Trains: in UK

Trains Portal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport Associated projects or task forces: /  This page is supported by WikiProject UK Railways.

Archives

September - December 2006 January - April 2007 April - June 2007 May/June - July 2007 August - September 2007 September - October 2007 October - November 2007 November 2007 - January 2008 January - February 2008 February - May 2008 May - June 2008 June - August 2008 September 2008 - February 2009 February -

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Hi All,

I am creating a wiki all about Transport in The UK. As this WikiProject is about UK Railways, it would fall under the scope of the UK Transport Wiki. If you are interested please leave a message on my user talk or on My UK Transport Wiki user talk.

Thanks - Dudleybus ^{Spake 2 me} 09:15, 4 June 2008

Request for help - the figures for continuous tractive effort just don't seem to add up (multiply) - see the talk page for details - is it me, or a typo, or what.?—Preceding unsigned comment added by FengRail (talk • contribs) 19:44, 21 February 2009

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:47, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Two new categories ahve been created:

• Category:Extreme reaches of National Rail
• Category:Extreme reaches of National Rail in England

I'm not sure what value these are going to add as they can only ever contain about four entries each. I removed the former from articles that were also tagged with the latter, but I notice that my edits have been reveresed. Before we get into an edit war over this, can anyone offer a reason why we need both categories on one article, when one is a sub-category of the other? Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought these would be better as a list, though lists and categories aren't mutually exclusive —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 12:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have a book or anything that states this station actually existed? I found out about it from the Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway map, where it's redlinked. But it's not on a map from 1953, and we don't appear to list it elsewhere. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just been informed that it did exist, on the line to Winchcombe. I can't provide any refs at the moment, but I've got a pre-grouping atlas and similar which I'll look at tonight. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 12:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have been a short-lived halt open between 1908 and 1917 [1], which would explain its absence from the 1953 map. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The strange thing is that there is no high street in cheltenham on the line. Still, thanks for confirming it existed. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page seems to give more info about its location: [2], possibly near a bridge over the High Street? Lamberhurst (talk) 09:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jowett's lists it as High Street Halt on the GWR line and High Street Goods on the LMS line - two separate stations. Mjroots (talk) 07:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have just found a recently created {{Rws}}. Is this different in any way to the long-established {{Stnlnk}}? Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was only a difference in the categories. I have redirected the new template to the old one, with a slight mod on the old one. Simply south (talk) 14:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We must have the same thought processes, or at least the same watched pages Geof -- I asked the same question on the WP:Trains talk page at about the same time!

Thanks for sorting this. EdJogg (talk) 16:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are currently two similar articles covering the Hornby company: Hornby Railways and Hornby Trains. I've started a discussion regarding merger here. Incidentally, I'm not sure if model railways fall into this project, but I've decided to mention it here anyway. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 22:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally i would say that it is within the project's scope, just like a certain UFO. My understanding is this project covers all rail transport related articles to the UK. Simply south (talk) 09:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been expanding the article (more still to do). What is the consensus to splitting section 3.3 off into a new article? That section has plenty of scope for expansion still. If left, it could start to dominate the article. Sections 3.1 and 3.2 can stay in the current article as they are relatively small and not likely to grow significantly although the original K&ESR freight stock is still to be added in a narrative form to section 3.1. Mjroots (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely split! I think that's the most thorough coverage of any heritage railway here. EdJogg (talk) 21:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, any thoughts on a title? How about "Rolling Stock of the K&ESR"? Will split tomorrow, am heading off to bed now. Mjroots (talk) 21:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That title would be fine if you split the whole of section 3. To be strictly accurate for just 3.3, perhaps append with "(heritage railway)"? With K&ESR in full it will be an impressively long title!:

• Rolling Stock of the Kent & East Sussex Railway (heritage), or maybe
• Heritage railway rolling stock of the Kent & East Sussex Railway??

Tricky!

EdJogg (talk) 22:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My 2p worth: keep it in the article, but move it to the end to form a de facto appendix, so the article isn't interrupted by the long list. See the "Derivation of street names" section in Noel Park for the sort of thing I mean. – iridescent 22:24, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The section is almost at the end of the article already. There's only the small section on twinning with the CFBS after it. The history flows nicely as it is, as the twinning was done after a lot of the rolling stock was acquired. Mjroots (talk) 04:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tweaked Edjogg's suggested title a bit, and have moved the section into a new article. Mjroots (talk) 07:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to suggest that all articles on Heritage Railways in the UK use a standardised format for individual items of rolling stock. Doing this would make editing of articles easier when items are moved between different railways. The format currently in use on the Bluebell Railway and Kent and East Sussex Railway is the format that I would suggest. Mjroots (talk) 05:34, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another can of worms has been reopened again: see Template_talk:Major_UK_railway_stations#Birmingham and feel free to join in..... --RFBailey (talk) 22:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of alphabetical listings of railway stations, such as UK_railway_stations_-_B. They seem to use fairly inconsistent formatting and templates.

I'm working on a linked open data project for UK railways at http://ontologi.es/rail/ and as a consequence have enough data to easily create new versions of these alphabetical listings in an automated manner. Is this something that people would like me to do? Tobyink (talk) 19:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Answers below please...

Hi

would somebody (or bodies) be kind enough to review my first attempt at drawing a route map. It can be found here. Eventually I'll add it to the NSR article but I'm sure what I've done can be improved upon.

So that my understanding on creating maps is increased, rather than edit the map could any suggestions for changes be placed on my talk page.

If you want an online source to compare against then there is one at http://www.lnw1.demon.co.uk/nsrsg/map/systemmap.htm

Thanks NtheP (talk) 15:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]