Talk:Plateway

Should this page be merged with wagonway? Pt1234 16:52, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Wagonways even earlier

Wagonways were even older than plateways, and sometimes consisted of grooved stone blocks, with no iron plates aka rails.

Tabletop 12:36, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Plateway and wagonway

Plateways had cast iron flanged rails. Wagonways began in the 17th century and like modern railways had the flange on the wheel. Oppose merge. (Sorry, forgot to sign it originally) Peterkingiron 18:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

This article covers similat ground to a section in Wagonway. I wonder whether material should be transferred from there to here, making this a sub-article to that one, dealing in detail with pre-mainline iron railways. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:58, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I support a merge. There is massive overlap throughout this and other areas. The modern "rail tracks" and "permanent way" pages are full of historical development material too, and I believe it is out of place there.

The solution is a single modern rail technology page and a single "development of railway tracks" page, encompassing plateways, wagonways and all the development stuff in the "modern" pages.

This is a huge editing task; I will try and start it in a couple of weeks time; obviously any other collaboration before during or after is most welcome. --Afterbrunel (talk) 08:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted from your redirect. This is the target you chose doe not reflect the conmtent of this article. WE already have

• Wagonway
• History of rail transport

and several more parallel articles that need to be rationalised (by merger), but what you did jumps over 200 years of development. I would suggest that converting articles to redirects should be at the end of the process, not its beginning. What you did was not a merger. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC)