Talk:Abergynolwyn railway station

Trains Portal

This article 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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wales Low‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History[edit]

@The Mirror Cracked How is the information that you removed redundant?WT79 The Engineer (talk) 09:26, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@WT79 The Engineer: "Around 1910, the primary passenger terminus moved again, as Tywyn Wharf Station was opened to passenger traffic, and thereafter the passenger station at Pendre became a minor request stop, although the railway's sheds and works did not move from Pendre." is already in the Pendre article and is nothing to do with Abergynolwyn.

"As already mentioned, the first passenger trains started at Abergynolwyn" is self-evidently redundant. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 09:42, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mirror Cracked:Yes, but the amount of information removed about Ty Dwr seemed exessive to me.

"As already mentioned, the first passenger trains started at Abergynolwyn" was used to introduce the section on Ty Dwr, which was in a seperate section so as not to sidetrack the main 'history' section.WT79 The Engineer (talk) 09:49, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mirror Cracked:Please can you explain? WT79 The Engineer (talk) 13:22, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which information exactly do you consider "excessive"? Perhaps it is "the incline was not safe for locomotive use and thus the railway beyond that point was inaccessible for locomotive traction" which is misleading because it implies locomotives could go up the incline, if it was made safe, which is not true. Is it the claim that the loco shed was built at Ty Dwr because it was easy to "transport building materials to that site for the construction of an engine shed" when in act the shed was timber, not slate? Was it the claim that the slate tower at Ty Dwr was dismantled "as stone was needed elsewhere (approximately 1 mile south of Dolgoch a major landslip occurred which required the building of a slate retaining wall)" which is wrong, since the landslip occurred in 1957 (see: https://www.talyllyn.co.uk/history/part-7-restoring-line) and cannot possibly be the reason for dismantling the water tower in 1968?

I don't think it is necessary to separate out the Ty Dwr section, since it is an integral part of the history of Abergynolwyn. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 18:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mirror Cracked: Fine, if you wished to replace the word "safe" with the word "suitable", to imply that it was an integral part of the design of the incline, fine by me.

sorry about the mistaken claim of a slate engine shed at Ty Dwr, I must have mis-remembered the content of a 1970s magazine in which the Ty Dwr site is discussed (it had just been excavated as part of work on the extention).

The source that I sited (Issue number 260 of Talyllyn News) explicitly mentioned "When the Dolgoch slip occured the pillars were dismantled and the material used as part of the retaining wall that was built at the slip site". Sorry if it was inaccurate; I believed that an article, by Ian Drummond (the chairman of the TRPS), would be about as reliable a source as I was likely to get.

Please could you provide an additional source to verify your claim that the watering point was dismantled in 1968?WT79 The Engineer (talk) 07:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were the one who added the 1968 dismantling date in this edit. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 07:54, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mirror Cracked: Sorry, my mistake. Typo, I intended to write '1958' not '1968', and actually should have wrote '1957', sorry. WT79 The Engineer (talk) 08:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mirror Cracked: Please may I reinstate that information into the article, with a corrected date? WT79 The Engineer (talk) 08:09, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]