical purposes, but I took this out in a wikilink clean-up, and never got around to linking Ramsgate to Ramsgate railway station, my bad! I think I'll put Ramsgate Harbour railway station back in there too, explicitly.(done)

About the houses and cottages, you'll see I've changed "Reculver marshes" to "marshland near Reculver" - I don't mean to be picky! I've only changed this because, though there has indeed been marshland near Reculver, I've not seen it generally referred to as "Reculver marshes", which implies a place-name of some sort. I'm fascinated by this sort of historical detail, though, and I'm wondering if we can be more precise, through e.g. a grid reference - does your source (Gray, 1998) allow that? I've looked at 19th century, 6 inch-to-the-mile maps of the area and can't see anything obvious.

Talking of which, there's this discussion of railway features around Reculver, where the last comment (at the time of writing this) is yours, in which you observe that "Large scale OS maps may indeed be the best bet": as far as the reported "Reculver goods station" is concerned, I did say in an earlier comment that "I've peered closely at 19th century Ordnance Survey maps of the area dated after 1864" to no avail. Any further thoughts? No problem if not, I'm just trying to wrap that one up. Thanks for reading! Nortonius (talk) 13:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Gray (1998) does not give more detail and it's difficult to speculate without straying into WP:OR. I would however imagine that the houses would be fairly near the line, possibly on land acquired as part of the original Parliamentary authorisation. A number of railway cottages that I've come across have their date of construction inscribed on the exterior and there is a certain architectural style associated with them. One bet could be to have a wander around TR202675 and see what can be found. Regarding the maps, you didn't mention the scale of those that you consulted, but I was thinking about OS maps which show 6 inches (or less) to the mile. As far as I'm aware, these are not yet on-line. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, much appreciated. Ok, if there's no more detail I'll leave it as is – actually I'd love to have a wander around, but I'm not nearby, and unfortunately I won't be heading that way for the foreseeable... I can picture the kind of building you describe, it would be fascinating to see what there is, hey-ho. You're quite right that I didn't mention the scale of the maps to which I referred, but the link I gave to old-maps.co.uk includes 19th century maps at 6 inches to the mile – these are the ones I've scoured. I was just wondering if another pair of eyes might spot something I've missed, but no matter, I'll probably keep looking. Thanks again. Nortonius (talk) 12:08, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Honeybourne railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Midlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Weston-sub-Edge railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ganger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Uttoxeter station revisited

We had a discussion last year about Uttoxeter station and the opening and closing dates for each. Basil Jeuda has a new book out which confirms the dates which I have used to reference the article. I take Jeuda, as a specialist on the NSR, over Butt on the accuracy of the dates in question. I've also deleted the bit about Hockley Crossing as this is unreferenced by anything that I can find and Jeuda's statement that Bridge St opened on the day the line opened makes the Hockley Crossing statement impossible. File:Uttoxstn.svg needs amending and I'll have a go at that later (although I'm not brilliant at manipulating svg files). NtheP (talk) 12:29, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Re the last discussion, I have managed to get my hands on an alternative to Butt, which is more detailed and seems more reliable. There is no reference to "Hockley Crossing" and your recent changes to the article are fully backed up. You may want to drop User:Adambro a line to see if he can tweak the diagram (he could also add in "Bridge St"). Lamberhurst (talk) 12:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I managed to get to grips with an svg editor and redid the drawing myself. I managed to get hold of a copy of Quick to and have created a template for it (based on {{Butt-Stations}}). Time permitting this weekend I'll start using it. NtheP (talk) 11:50, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Very useful. That will save time for other articles on which I intend to use Quick. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Winslow Road railway station

Hi; at Winslow Road railway station#History you've put three instances of {{sfnp|Leleux|1984|p=37}} but there is no full citation. I've not heard of this author, so I can't add it myself. Thanks. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for picking that up. I've now added the missing source. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Nice catch

here. Don't know why I didn't spot that earlier, seeing as I carefully amended the "line/station open/closed" stuff. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I keep an eye on your edits from time to time! Btw, I'm not happy with what's happened to Norden (England) railway station but as the disambiguator follows the station name, I haven't complained so far. But I would personally have a preference for Norden (Dorset). Lamberhurst (talk) 16:40, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, I remember that one: the page got moved from Norden railway station, and then the redirect left behind was converted into a dab page. I went around cleaning up the bad links, but there are still some. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:03, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Denvilles halt

I've added more to Talk:Denvilles halt#Existence?. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Leamington Spa railway station

Please see Talk:Leamington Spa railway station#Split.

BTW are you anywhere convenient for Reading? It's the third Reading Meetup this coming Sunday; I intend to be there. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Replied there. I would have liked to have come to Reading (the station works themselves are worth a look) but I am currently some distance away in Luxembourg for the moment! Lamberhurst (talk) 08:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

South Yorkshire Railway

I've worked on the SYR diagram. But it's not exactly a few tweaks...! Britmax (talk) 12:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

This looks great, it was a bigger job than I had imagined. I'm going to make one or two slight changes to take account of the active lines which are still there. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

High Speed 1

Hello. There is a discussion under way there : User talk:Sladen#High Speed 1, please take a look at it. It is not polite to cancel my modification without preliminary discussion. Regards, Freewol (talk) 09:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

This now involves several people, I've relocated the conversation to Talk:High Speed 1#Dead links and various. —Sladen (talk) 11:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

County Durham stations

Hi, please see User talk:Redrose64#West Stanley railway station. I would particularly value your opinion, since you are directly named as the instigator of a convention of which I was not aware. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

East Midlands

Hi, re this edit: administrative Lincolnshire is in the East Midlands, although geographic Lincolnshire is split, with the two northernmost district councils (North East Lincolnshire and North Lincolnshire) lying in Yorkshire and the Humber. I do agree that {{EastMidlands-railstation-stub}} should be removed, since the article has {{Lincolnshire-railstation-stub}} and doesn't need both. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I hadn't realised that we have separate stub templates for counties where the area is already covered by a regional one. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

The county ones are inconsistent. AFAIK, we only have these for Greater Manchester, Kent, Lincolnshire and Merseyside. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Leen Valley Extension

Hello Lamberhurst, I hope this is an appropriate way to contact you. I have had a first stab at a route diagram of the LVEx and surrounding lines, what's more, I've done it in my Sandbox, gosh. I would really appreciate you giving it the once over before I start linking the stations and all that sort of thing, it would be somewhat miffing to spend a day and find it's barking up the wrong tree. Apart from spotting mistakes and better ways to do things please consider the title, as written it is too widely scoped, I haven't attempted ot include the Toton area, for example, and don't aim to do so. I assume you can get at my Sandbox, if you need permission I cheerfully grant it, if you need me to do something to let you in, just say. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

You've got the various lines clearly shown there. Just a couple of comments/observations:

• The trick with route diagrams is to get them as narrow as possible so that they don't take over the article page. Userdenim is very good at this.
• The title is fine but you could have something more descriptive such as "Railways on the Notts/Derbys border".
• It's useful to use the  (HST) icon for the smaller stations, leaving  (BHF) reserved for the larger ones.
• As a general rule, only the red (and light red for disused lines) icons are used in diagrams. The blue ones are generally for underground/light rail networks. I do however understand why you used them here to distinguish between the different lines. However, it does have the disadvantage that it's not easy to see which lines/stations were open and closed in 1962.
• I have a detailled route map of the line and can add in the colliery lines etc once you work on it a little more.

Lamberhurst (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you, I'll take this on board. I have been in touch with useddenim who "professionalised" the LD route diagram, he comes across like you - helpful, constructive an knowledgeable. We've worked together to add things to it, ie me saying "left hand down a bit" and him doing the hard stuff. The "bad" news it that I'm now committed to doing articles on LJ Shed, Tux Shed and Tux Works. I've set him loose on "Template:Duckmanton Junction" so I'll keep the Leen Valley from him until he's knocked Ducky J into shape. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 08:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)I've had a right good think and I reckon that what I've attempted isn't a route diagram, but a MAP. A route diagram should be just that, the LD and GC ones are just that, single purpose things describiing a route. What I have attempted strives to show an area, not one line. I've done a tube map, not the Piccadilly Line. Is there a place for maps using this technology, the strengths being those of the tube map and the ability to click on a blue item and link to the asssociated article? I'll be happy to do individual route diagrams for the LVX and the Mansfield Rly, having got the basics right. Is there a place for a map? The same discussion applies to my earlier work on the Clowne and Doe Lea Branches. Kind regards, Dave.DavidAHull (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes there is and there are examples of network maps at North Staffordshire Railway, {{Kirklees North Lines}}, {{Leeds Lines}} and {{Liverpool to Manchester Lines}}. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:49, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hard line breaks

Hi, I've been meaning to mention this for some time now, regarding HTML tags in edits like this. In this particular case, I've amended it like this. I'll explain.

Some HTML elements have an effect on a particular piece of text, so they need to indicate the start and end of that text. The element has two tags, the opening tag - which has no slash - and the closing tag - which has a slash immediately after the initial < sign. The small element is an example: we need to show where the reduction in font size is to commence, and where the normal size should be resumed. The opening tag is therefore <small>, and the closing tag is </small>; such a pair is sometimes called an enclosure.

Other HTML elements cause some non-textual item to be shown. Since they do not affect the appearance of text, they do not need to indicate where their effects end, and so they have no closing tag. There is therefore only one tag, but it has two subtly different forms. One form looks just like the opening tag of an enclosure; the other looks rather like a closing tag, except that the slash is just before the > sign. The br element is an example: we need to show where the line break occurs, not where it starts and ends. The single tag may therefore be either <br> or <br />. Which one you choose depends primarily upon whether you're writing HTML (where both are valid) or XHTML (where only <br /> is valid) - until 2012, Wikipedia had used XHTML, but since 2011 or 2012, Wikipedia has used HTML5. In both cases, there is no closing tag, so </br> is not valid.

Hope this helps. BTW if you're ever in Oxford on first Sunday of the month, please come to the Oxford Wikimedia Meetup, we can have a chat over a beer. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you're quite right and I appreciate the reminder. Just when I thought that I put this habit behind me, I find that I'm doing it again. In an ideal world the routebox template would distinguish between the "route" and the "operator", something which the s-line template has. As for the meet-up, I would like to attend but unfortunately I'm abroad most of June. I'll be here all of August if there's anything on in the south, so may be able to attend then. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Clowne South

Hello again. I've done a lot on Clowne South and have attempted a route diagram to illustrate how the LD served as diversionary and alternative routes, which I've just added to the Clowne S article. Although I copied and edited one of the awesome useddenim's templates it still defaults to "expanded" in the Clowne article. I'd appreciate your comments on the whole bag of tricks and in particular would ask if you can show me how to fix the expanding/contracting issue. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll have a look at this in one or two days time; still catching up on a multitude of other things! Lamberhurst (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed the template issue. You needed to add "|collapse=yes" within the template parentheses. In addition the "navbox" parameter in the rdt template has to correspond to the title of the page for the template. Other general comments about Clowne South - ideally every sentence should be backed up with a reference and try to break up long blocks of text into smaller digestable sections. Also, just a comment about Duckmanton Junction and East, North and South junctions. The first article about Duckmanton Junction is probably one of the best about a UK rail junction but you run the risk with the other three that someone will propose that they should be merged into the first article, particularly as you've referred the reader in the other articles to the first article. Leave it for the time being, but possibly in future it's best to have one article for several interrelated junctions in the same location. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)This is both helpful and encouraging, thank you. I know what you mean about Ducky Junctions, my starting point was Arkwright Town Jct on the LD main line and on the LD route diagram. Perhaps I could prevent the problem by having two separate articles - ATJc and Ducky Jc, with the latter being a composite with the three components in the text and the route diag pointing to Ducky Jc? The downside is that I've already added separate images to DNJ and DSJ, also literature such as Kaye has separate photos and text on both. I reckon do nowt and see if ordure gets chucked. I've also discovered a stunning image of ATJc on Flickr which I haven't yet referred to. Eee, it's fun. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 22:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

WTT on Flickr

Hello, I've found this on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/16418497@N03/8080696657/in/pool-1748003@N23/lightbox/ I regard it as stunning, though perhaps I'm in a minority of one! Can you please tell me the gist of the rules regarding using such things in Wikipedia? In heaven I'd like to be able to make it openly visible in the Duckmanton Junction article and link it to the Chesterfield MP and Arkwright Town articles. Are either or both of these options legal, moral and unfattening? I know how to link, but how do I make it visible, if it is Ok to do so? Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 09:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I can't see a date on there but imho the copyright is owned by BRB (Residuary) Limited. As BRB is going to be abolished very soon, the copyright would go to the Crown. Crown copyright protects a work for 50 years from the date of publication, so if the WTT predates 1963 it could be uploaded to Commons. Best probably to wait for definitive confirmation of the demise of BRB, it could happen in July. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:40, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

If you look at the parent page http://www.flickr.com/photos/16418497@N03/8080696657/in/pool-1748003@N23/ you'll see that it shows "© All rights reserved", which means that even if the person who uploaded it to Flickr owns the copyright (which I doubt, see Lamberhurst's post above), it's inadmissible for upload to commons: (see Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr and I'd like to use a photo I found on Flickr. How do I do that?), and only admissible for upload to Wikipedia if you can prove a cast-iron WP:FUR. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

thanks both of you, I'll just link is as a reference. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 11:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I notice that this WTT page has rows marked "Class", containing letters G, H, J. It therefore dates from before 18 June 1962, because on that date, the numeric system to indicate train class replaced the letter system, see

• Perren, B. (1962). abc British Express Freight Trains. Hampton Court: Ian Allan. p. 64. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

The numeric system is still in use, see Rule Book Module TW1 Preparation and movement of trains: General, p. 16, although it has been adjusted from time to time.

Anyway, back to the point. Although 18 June 1962 is almost 51 years ago, that does not necessarily mean that Crown copyright will expire immediately upon the demise of the BRB Residuary Body. This is because copyright terms in the UK are calculated from date of publication not from date of creation, and the WTT was a private document until very recently. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:18, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

A good point. The distribution of WTTs to BR staff would not count as "publication" - this much was confirmed by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd where extracts of the Prince's diary circulated to his friends was held not to constitute a first "publication". Lamberhurst (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Please Mister, can I have my ball back? Chesterfield MP was closed in March 1957 and tracks were lifted. Tracks to and through Markham Junction were lifted before the DMU railtour of 1961 [*DVD (2005). The Lancashire, Derbyshire and East Coast Railway - Memories of a Lost Route. Chesterfield: Terminus Publications. stills on DVD. {{cite AV media}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)] so the WTT would presumably have predated the latter, if not the former, making it at least 51 years old. However, regardless of the issue of whether it can be put into Commons, is there any reason I shouldn't link it as a reference like any other website? Have fun. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 22:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Clowne and Barlborough

Hello Lamberhurst, I hope this is the right way to go about writing to you, if not, please tell me what is, I'm new to all this.

I welcome your edits to C&B and would ask your advice: 1) I struggle with co-ordinates and have settled on using geoLocator for co-ords, OS getamap for OS refs and NPE for historical maps, then I physically type in the values. Is there a better way? Were my mismatching values just a bit out or did they look as if I'd inadvertantly left them in from the maaster I had copied from or had I just made a typo? I thought I'd checked them back from the saved final edition, but I am human! 2) I'm struggling with the photo you've added. I live in exile in Southport now, so can't get over to civilisation easily to have a look, but I visited the C&B site c2008 and the station building was still there and tracks were in situ, but very overgrown. I don't recognise your image, though of course it could be looking away from the station site. Please advise. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 09:57, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I welcome the feedback and it's fine to raise it here, although we could also have discussed it on the article's talk page to allow other editors to see the discussion and contribute. You've made some great progress on the Bolsover & Clowne branches which were a black hole in our coverage of closed railways in Derbyshire.

As for the coordinates, it's really a question of choice. If you have the OS refs (from a book or website) then you can "convert" them into coords using streetmap.co.uk by typing in the OS ref (which takes you to the site on the map) and then clicking on the link below the map which says "click here to convert coordinates". If you don't have an OS ref (or want to check your OS ref), you could use the npemap.org.uk site (linked on the Clowne & Barlborough page) to search for the town and then click on the station (usually marked with a red dot) and that will give you the coords. This will not help for stations which closed pre-1947, for these you need to look at older maps and paper atlases to work out where it would be on a modern map. Once you've found the location, you can look it up in streetmap and that will give you the coords and OS ref.

As for the image, it was taken by Ben Brooksbank who has contributed many images of closed stations to the geograph.org.uk site which is a great place for free images for our articles. According to his description, the image is of the Midland station. With your local knowledge, you may know better. I couldn't see any remaining buildings from Google Street View, just looks like an overgrown wilderness!

By the way, if you have time, it would be useful to have a short line article for the Clowne & Bolsover branches; I think it's the only significant railway line in Derbyshire not to have an article and you've already done a superb routemap. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, this is really encouraging, thank you for taking the time and trouble. I imagined you might be heartily sick of nincompoops coming in and making the same old errors in the same old ways. I have a flood of questions which follow from your edits to Staveley Town, I'll try to limit them to a trickle. 1. What does the structure "....." do, eg re Radford? 2. I would like to learn how you converted my raw external links to your seriously fab versions. I would do it by scrutiny if I had a before and after, but you've done such a comprehensive job I haven't got any befores to compare. 3. I don't have either Quick or Butt (but I have a birthday coming up...) is there any way I can look dates up without owning either? Finally, 4. I'm chuffed that you describe my routemap as "superb" and am game to do an "article", what is an "article" in wikispeak? Can you please point me to an example? Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 00:26, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Not at all. It's always good to welcome new contributors who are not only interested in creating articles for our missing stations and lines but what's more know what they're talking about and give references from published works. That doesn't happen so often so I'm very happy to welcome you onboard and I'll do whatever I can to help. I'll freely admit that I'm not in any way an expert on the Midland; my contact has been with the Great Central. Now for your questions:

• {{rws}} is a short way of linking a railway station without actually typing "railway station" and then piping the link. So you can refer to Staveley Town and Bolsover Castle in a short and quick way.
• Using the {{cite web}} template is not as hard as it looks. There are tools which can automatically convert your pages into templates, see Magnus's tool here.
• There's unfortunately no freely available list of opening/closure dates of stations (except this site!). If you are looking for Butt, you may be able to pick it up on the cheap on Ebay (if you use that) or abebooks.co.uk. Quick is available from the RCHS website but it's not cheap. I'm aware that "Passengers No More" by Daniels and Dench has a list of dates of closure.
• "Article" just means a page just like you've done for Staveley Town. An example of a page about a line is the Lancashire, Derbyshire and East Coast Railway but you don't have to do it the same way; as long as it's ref'd and has some kind of logical structure, that's fine. If you have a look at Wikipedia:Article wizard, this may give you some ideas. You may prefer to get the article ready on your own userpage in a sandbox; using the template {{My sandbox}} on your user page (not the talk page) will create one for you. You can then work on the article and move it to its own page when you are ready. Lamberhurst (talk) 08:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. I was rather disappointed that you "hadn't" replied to me a couple of weeks ago, and now I know why - you had, but I wasn't looking in the right place (a bit like socks and car keys.) Thank you anyway. I will do articles on the Clowne and Doe Lea branches in due course, but I'm trying to keep my eyes on my primary task, which is to "do" the LD. I am working eastwards and have just put Dukeries Junction to bed (for now, they come back to you , don't they?!) when I've done Skellingthorpe I'll do the Clipstones, then the Sheffield Branch then the Leen Valley extension, with article, then Doe Lea Branch article, then Clowne Branch article, then Pleasley West to Westhouses stations and article, then I reckon I'll have said all I have to say, but you never know, I have enjoyed myself so much I might take on gaps like minor closed stations on the ECML.... I have hit a snag with Tuxford North and Duk Junction, I have incorporaed the Great Northern Main Line template, but even though I've incorporated "Collapse" into it it still shows in full every time, any ideas? Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 15:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Now fixed for the Great Northern template - I needed to add a line of code to the original diagram to make it collapse. I've always found myself coming back to earlier articles after having learnt a bit more about writing pages and the possibilities that Wikipedia offers. At least you've mastered the system of referencing; that took me at least two years and using a variety of different methods. Still longer to put together basic route diagrams. The Leen Valley Extension is a particularly large gap and the route diagram would be quite challenging to do, particularly if you want to indicate the other parallel lines. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I enjoy challenges. I had a train journey recently with good thinking time and, unless I've missed something, I reckon I know how to do Leen Valley Ext/Robin Hood/Mansfield Rly, the only tricky bit is Sutton in Ashfield where they fell about each other. Famous last words perhaps. Well done for fixing the GN template. I've done Fled, Fled Viaduct, Clifton & Dodd so far today, with Skellingthorpe this evening I reckon I'll have earned a pint. I noticed the fab Viaduct Box you've added to Fled Viaduct, I hadn't seen one before, do you have the time and data to add them to Boythorpe, Horns Bridge and Doe Lea Viaducts or shall I kick them off? (with Markland Grips to follow.) Enough rambling, please give me your opinion on whether articles on Langwith J Shed, Tuxford Shed and Tuxford Works are warranted, I reckon they are. If you do, shall I ask the person who redrew the LD route diagram to add them, he's rewritten it using syntax I don't know, so I'm stumped how to proceed. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

That would be this edit; I did predict that might happen, here. BTW, per WP:THREAD, please start your replies on a new line. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Infoboxes now added. If you have enough material about the sheds, by all means create the articles. This is an example of one done earlier: Pyewipe Junction engine shed. I can add them into the RDT when you've done the articles. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:33, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

After many perambulations here and there I've had a first bash at the Clowne branch; Doe Lea Branch next, after amy changes you may suggest. I'm on hold on the LD for the moment because I've got the book you drew my attention to coming for my birthday on 9 July. In my sandbox I've done a first draft of a "LD North of Langwith" route diagram which I'd value your comments on before I spend a lot more time on it and get useddenim involved. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 22:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

South Yorkshire Railway

Hello! Maybe you didn’t notice my suggestions at User:Lamberhurst/Sandbox2? Tuvalkin (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - yes, I missed it. The version you've used works as well but I can't help thinking that the icon which you kindly created shows better what has happened here, i.e. a short spur was added to link two previously unconnected lines. The alternative which you've given is good to show curves at junctions. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Handbills

Hello once more. A few weeks ago I loaded a scan of a 1957 foorball excursion handbill from Shirebrook North to Nottingham Vic and a 1950 excursion handbill to Chesterfield Market Place onto Wiki Commons, then attached them to relevant LDECR and GNR station articles. Someone jumped on me on two grounds, 1) they weren't "my own work", which is obviously true, I put that not knowing what to put, but to demonstrate accountability and 2) they are someone's copyright. A small discussion ensued, the upshot of which was that the 1957 image was zapped but no-one seemed interested in the 1950 image, which is still attached to LDECR main line stations. A constructive suggestion was that BR Residuary might own copyright. I therefore emailed them, with the following outcome:

Dear Mr Hull

Thank you for your enquiry of 29 May seeking authority to reproduce images of two BR handbills on excursions on lines in Derbyshire in an article you are producing for Wikipedia.

The property rights and liabilities of the remaining elements of the British Railways Board were transferred into the SRA and its subsidiary BRB (Residuary) Ltd in 2001. The company was transferred to the DfT on 21 August 2005. With privatisation and disaggregation of the industry from 1994, it is not possible to be definitive about the ownership of the intellectual property rights of the former BRB.

This is to confirm however that, insofar as BRB (Residuary) Ltd is the copyright owner of the material to which you refer, it is content for you to copy it for the purposes you specify on a non-exclusive, royalty free, non warrantable basis.

Yours sincerely

Peter Trewin Director/Secretary

Direct Dial - 0207 904 5027 / email - peter.trewin@brbr.co.uk

BRB (Residuary) Ltd, 4th Floor, One Kemble Street, London, WC2B 4AN - BRB DX 37977 Kingsway

---

Original Message-----

From: The BRB Website Sent: 29 May 2013 09:56 To: surveyors Subject: BRB Website Feedback

Name  : David Hull Company : Phone  : 01XXX XXXXXX Email  : david_hull49@XXXXXXXXXXXXX Address : XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Message :

I have two handbills, issued by BR in 1950 and 1957 for excursions using long closed and lifted lines in Derbyshire. I attempted to use them in Wikipedia articles and was told they are your copyright. Can you please tell me how to go about seeking permission to use them? If you can give me an email contact I can share images of the handbills in question. With thanks in anticipation. David Hull

Do you agree that this would amount to a green light to use the images? If so, how should I go about it? Kind regards, DaveDavidAHull (talk) 21:39, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

This is potentially very good news for us. It may even cover not only handbills but also BR official photos and timetables. May I suggest you raise the issue at Wikimedia Commons on this page concerning copyright issues. It would be a good idea to propose that, if they accept that BRB material qualifies as unfree/non-commercial material, whether a standard template could be created to cover all BRB material (thus allowing us to upload it without having to justify for each image why it can be used), something along the lines of this Swedish one. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Have done, DaveDavidAHull (talk) 21:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

has teh "discussion" closed,I wonder? DaveDavidAHull (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Reading through what Carl has written, it seems that what you received from the BRB isn't quite enough to allow us to reuse their material. Could you possibly see whether BRB would be prepared to give a consent in the terms indicated on this page? Lamberhurst (talk) 07:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll be happy to write to him, but could you please draft the text? You seem to have the patience and understanding to wade through this and the ability to render it an accessible format. If I were the chap at the BRB and received a page like the one you've just shown me I would consign it straight to the "can't be bothered" folder. DaveDavidAHull (talk) 14:28, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

OK here goes - Lamberhurst (talk) 17:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

"Dear Mr Trewin, Thank you for your kind confirmation that I could reuse the material referred to in my Wikipedia article. After having produced your email to the administrators who manage the site, I was informed that the wording which you used to grant me authorisation is not considered to be sufficient to enable the material to be considered as free from copyright for the purposes of Wikipedia and its sister sites. In order for it to be considered as such, the following form of wording would have to be used:

"I hereby affirm that BRB Residuary Limited is the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of works produced or owned by British Rail.

I agree to publish that work under the free licence Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation Licence.

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the licence chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me. I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project."

If you would be so kind as to provide me with the above in the form of an email, I can then proceed to use the said material for the purposes of my articles on Wikipedia. Further information about the above authorisation and the licences to which it refers may be found here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates.

Kind regards etc"

OK, back to this. I'm trying to put myself into Mr Trewin's shoes. First of all I have to say that being approached with legalese puts me on my guard, thinking "what am I letting myself in for?" "how will these people use this against me or my organisation?" and "does this open floodgates?" Dont forget that after the Wikileaks abomination Wikipedia is tarred with the same brush, whereas in fact it appears to take exactly the opposite approach.

1. My first problem passage is in your preamble "is not considered to be sufficient to enable the material to be considered as free from copyright for the purposes of Wikipedia" this appears to lead to the universal request that he allow anything to be considered copyright free, ie carte blanche. 2. Next problem, which runs through the legalese, is "Who is "I"" in this lot? The first "I" seems to be him, but the second could be him or could be a Wikipedian offering something for inclusion. The third and fourth "I"s are back to him, but contains the killer text "I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs" which seems to be asking him to say "its all yours and if you want to mess with it and make mnoney out of it, that's fine." OK, it is softened by the following stuff about "provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws." but he almost certainly won't know what they are and is 99.99% unlikely to be interested in finding out. 3. Finally, back a bit to "works produced or owned by British Rail" how would you, I or someone less keen to do the right thing know that a handbill or a timetable or anything else was done by BR ( also, does British Rail include British Railways? it may to Wikipedians, but to civilians?)

I'm putting thsi so negatively because I am trying to anticipate how he might react in the worst case. Like you I see the potential benefit here as being very wide, which was why I was especially disappointed that the talk page merely produced one lawyer's response and no discussion AT ALL.

Coming at it all from a different angle, we want our cake and eat it, ie to cover Mr Trewin's back and to get a form of words which allows us to wang WTTs, handbills, adverts, TT, pamphlets, staff manuals and all sorts into articles without going back to him on a case-by-case basis. Firstly, a naive question, do we have to have carte blanche or nothing? Can't we put things onto Wikipedia so people can't legally mess them about or make money off them, do we have to have "do what you like with it" only? I wish there was a form of words which allowed me to put my 1957 handbill onto Wikipedia which says something like "I have copied this from an original document created by BR, who retain copyright. It may be displayed and reproduced within Wikipedia but not adapted, sold or copied for other purposes without the express permission of the copyright holder." that seems to be a halfway house which protects all concerned. If we could show this to Mr Trewin he could see that his interests would be protected.

This is like being back at work!

Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 11:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Broadstone (Dorset) template

Hi Lamberhurst,

Just wanted to get your reasons for reverting the template on this page back to the Broadstone template??

The many reasons I updated this page to transclude a bigger and more useful template are as follows: The current template is not a "position on network" template, it's a small section of the Somerset and Dorset Joint railway template and it doesn't show very much that is useful or relevant. It doesn't show any main connections from Broadstone eg. Bournemouth or Ringwood or continuations such as Dorchester, Bristol, Bath Spa or London Waterloo! You can't see enough of the current railway network for anyone except a local to identify the location. It also doesn't show the (very local) competing railway lines, which led to the closure of the SDJR and Broadstone. And why does such a small routemap still have distances and times to the start of the SDJR? Lukew151 (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

{{Broadstone Lines}} is aimed at showing Broadstone in the context of the other lines around the station, whereas {{Bournemouth Lines}} is a general overview of all the lines in the Bournemouth area. In particular, as Broadstone is well-known as the meeting point of the Somerset & Dorset and Castleman's Corkscrew, Broadstone Lines shows very clearly the junctions and the limits of the various lines. By contrast, Bournemouth Lines, while providing a good overview of everything in this area, doesn't (and couldn't) provide the same level of detail. Another advantage with Broadstone Lines is that it's a relatively simple template and doesn't need much examination to work out what goes where. However, Bournemouth Lines is more complex and shows a number of stations, many of which have little historical connection with Broadstone. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Beighton Junction

Oops. I am in the process of building a route diagram for Beighton Junction and inadvertantly created an article called "Beighton Junction" rather than one called "Template:Beighton Junction" I have now created one called "Template:Beighton Junction" and am working on it. Could you please delete the false article? I will in due course write such an article, but in the meantime it has already started to waste people's time. Hope this makes sense. Kind regards. DaveDavidAHull (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

You'll need to copy the following text to the page (leaving out the two "no wiki" tags): {{db-g7|rationale=Created in error}}

I've used the rationale "created in error" as it seems to cover your situation but please feel free to change it to something more appropriate if you want. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, either {{db-g7}} or {{db-author}} - more information at WP:CSD#G7.

What you could have done (although it's too late now) was move the page from the incorrect name. At Beighton Junction, you would have located the drop-down menu just to the left of the search box, and clicked the "Move" link in that menu. This would have given a page headed "Move Beighton Junction" with a dialog box. In that, there's a prompt "To new title" followed by a drop-down menu and an entry box. Here, you would have left the entry box alone, and altered the drop-down from "(Article)" to "Template". Upon filling in a reason and clicking Move page, that would have renamed the page to Template:Beighton Junction. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both. If I had a brain cell I wouldn't have wasted your time. I thought I had irrevocably created a template in a non-template place, it has dawned on me that there is no such thing as a template place, all places are blank canvases. I've simply overwritten the route diagram coding I had created with some holding text and will get cracking with writing the article in the next few days. Doh! DavidAHull (talk) 00:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Rail

Hi Lamberhurst. I am intending on a more descriptive, less misleading classification for Britain's railways. Please give your thoughts as to how we can improve the current classification at the railways template where you have been a contributor. Adam37 (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Using Route Diagrams

Hello once more. I've created Eskmeals station and inserted useddenim's superb West Cumbrian Railways route diagram. I've added "|collapse=yes" but it still comes up in full glory. Please tell me what I'm doing wrong so I can deal with it myself in the future. Thanks in anticipation, DaveDavidAHull (talk) 10:03, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You need to replace the first line of the diagram with the code below, omitting the no wiki tags. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

{| {{Railway line header|collapse={{#if:{{{collapse|}}}|yes}}}}

By the way, if you know the standard colour used in Furness Railway's livery, I might be able to create a template which would add the colour to the routebox. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the collapse code, I see you've beaten me to applying it, but I now have it for future reference and for my own RDs.

I believe Furness locos were a browny red, as shown in wiki's Locomotives of the Furness Railway. The sole coloured photo I have of a train is unclear, but the coaches don't look red. Wiki's articles don't mention colour as far as I can see. The fabulous West Cumbria rt diag now needs applying to the stations thereon, is there any tool which enables the likes of me to spot them or to list "candidates" and then put the template in, or is that best left to the likes of you? I am thinking more of my own Derbyshire area. For example, I have come up with a piece in 1960 Trains Illustrated which I would like to add to the ref list of all main line and Beighton Branch stations, but can't see any way other than laboriously going through each one. That is OK once, but every time I come up with something of that ilk? Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 11:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I've fished out my other Furness book, not a mention of colours or coloured picture anywhere, however, both my books are in the same purply/browny/red covers which I reckon is more than coincidence. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 12:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I've been trying to decide on a Furness colour for months. Carter's book uses colour ref no. 29 but describes it variously as "Indian red", "standard dark red", "dark red" and "rich dark crimson", but stresses that it was not the same as the colour used by the Midland Railway, the latter being a "pronounced chocolate shade". --Redrose64 (talk) 13:48, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I took a scan of the colour dab in that book, and have produced {{Furness colour}} which looks like this   which seems a bit dark. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:40, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have to dig out a colour image of a locomotive bearing the livery before assessing the colour. The above colour looks like a decent start based on the description.

Dave, I've not really understood what you want to do with the West Cumbria RDT. If you want to add a collapsed version to the pages of each station in the diagram, you'll have to do this copy/paste job manually. The same for the article from TI. If, however, you're looking for a quick way of referring to a work which you use frequently, you could create a specific template for the book. An example is the template for {{Butt-Stations}}. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

1. I feared the job of adding would be laborious manual copy-find-paste-check-save-find2-paste-check-save-find3 etc. What I was hoping for could be a tool into which I would enter a) the text I wished to enter, eg a route diagram template or a book for the bibliography or a new paragraph or whatever, then b) I would enter the category I was interested in working through, eg "Furness Railway Stations" (please forgive me if that isn't the exact name, I'm talking concepts.) The tool would then offer me an edit-ready version of Aardvark Central station's article, I would paste, check, adjust if necessary, recheck then hit "go", after which it would save Aardvark Central then and offer me Banana North, then Carrot Junction and so on until Zenubia, then finish. This could have three advantages, i) saved effort, ii) completeness and iii) cross-checking the category, as knowledgeable users (who else might use it?) would spot that Rhinoceros Market Place was missing or that Verucca Victoria was included but wasn't a Furness station.
2. I like the idea of standardising references, but here, too, my embryonic ideas go further. As I have worked on the LDEC others and I have expanded the source material beyond what was previously there. So that, for example, the list of sources associated with Shirebrook North is fairly decent. I would like to build what I will call a "Library" (I'm all ears for what Wiki calls it, "Category:LD sources"???) which lists in one place the sources cited in the LD and associated articles, in heaven with one line of commentary, such as "Photobook with many small errors more than offset by exceptionally rare and pertinent photographs". That may be doable now, but I would hope for three-way traffic, ie a) as stated, build a library, b) standardised formatting for anyone to copy and paste rather than have to invent things afresh each time in slightly different ways and c) become a source for a "meta-library" eg "Category:Railway Libraries" into which people could dip.
3. Furness Livery: these might help: [7] [8] (see penult paragraph) [9] (see para 3) One para I found, but then lost (don't ask, doh!) said the FR livery was "Indian Red." I'm no artist, but the things shown in these links look a lot lighter and browner than Midland Red. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 10:10, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Re 1 - that sounds like WP:AWB; the category is Category:Former Furness Railway stations.
Re 3 - Carter's colour for the Midland Railway is no. 28 in his book, which I've also scanned and it comes out as  . If you put the two together,    they look almost the same, but if you draw a pair of decently-large rectangles (see right), the second one (which I've used for the Furness) is definitely darker and browner. But we don't need the exact shade - what we are looking for is omething that's sufficiently different from the colours that we're also using for neighbouring lines. The Midland and the Furness had a joint line between Wennington and Carnforth, so we might show both companies at certain stations. As we're already using {{MR colour}}   for the Midland, my suggested Furness colour is sufficiently different from that - and from two others that we might use in that area, i.e. {{LMS colour}}   and {{BR(LM) colour}}   - that we should avoid confusion. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

will have a look at WP:, thank you.

Furness livery. I agree with your logic and that looking different is more important than being exact. Looking at the images of locos in sunlight I would have said your draft Furness colour is sufficiently different but still too dark, put another teaspoon of cream in perhaps? Dave DavidAHull (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

20.59%	25.1%	30%	34.9%	40%

OK, by leaving the hue and saturation unchanged (2.61° and 65.71% respectively) and varying the lightness, I've produced these:
The last one isn't much different from {{LMS colour}}   - the latter is about the same lightness (40.2%), more saturated (70.73%) and also slightly bluer (353.79%). --Redrose64 (talk) 14:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

MR	LMS	40%
MR	LMS	34.9%

Fab, like beer tasting, things become easier when comparing, can you please do your big, adjacent shapes for Midland red, LMS red and the two rightmost candidate Furness colours? Ideally do two sets: set 1 Midland/LMS/rightmost Furness then set 2 Midland/LMS/2nd rightmost Furness. If you can somehow wangle the image of the Furness loco in somewhere near I reckon it'll become as clear as day. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

See right - I've inserted it above (and therefore to the right of) your post partly for space reasons, partly to get it close to the 20%-40% scale. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:46, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Seriously, seriously fab. My partner, to whom Furness Railway could be Icelandic for Potash Walnut, but who not only understands colours but even understands the concept of "goes with" re clothes, flowers, wallpaper etc unpromptedly agrees with me that the top right colour is both closest to and close to the loco's colour. Gold Stars from Ann and me. Dave DavidAHull (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I've altered {{Furness colour}} from 571512   to ae2a24   which is simply the first figure, doubled. That works out at lightness 41.18%, again exactly double the lightness of the first figure. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

...and as a result of your efforts Eskmeals, Ravenglass and Bootle's prev/next boxes look just the job, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 00:15, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Mislinks in sfnp etc.

Hi, re this fix and others I've done in the past; you might wonder how I spot them so easily - it's because of User:Ucucha/HarvErrors. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - very useful tool now installed. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lowestoft railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Steam Navigation Company (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Olney railway station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *{{{Cite book|last1=Davies|first1=R.|last2=Grant|first2=M.D.|series=Forgotten Railways|title=

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Images on DLR list

I've left a note on the images at WT:UKRAIL. Simply south...... eating lexicological sandwiches for just 7 years 18:01, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Railway stations

Hi Lamberhurst

I just spotted that you had opened WP:RM discussions on some English railway stations which had a county disambiguator at the end of their name: e.g. Whitchurch railway station (Hampshire) → Whitchurch (Hants) railway station. I will support those moves, because as you noted, "Foo (Countyname) railway station" is how they appear in the timetables and are commonly known.

I had noticed a few such glitches before, and had meant to get a full list of them. So your good efforts prompted me to do so, and I have placed the list below. I used WP:AWB to get a list of all articles in Category:Railway stations in England and it subcats, and removed those who names did not end with a close-round-brcaket.

It seems to me that all those with a county name disambiguator at the end need renaming, but that the others are OK. What do you think? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Stations which may need renaming

My own view is that if the disambiguator forms a verifiable part of the station name - that is, it was shown on the station nameboards or on official timetables of the railway company (e.g. Bampton (Devon) railway station) - it goes before the words "railway station"; but if it's something invented by Wikipedia editors (e.g. Witney railway station (goods)) purely to create a unique article name, it should go after. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

That's an impressive list; I had only been looking through the lists of active stations and not dared to look further. I would also include comma separated station names such as Newcourt railway station, Exeter and Christchurch railway station, Dorset. The root of the problem is the absence of a naming convention to achieve a more uniform approach. One such convention does exist but it was never formally adopted. We therefore fall back on the default WP:DISAMBIG rules. This results in a situation where the disambiguator follows the station name only where the national operators explicitly provide for it (as in the Whitchurch stations which I nominated) or where an editor has been WP:BOLD. Where the national operators do not provide for a bracketed disambig, problems arise in applying this approach - see for example this discussion. In particular, it is very difficult to use this approach for stations which need to be disambiguated due to a similarly-named station in another country. In short, a piecemeal approach for active stations and an approach based on boldness for the others.

@Redrose64: I can see your approach but it will not help us with stations such as Upwey railway station, Dorset. More importantly, the manner in which a station is referred to in timetables and on nameboards can be inconsistent and vary over time (see for example the discussions about Penrith, Coombe Junction, West Malling and Wells-next-the-Sea). Also, what to do where the other station which made the original disambiguation necessary closes or changes its name? Did Bampton (Devon) remain as such even after Brize Norton's change of name or did it become simply "Bampton" rather like Buxton railway station (Derbyshire) seems to have become "Buxton" after Buxton railway station, Norfolk and Buxton (Midland) railway station closed? Should we really care? Would it not be better to continue the original disambiguation regardless of subsequent events? Lamberhurst (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Cats for Leeds stations

Hi, I notice that you moved Leeds New railway station‎ and Leeds Wellington railway station‎ from Category:Railway stations in Leeds to Category:Disused railway stations in Leeds. The thing is, neither station is really "disused" - they were amalgamated as Leeds City, which is the present-day station. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I moved them on the basis that they no longer exist in their own right, in the sense that it is no longer possible to purchase a ticket from, say, "Leeds New" to York. Both {{Butt-Stations}} and {{Quick-Stations}} show them as having closed in 1938. The same logic applies to other "amalgamated" stations such as London Victoria and East Croydon, where we don't show the pre-amalgamation stations as still open. Lamberhurst (talk) 12:23, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to East Grinstead railway station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• } were attached to the 5:05pm express from London Bridge to {{rws|Eastbourne}} via Lewes and were [[slip coach|slipped}} at {{rws|Horley}} to be routed via the Three Bridges to Tunbridge Wells line.{{sfnp|Barker|2002|p=

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

European Economic Area

So where is the source for the statement that the Faroes are not a state? I don't see one and fail to see why someone can make that statement, which is untrue in the article as it is written. According to Wikipedia a state is an "organized political community living under a government". Why do we want to leave an untruth be prevalent within an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julien Houle (talk • contribs) 21:25, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

You'll find your answer on the Faroe Islands page. By the way, this discussion should not be on my talk page but on the article's page per Wikipedia:Don't lose the thread. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:38, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Winslow rs - rediscovery of Grip4 report

Well spotted! It was more than I could do!

FYI, I'm about to leave a note at talk:Winslow railway station, about a picture you added - I don't see the point. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I was just looking for some images to brighten the page up, and that one was taken from a similar position to an earlier copyrighted image which I have which shows the station building. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:30, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Yes, if you could have put the old and the new pics side-by-side, that would have made sense and 'bi&av', but the modern picture in isolation loses that impact.

Meanwhile re the hatnote on Horsted Keynes, I now understand the style rule. As an alternative, what do you think of changing it to not to be confused with Milton Keynes Central, which is most likely what was intended in the first place.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for improving the map on the GNGE Joint railway page. Davidvaughanwells (talk) 21:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Dear Lamberhurst, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, especially your recent creation of Ebbw Vale (High Level) railway station. Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk 21:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ebbw Vale (Low Level) railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crumlin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:PERM Request

Hi Lamberhurst. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — xaosflux ^Talk 21:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

The "Knotty"

Hi, you did a lot for the North Staffordshire Railway - see what you can do for Market Drayton railway station, which was its western outpost. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:32, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Good to have an article for this important closed station. My NSR material is limited but I will add what I can. Nthep may be able to help as well. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure I've got something about NSR and GWR services over the Silverdale line but not too much about the station itself as it was a GWR building. Anyway glad to see another redlink vanish off the NSR RDT. Nthep (talk) 22:48, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Finmere railway station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Main line. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Waverley Line - substantial edit - seeking advice

As per Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification points 1 and 4.2, I am seeking advice on this substantial [10] edit on Waverley Line. Discussion at Talk:Waverley Line please.--KlausFoehl (talk) 15:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Borders Railway

You are an author on User:KlausFoehl/Borders Railway. When do you think would be a good time to move it from user into main name space? If your answer were 'earlier than September', then of course one would have to use future tense, not a big problem.--KlausFoehl (talk) 17:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Klaus, let's wait a bit longer. I have quite a lot of material to add. I have been going through my magazine articles and found some useful stuff. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:08, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Nor do I want to rush it. Good to hear you have paper sources. Following the http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Waverley_Line link on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Waverley_Line&action=info ( Waverley Line > Page information > Page view statistics ) there are about 100 page views per day. Short peaks filtered, the visit level is reasonably constant during the last three months. If it started to rise, we should think to move soon. In the meantime we can also wait for announcements from Abellio, fresh photos, and more.--KlausFoehl (talk) 23:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lamberhurst, you really have been productive on the Borders Railway article, quite substantial by now. So 19 weeks to go, hence another seven weeks until driver training is scheduled to start, advance tickets can be booked, and hence I presume ticket prices will be known. One could certainly wait until photos with a nice class 158 on the line emerge. But I am leaning towards moving the article into main space soon. How do you feel about that? Thoughts, considerations, comments?--KlausFoehl (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I've added nearly everything which I have; there is more pre-2011 but I can add it later. Apart from some copyediting, I'm finished and would have no objection to moving it to main space. My only remark would be with regard to tactics. Presuming there will be a request to merge Borders Railway into Waverley Line, is there anything else that should be done to ensure that the merger does not take place? My idea was to try and improve the Waverley Line article by adding references and reinstating the deleted text. However, this would take time (at least until after May) and I'm waiting for the new edition of David Spaven's book to be published. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

This one vocal demand for one and only one and not more than one article, talk about throwing rattles out of the pram. Now in earnest. The Borders Railway article is already quite long, longer than most other railway line I was reading up. Waverley Line or Waverley Route currently has the problem of missing sections, I see some risk of a merge suggestion of that torso into Borders Railway. I personally see a good case for two separate but complimentary articles, and there are several precedents of similar articles pairs.

Let's not forget other aspects. Waverley Line is getting ~100 daily visits, Waverley Route and Borders Railway 5-10 each. On an uncontroversial existing line one has ~30 daily readers for the modern line, and ~15 for the historic line. Now Waverley Line is what is linked, but I read from these numbers that readers are not looking for steam engine on Shankend Viaduct. I think quite a few are actually looking for the new railway line, and I think these should be able to find something on wikipedia.

And since that massive deletion end of March things have gone very quiet on Waverley Line. Page watchers count 35. If there were to be a "merge" request, then I would like like to have this debate not immediately before the opening of the line.--KlausFoehl (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

P.S. I have asked for some external advise. In the case of two articles one has the issue of doubling i.e. station descriptions. The main issue is thought to be the rather short(ened) Waverley Line article, in that state easily to be absorbed into Borders Railway. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

P.P.S. May I suggest to move circa 6/6? Later than 28/5 but earlier than 6/9 minus 12 weeks... -- KlausFoehl (talk) 19:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

OK for me. I will see what I can do to improve the Waverley article. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Your work on rebuilding the Waverley Line article with reliable sources has been excellent. Keep it up, and know that your editing is appreciated. RGloucester — ☎ 17:03, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Lamberhurst (talk) 18:10, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Borders Railway about to go live

Hi Lamberhurst, just to let you know that the page move into main name space is imminent. I've asked for the redirect to be deleted ahead of the move, and I presume that an administrator will do that quite soon. Now regarding the sister Waverley Route article, it does still have some gaps, but they are identified and the roadmap is established and pretty clear. And it already looks reasonably healthy as it stands. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 10:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Just a quick note: here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Borders_Railway&diff=666173181&oldid=666098260 I write about "non electrified", and here http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/main-line/driver-training-underway-on-borders-railway.html?channel=524 (which google found 33 minutes ago) "Written by Keith Barrow" one finds "non-electrified". Coincidence? -- KlausFoehl (talk) 15:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

These lazy journalists profiting from our hard work! Lamberhurst (talk) 07:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

But the photo would nicely fit our wikipedia article. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 10:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

We'll have to see what comes up on Geograph or if any editors in the area upload images. I'm a lousy photographer and won't unfortunately be able to get there for the opening. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:24, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Borders Railway Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Borders Railway Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I've just looked at that image... it's just a blank rectangle. The image source is

<?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 20010904//EN"
 "http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/DTD/svg10.dtd">
<svg version="1.0" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
 width="512.000000pt" height="470.000000pt" viewBox="0 0 512.000000 470.000000"
 preserveAspectRatio="xMidYMid meet">
<metadata>
Created by potrace 1.12, written by Peter Selinger 2001-2015
</metadata>
<g transform="translate(0.000000,470.000000) scale(0.100000,-0.100000)"
fill="#000000" stroke="none">
</g>
</svg>

I know quite a bit about SVG, and the first thing I notice is that there are no elements that actually draw something. There are in fact just three elements here - the <svg>...</svg> element is an enclosure for the whole drawing, and also defines its dimensions and coordinate system; the <metadata>...</metadata> element is an enclosure for some non-displaying documentation; and the <g>...</g> element is an enclosure which does nothing alone, but sets certain characteristics for the graphics elements which it encloses - except that there's nothing inside it.

I think that this image meets WP:CSD#G2. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look. I'm trying to convert a JPG file to SVG format and used one of those online conversion tools but it's failed miserably. I'm having a go at doing it in CorelDraw and hopefully will succeed in uploading a new version before this file gets deleted. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:45, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't attempt to convert JPG to SVG - the principles are so vastly different. Quite apart from the fact that JPEG is raster graphics and SVG is vector, JPEG is also lossy, so the result of converting all the JPEG artefacts into separate dots using some automated tool makes the result look an utter mess. Personally I would redraw it from scratch: if you use a tool like Inkscape, you can use the JPEG as a background, and draw the SVG over it - rather like a tracing. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

OK, I've just had time to have a look at your third version - there's an <image /> element in there, containing a huge amount of binary data - this single element is 96% of the 571 KB file. There are some <polygon /> and <path /> elements later on, but I'm not sure whether these represent the whole drawing or not. This suggests that the tool that you used - apparently CorelDRAW X5 - hasn't fully converted to vector graphics, but has embedded a raster version of the JPEG, which is a bad idea (see c:Help:SVG#Bitmaps). --Redrose64 (talk) 11:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to have a fourth attempt without the JPG embedded. I'm afraid that redrawing it manually is going to be too time-consuming. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:21, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

If we'd wanted to get an SVG-Version of the logo, I'd turn the raster image into black-and-white and have that one traced by the routine inside Inkscape. Use these paths then to cut out the visible parts from an underlying colour gradient. Monochrome parts can be coloured directly.--KlausFoehl (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Borders Railway Logo.svg

A tag has been placed on File:Borders Railway Logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. RGloucester — ☎ 19:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

please check

Someone made the A701 cross the Borders Railway. I corrected that to A720. Could you please check my edit against Spaven-223 given as reference. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 08:31, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

It says in Spaven "the A701 Edinburgh City Bypass". However, this could be an error on Spaven's part. Btw, it also talks about it being "longer" not "wider". Lamberhurst (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, A701 and new Borders Railway have a few miles at least in between them. The only dual carriageway crossing the line is the A720 aka Edinburgh City Bypass. I wonder whether "longer" refers to the rail underpass length. Aerial photos i.e. https://twitter.com/bordersrailway/status/575706062826967040 show that a few more road lanes can indeed be accomodated on either side. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Borders Railway

Hello! Your submission of Borders Railway at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Lamberhurst, if this 6 weeks rule is genuine (section above Yoninah) then it is placed obscurely enough that I did not come across it yet. Hence I am tempted to ignore it tacitly. If that does not work, then I'd state that obscurity point explicitely. Do you have an opinion? -- KlausFoehl (talk) 12:38, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I think this 6 week rule is genuine. In any event, there are now 5 weeks and 5 days until the opening. I will fix the issue raised by Yoninah concerning the hook. Lamberhurst (talk) 07:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Please see new note on DYK nomination template.

BTW articles can stay on the nominations page for weeks/months before they are reviewed, and even more time as issues are resolved. Once we resolve this nomination's issues, I'll be happy to move it to the Special Occasions holding area for September 6. Yoninah (talk) 11:22, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hucknall station

Hi. Redrose64 has suggested that you may be able to contribute to the discussion at Talk:Hucknall station#Station opened in 1993. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 13:32, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Gwendraeth Valleys Railway

Hi, re this edit - the GVR and the BPGVR were different railways. They were separately absorbed by thr GWR at Grouping, on 1 January 1923 and 1 July 1922 respectively. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

You're quite right, but I thought it would be a better temporary place for the redirect as the RDT shows the line. Lamberhurst (talk) 16:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Apology for absence

Hello Lamberhurst, I'm going to be offline for the weekend and hence unable to update Borders Railway in time. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 16:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

It's ok, I'll take care of it and hopefully find some time to complete the missing sections of Waverley Route. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Borders Railway

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Commons category

Hi, did you realise that when you remove the parameter from {{commons category}}, this puts the page into Category:Commons category template with no category set? --Redrose64 (talk) 11:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, no I didn't realise that. I had (wrongly) presumed that the template operated on a similar basis to its Commons counterpart. I will not make any more of these edits. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

You will carry on removing the galleries, won't you? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Oh yes, and poor quality infobox images as well. Lamberhurst (talk) 18:30, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Rail-766

In the Borders Railway, it looks as though you have accidentally put two different RAIL magazine editions under the Rail-766 reference tag, as shown here. Please can you go through the article and correct what info goes in which magazine issue. Thanks. Simply south ...... time, deparment skies for just 9 years 11:42, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that; I've now fixed the refs in question. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

London Borough templates: tube and rail stations discussion open

Hello and a Happy Christmas. Thanks for your recent contributions, improving London's coverage. I would like to invite you to: Category talk:London borough templates.- Adam37 Talk 15:36, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Spencer Road

Hello, Lamberhurst. You have new messages at RHaworth's talk page.
Message added 02:40, 13 July 2008 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Help! All RDTs have Gone Crackers

Hello

I've logged on this morning and found all articles which contain a route diagram have gone crackers. All appeared well when I logged off yesterday morning about 09:30.

I've also tried going in unlogged in, with the same result.

The RDs behave in the same way they do if a "{" has been missed, with gaps between lines and sections displaced.

I've switched off and rebooted, same effect.

I've gone into things I've not gone into for months or even years, with the same effect.

eg Duckmanton Junction, Lancashire, Derbyshire and East Coast Railway, Immingham Dock electric railway station, East Halton, Lowca Light Railway, High Harrington and more.

I'm at a loss to understand what's going on and how to begin to fix it.

Please can you help?

DaveDavidAHull (talk) 12:51, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging it - I've raised the issue here. By the way, I've been following your excellent articles on long-neglected Cumbrian stations and branch lines. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:17, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for acting so promptly, I feared you'd get back to me saying you couldn't reproduce the problem. I really appreciate your kind remark on my Cumbrian efforts this far, I also appreciated the way you gently gave me some outside links as a Starter for Ten on the Lowca Light Railway. Kind regards, Dave DavidAHull (talk) 15:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I think I know what happened, and I've answered at Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template#RDTs incorrectly displaying. If only you had posted this ten minutes earlier - I had to go out to work at 12:50. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Annesley Dido

Hello Lamberhurst, good to hear from you.

Thank you for adding Robotham's book to the sources, I didn't put the Annesley Dido in the list of examples because it is the premier example used in the text of the article, but I don't mind it twice if you don't.

As for it being the most famous, well, you might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment....

It's easily the most famous in my book, but can you imagine defending that against the Gnomes?

Kind regards

DaveDavidAHull (talk) 00:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for creating this article, it's a very welcome addition. I've uploaded a photo of Hollin Well & Annesley station to Commons recently, so I really should get on with an article. Whilst checking Robotham's book, I remembered that there was talk about another station - Annesley Sidings - which no-one seems to know anything about. Probably needs more research. Btw, as you've done quite a bit on Tuxford, you might be interested to know that there's a decent article in this month's Railway Mag on the history of the various stations there. A second part is to follow next month. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I reckon the article in RM is fab, I updated Duk Jct and the Tuxfords a few days ago, but thanks for the nudge. I have Croughton, Godfrey; Kidner, R. W.; Young, Alan (1982). Private and Untimetabled Railway Stations, Halts and Stopping Places. The Oakwood Press. ISBN 978-0-85361-281-0. OCLC 10507501. in front of me, p39 Annesley Sidings existed! He gives it as GCR, at SK524532, between Annesley Sth Jct and Hollinwell & A, for railwaymen, open "by 7 1923" closed 16 Sep 1956. There was also an Annesley Sth Jct Halt SK527529 opened by July 1923, closed 10 Sep 1962. Good luck with that lot and the others nearby, I suspect that some railwaymen used neighbouring stations too, such as Linby and other long-closed ones used for workmen's trains. I look forward to reading about it all. The Dido article and recent forays into foreign territory led me, as things do, to realising that there are all sorts not yet written about, such as "Workmen's trains", "Inspection Saloons", "Directors' saloons" "Brake Third" and "Pagoda shelters", just for starters. Well, I've "done" Pagoda Platform Shelters and found it great fun, spurred on by the supercilious comments by the donowts on the talk page. Kind regards, DaveDavidAHull (talk) 21:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Meetups

Have you ever been to a Wikipedia meetup? There's one in London this Sunday, I'll be there. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:31, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I've moved abroad in the last few years so don't get to many of these. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I was under the impression that you still lived in Kent. --Redrose64 (talk) 06:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

No, now in Luxembourg but I do get try to back when I can. Time on here nowadays is more limited as I have a very active 2½ year old. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Lamberhurst. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)