Difference between revisions of "Talk:Eardington"
From SVR Wiki
(Suggested change) |
m (More comments) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::Maybe just go for the generally accepted definition of a Halt as having no staff and no goods facilities and mention that it has never been officially downgraded (if that is the case) but is usually referred to as a Halt now that it fits that description. | ::Maybe just go for the generally accepted definition of a Halt as having no staff and no goods facilities and mention that it has never been officially downgraded (if that is the case) but is usually referred to as a Halt now that it fits that description. | ||
:::Which suggests editing all "Eardington Halt" and "Eardington station" to Eardington, with a note on the Eardington page that "although sometimes in preservation referred to as "Eardington Halt", it was a full station before the line's closure and in preservation. No evidence has been found that it was downgraded to a halt after it became a request stop after 1974, or after its preservation era closure"? Let's leave that change a few days to see if anything else comes up. Dan, if you have other info to add do you want to include this amendment? Thanks--[[User:Patrick Hearn|Patrick Hearn]] ([[User talk:Patrick Hearn|talk]]) 13:03, 23 March 2017 (UTC) | :::Which suggests editing all "Eardington Halt" and "Eardington station" to Eardington, with a note on the Eardington page that "although sometimes in preservation referred to as "Eardington Halt", it was a full station before the line's closure and in preservation. No evidence has been found that it was downgraded to a halt after it became a request stop after 1974, or after its preservation era closure"? Let's leave that change a few days to see if anything else comes up. Dan, if you have other info to add do you want to include this amendment? Thanks--[[User:Patrick Hearn|Patrick Hearn]] ([[User talk:Patrick Hearn|talk]]) 13:03, 23 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::The part about "trains can not be crossed at Eardington" refers only to signalling, rather than the station's status -- whilst there was (is) a siding, it cannot be used to shunt one train whilst another passes. Is there a different between being downgraded to a request stop and to a halt? In my mind, the two have always been synonymous, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was some subtlety. For the official name, I guess there is the fact that the SVR currently refers to it as "Eardington Halt" on the website... --[[User:Danny252|Danny252]] ([[User talk:Danny252|talk]]) 13:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 13:49, 23 March 2017
There is a mix on this wiki of Eardington station and halt. When was the term "halt" officially used, and should we use Eardington or Eardington station more consistently?--Patrick Hearn (talk) 10:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- It may have simply been "Eardington" (no "halt") throughout its time in GWRGreat Western Railway/BRBritish Rail or British Railways days, with the BRBritish Rail or British Railways 1963 summer WTTWorking Timetable showing it as such (unlike "Northwood Halt" etc.): link. This page states that it became "request only" from 1974, so I would presume "halt" was appended in that year or later (note that the linked page has a lot of information we could add here). I might put out a call on Facebook to see if some contemporary evidence (e.g. timetables with the name printed on) exists showing such a change.
- Regarding names, I think we generally go without "station" for other locations ("Bridgnorth" rather than "Bridgnorth station"), but I'm not aware of any definite choice of style having been chosen. --Danny252 (talk) 11:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- There's a note that "Trains can not be crossed at Eardington or Linley" here and, unlike Northwood etc., it's not identified as a halt, which suggests it was classified as a station in 1948. And in 1962/63, tickets were issued for "Eardington" as against "Cound Halt".
- Maybe just go for the generally accepted definition of a Halt as having no staff and no goods facilities and mention that it has never been officially downgraded (if that is the case) but is usually referred to as a Halt now that it fits that description.
- Which suggests editing all "Eardington Halt" and "Eardington station" to Eardington, with a note on the Eardington page that "although sometimes in preservation referred to as "Eardington Halt", it was a full station before the line's closure and in preservation. No evidence has been found that it was downgraded to a halt after it became a request stop after 1974, or after its preservation era closure"? Let's leave that change a few days to see if anything else comes up. Dan, if you have other info to add do you want to include this amendment? Thanks--Patrick Hearn (talk) 13:03, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- The part about "trains can not be crossed at Eardington" refers only to signalling, rather than the station's status -- whilst there was (is) a siding, it cannot be used to shunt one train whilst another passes. Is there a different between being downgraded to a request stop and to a halt? In my mind, the two have always been synonymous, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was some subtlety. For the official name, I guess there is the fact that the SVRSevern Valley Railway currently refers to it as "Eardington Halt" on the website... --Danny252 (talk) 13:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
- Which suggests editing all "Eardington Halt" and "Eardington station" to Eardington, with a note on the Eardington page that "although sometimes in preservation referred to as "Eardington Halt", it was a full station before the line's closure and in preservation. No evidence has been found that it was downgraded to a halt after it became a request stop after 1974, or after its preservation era closure"? Let's leave that change a few days to see if anything else comes up. Dan, if you have other info to add do you want to include this amendment? Thanks--Patrick Hearn (talk) 13:03, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
