Talk:Redhill railway station

Untitled 1

It was Tonbridge NOT Tunbridge Wells served by trains; and the timetables do not show any trains beyond Horsham: trains to Chichester/Portsmouth Hbr do not call here. I think it easier to understand if the services which pass through a station are named in that way: ie "Services to and from etc" and not as if the trains going in one direction have no connection with the same trains the other way. Peter Shearan 14:21, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Untitled 2

Chichester/Ports Hbr trains DO call here (xx.02/xx.32 ex Victoria). Joe Sharples —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.3.32.9 (talk • contribs) — Preceding undated comment added 23:05, 7 June 2005

Just a Quick Note

Be careful about going around this station after about 9PM. Chavs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prophile (talk • contribs) — Preceding undated comment added 18:08, 28 March 2006

That's useful to know. Also worth noting that I was going to take some photos of the platforms using my SLR but a station attendant told me that on that private land photographs are not permitted (September 2012). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.152.156 (talk) 21:08, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

There was an article in The Railway Magazine a year or two back regarding where it's legal to take photographs on and around Britain's railways. Basically, you can unless there are specific byelaws against it. The London Underground has such a byelaw - Network Rail generally does not. Current information may be found at Railway enthusiasts - Photography at the NR website. So, unless you were being silly with your flash or tripod, or taking a keen interest in the security cameras, that station attendant was being a jobsworth. Print off that page and show it to him next time he complains. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

St. Johns?

The chronic congestion at the station was however eased after 1 May 1868 when Redhill ceased to be on the South Eastern Main Line to Dover following the opening of the 'Sevenoaks cut off' line between St Johns and Tonbridge railway station.

According to the Wiki page on St Johns station (near Lewisham), it didn't open till 1873. Is this the same station? Valetude (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

@Valetude: WP:DAW. But this can be checked against South Eastern Main Line, because Mjroots (talk · contribs) has been doing a lot of work there recently. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe the station didn't open until 1873, but the line was certainly extended from the junction southwards, with the final bit between Sevenoaks and Tunbridge (1868 spelling) opening in 1868. At that point, the Redhill-Tonbridge line became a branch line, and SEML trains took the new line, saving about 13 miles to Tunbridge and points south and east thereof. Mjroots (talk)

RfC about new infobox photo

Image #1 (current photo)

Image #2 (suggested replacement)

In response to an edit dispute − which image (1 or 2) is better-suited as the main photo for this article? 2A00:23C5:D012:2200:195B:2EAB:9026:C4F4 (talk) 23:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support Image 2. I personally think Image 1 does a very poor job representing Redhill station. Firstly, the photo is not of great quality: even the word "Redhill" is blurry/pixelated, despite being right in the foreground. Secondly, the Network South East signage is out of date − it was replaced with Southern's green signage a long time ago, as can be seen in this image from Google Street View. The café adjacent to the station has also changed branding and looks different now. Thirdly, the station building is partially obscured by the two cars and the people in front; in fact, when looking at this photo, my eyes are immediately drawn to the three people looking into the boot of the car, and away from the station building. That's not the impression I want the "main" photo of the station to give.

By contrast, Image 2 shows a larger portion of the station premises than most other photos. It clearly shows three out of the four platforms of the station (including the recently-built platform), as well as the two through tracks without platforms. The fourth platform is occupied by the train on the left so it cannot be seen; however, this isn't an issue, as this way the picture also shows two of the three TOCs that serve the station, which is a good thing.

Furthermore, I believe that the reasons for reverting the edits given by User:Djm-leighpark and User:Dubmill are not convincing:

"[Image 2 is] more about trains than the station" − again, this picture shows a considerably more significant portion of the station than Image 1. I also do not agree that the trains are the dominant feature of this photograph − the island platform in the foreground alone takes up more space than the two trains combined.

"The picture of the bare platforms could be anywhere" − sure, if you ignore the sign that says Redhill on the right. In a similar way, one could argue that Image 1 could have been taken anywhere. Besides, the point of the main photo of an article about a place is to show a substantial part of that place, not just a label with its name. Otherwise, every railway station article would have a main photo looking like this. In general, "this picture could have been taken anywhere" is an argument that could be used against almost any photograph, so it's not very helpful.

"[The signage] is not out of date as it still looks like that" − the Street View link above provides strong evidence against this statement.

2A00:23C5:D012:2200:195B:2EAB:9026:C4F4 (talk) 23:07, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support Image 1. For railway stations that have buildings, in my opinion it is generally better to show the building rather than the platforms, at least as the primary photo. The platforms could be shown in secondary photos. The signage at the station entrance may have changed but the building hasn't. When I look at the photo, I'm seeing the building. The signage is just an additional detail, although ideally, a similar but more recent photo should be found, one that includes the current signage. I don't have a problem with the car and people in the foreground. It's just showing the station in use, i.e. people who have left the station or are about to enter it.

I will admit Image 1 isn't of great quality, but I still think it depicts adequately what is a reasonably distinctive station building. Image 2, on the other hand, depicts something that isn't at all distinctive. I accept that it is a photo showing the platforms at Redhill station, but it could easily be some other station. You might say, so what, all it needs to do is document the appearance of those platforms, and it's irrelevant if it looks more or less the same as other stations. I suppose that's a valid position but I don't agree with it. When I look at the pages for Euston and King's Cross, for example, they don't lead with photos of the platforms but ones that show the building and entrance. Of course, Redhill is a much lesser station, but the building is still relatively distinctive and so warrants a photo in my opinion. Dubmill (talk) 00:15, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support Image 1. The selection of main image can be somewhat subjective. Sexy Simon has provided commons with some excellent images of stations over a few years now. In my view most up to date best resolution does not always win for lead images, for most page visitors image is only see in thumbnail anyway and I'd agree it is sufficient if the image was of adequate quality.. Redhill was a commute interchange station I endured on and off for a year or two pre-platform zero and the entrance always struck me as distinctive. Sexy simon's original caption constrasted the EMUs rather than captioning the station as the star, and an image consisting of a large expanse of platform in the centre is not in my view the best for a lead image. There is another image on the article that depicts the platforms better but I still !vote Support Image 1. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:33, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
• Support Image 1. Although Image 1 isn't of the greatest quality, Image 1 is much more distinctive than Image 2 and does a much better job of representing the station. Image 2 looks like it could be any railway station and isn't as distinctive as Image 1. I agree with Dubmill here. Rexh17 (talk) 23:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
• The original IP post makes good points, but Support Image 1 in the infobox, bring in Image 2 elsewhere. Image 1 is more distinctive and I believe a more useful lead-image identifier. I would suggest dropping the Platforms 1a/1b image, which seems to have little value if we bring in the new image. I would move the 1955 image into the Platforms 1a/1b slot. I would add the new image in the current 1955 slot. The new image would need a detailed caption, comparable to the caption of the Platforms 1a/1b. Alsee (talk) 23:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support image 1, but highly encourage someone to update it with a better quality photo. Darx9url (talk) 00:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)