Talk:Filton Abbey Wood railway station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Change name[edit]

Can some clever person please change Abbeywood to Abbey Wood (the station title is definitely two words) on both the article title and in the text. Thanks - Adrian Pingstone 20:19, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Portakabin[edit]

The change from Portakabin to temporary building may seem petty but others have been sued, or at least threatened, over this sort of thing. Lawyers write to magazines insisting that their brand name is not used generically. I can recall Private Eye having a problem with the legal people acting on behalf of Biro and I think Tannoy have done the same thing. Britmax 09:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Service pattern[edit]

I think that the service pattern at Filton is too complex to show in full. Don't forget that this is an encyclopedia, not a timetable. How about this...

Preceding station   National Rail National Rail   Following station
First Great Western
First Great Western
CrossCountry
Mondays to Saturdays only, limited service

There are esentially just two FGW routes (lef tor right at Filton Junction), each of which has up to three terminal points at one end or other, plus the odd CrossCountry service. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Filton Junction[edit]

There are a number of references in the Infobox as if this station is a rebuild or rename of Filton Junction station. It isn't, the names refer to two separate and distinct stations. As the main text says, Filton Junction station was finally closed in 1996 when Abbey Wood station opened a few hundred yards to the south of the former (should be past tense though). Could this be made clearer in the infobox? I presume the map co-ordinates cited refer to Abbey Wood rather than Filton? In fact Filton (Junction) station should, I think, have its own page; or at least its own paragraph! Anyone else agree? Andywebby (talk) 16:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't have an article on Filton Junction station alone - if anything, we should cover the diamond junction of lines in the area. There's a lot involved there that's to minor to justify their own article, but the diamond deserves coverage.
Historically Abbeywood has almost nothing in common with Filton, even though they're adjacent. Filton Junction was an important junction that became a convenient place in which to put some very minor platforms too. Abbeywood was a development from scratch, to handle commuter traffic for the large MOD site. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've expanded the history of it all. We can split it if needbe. I'd say that Filton 1 and Abbey Wood should be the same article, as they were more or less the same site, and then it just makes sense to put Filton Junction in there too. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Filton Abbey Wood railway station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 17:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC) I'll start this review this afternoon. --Coemgenus (talk) 17:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cool cool cool. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
  • A few preliminaries: the images, their licenses, and their captions look fine. References look legit too, at first glance. No edit wars or obvious POV. Now, on to a closer read... --Coemgenus (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Over the decade 2002–2012, passenger numbers at Filton Abbey Wood almost doubled, from 0.395 million to 0.771 million" This might be better expressed as ..."from 395,000 to 771,000", since that's how people usually say numbers in that range.
     Done -mattbuck (Talk) 22:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A single direct service from London Paddington calls at Filton Abbey Wood in the morning, continuing to Swansea, but there are no direct services to London." You can get a train there directly from London, but can't return directly to London? Is that right, or am I reading this wrong?
    No, you're reading that correctly. It's one of those oddities of the timetables. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "4 miles 53 chains (7.5 km) from Bristol Temple Meads" Do people usually speak of miles and chains in Britain? It sounds weird to me, but it could be a difference in dialect (in the United States, we typically measure in miles and feet).
The railways of Britain are surveyed in miles and chains, and these distances are printed in several WP:RSs such as
  • Yonge, John; Padgett, David (2010) [1989]. Bridge, Mike (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 3: Western (5th ed.). Bradford on Avon: Trackmaps. ISBN 978-0-9549866-6-7. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
They are painted on bridges, tunnel mouths and other structures. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A regional difference, then. No problem. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The station continued in use until 1 July 1903, when it was closed and replaced by a new station further north." How much further north? Never mind, I see this is answered in the next section. Might be useful to mention the distance when you first mention the new station, though.
     Done -mattbuck (Talk) 20:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That long chart of the historical railways that used the station is nice; I'd make it collapsed, though. It interrupts the flow of the text.
    Assuming that you mean the three boxes headed "Preceding station Historical railways Following station" - those are known as "routeboxes", and they are never collapsed. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    The Filton Junction one is particularly long due to the awkwardness of the layout - Henbury, London and Wales lines all feed in to Filton, but out the other end there's only one line, and that had the discourtesy of changing next station a lot. So there is redundancy, but it's not possible to address it any other way I think. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Also there's the problem of the junction, several miles west, of the South Wales Main Line and Cross Country Route - until Bristol Parkway was built, they could both claim "next" stations. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if that's the standard for train station articles, then I guess you should keep it. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The remains of Filton Junction can still be seen from passing trains, and the two western platforms are still in situ..." I'd say "still exist" instead of "are still in situ" More common language, easier for the average reader to grasp.
    I think in situ sounds and flows better. Perhaps there's some third option. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Since it means "in place", maybe that would work? --Coemgenus (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do people commonly consider the second and third stations the same? I can see why you'd address them in the same article, but they are ¼ mile apart.
    Honestly that's a good question. I decided to combine them because they are effectively the same station, one replacing another. In principle you could write three different articles, but that seemed to be overkill, when frankly someone who wants to know the history of one will likely be interested in the history of all three. Also the other names redirected to this page to begin with. I'd welcome Redrose or other WT:UKRAIL people to comment on that aspect. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    It's fine with me as far as this GA review goes, just seemed like a question that might come up. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's all for now. I'll wait for your answers on these before taking a second pass at it. --Coemgenus (talk) 19:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changes look good, and I didn't see anything else worth mentioning on a second reading. Passed! --Coemgenus (talk) 23:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      Thanks very much! -mattbuck (Talk) 09:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anomalies and further info on goods yard[edit]

There are some anomolies in the article:

re Filton Junction: "The station buildings were demolished in 1976, as were the platforms serving Badminton Line trains, as no trains on this line called at Filton anymore. The remaining two platforms had small replacement shelters built on them.."

This is not strictly the case - the Badminton platforms were demolished well before the station buildings - this allowed for track realignment on the curve toward Stoke Gifford. In fact one of the photos accompanying the article shows the station buildings to still be substantially intact in June 1977.

Name: "..and for 58 years was known as Filton Junction"

The length of time seems irrelevant unless you say what the name changed from and to - It reverted to plain 'Filton' on 6th May 1968 [1]

History: "The first, Filton, opened in 1864 just north the site of the current Filton Abbey Wood..."

however next paragraph:

First Station: "The first station at Filton opened on 8 September 1863 when services began..."


Further Information may be worth including

re the Goods yard:

The article reads "Facilities included a shed and covered loading platform, and, in later years, a coal depot..."

A coal siding was added after WW1 (designated 'NCB siding' after 1948). Goods facilities closed on 5th July 1965 except for coal traffic - [2] By this time a large Coal Concentration Depot had been established in the goods yard. "Opened in October 1965 by the Chairman of the National Coal Board, Lord Robens. Trading as the Bristol Mechanised Coal Company Ltd it was the first concentration depot in the South West of England, and the most modern of its kind at the time." Source http://bristol-rail.co.uk/wiki/Filton_Coal_Concentration_Depot This seems important enough to warrant an expansion of this paragraph?

Track Layout Changes:

Is it worth mentioning that when the lines running from Bristol to Filton were quadrified, the Badminton lines become the 'Main Lines' whilst the South Wales lines became the 'Relief Lines' between Filton Junction and Doctor Day's Junction. Later de-quadrified as part of the Bristol MAS project in the late 60s but currently undergoing re-quadrification? Andywebby (talk) 23:42, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Andywebby: I've corrected the date as mentioned, and changed the wording of Filton Junction. Regarding the buildings I'd have to check the sources, but I left them at work so it will be sometime this week. The Bristol Rail wiki is not a reliable source (though images from it are ok), and as I do not have the book you mention I can't add that info myself. Regarding the track changes, I don't believe my sources mentioned that, and unless we can cite it we can't include it. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:35, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andywebby: I've checked my source (Oakley Gloucestershire stations) and it says the principle station buildings were demolished in 1976, so I've amended the wording. Regarding the coal siding, I just ordered that book so will look into it. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:28, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andywebby: I have just got my copy of Clark, and I have updated the article with the information contained within. Unfortunately there's not sufficient info for the detailed bit about the coal siding, but that's probably not too relevant anyway. Thanks for bringing this book to my attention, it looks quite interesting! -mattbuck (Talk) 14:23, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ $$ below
  2. ^ $$ Source: Selected GW Stations Vol 1 - RH Clark publ OPC

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Filton Abbey Wood railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Filton Abbey Wood railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Filton Abbey Wood railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:18, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Filton Abbey Wood railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Filton Abbey Wood railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:26, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is v/v?[edit]

"where facing cross-overs allow transfer between the Main and Relief lines and v/v, and just south of Filton Junction No. 1,"

Some sort of technical jargon? Only thing I can find online is to do with volume in chemistry. Incidentally this section was massively changed last month and I doubt that the old references that are used stand up anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victoriosissimus (talk • contribs) 00:04, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Upon reflection I'm guessing it's vice-versa. Hardly encyclopaedic to have it abbreviated in such a way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victoriosissimus (talk • contribs) 00:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Filton_Abbey_Wood_railway_station&oldid=1218568015"