I've marked this page for clean up of the writing style. It's appalling! Some examples of poor primary school level English:
"A new Entrance has been opened in The middle of the station. In the Victorian stone building....Also the old red Clocks are gone. They have been replaced by newer, modern types."
"The Waiting room is adjecent to the coffee shop. In the middle taking pride of place is a model of Durham railway station from years ago. Heralding the station's past. The station was known to be dirty and grimy but now it has been revamped to a clean and modern standard."
"Many travellers use this station and sometimes it can become crowded. Of course the station is quite well hidden you must as above turn off to your left almost as soon as you as you are under the viaduct and go up a steep hill."
Is it obvious to someone who has not been to Durham to know that you must as above turn off to your left and go up a hill?
"Before the refurbishment passengers had to stand on the platform waiting for their train to arrive."
MDCollins, I agree with you - the writing style reminds me of someone having a conversation with you over a mobile phone while they are jogging up a long and tiring hill. I would attempt to clean this up myself, but without knowing what is accurate, what isn't and from where any of it could be referenced it seems a bit pointless. Is there any way we could find out whether there are users in Durham who might be able to contribute here?ColourSarge 15:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, just discovered this page as it uses my photo, and it has a distinct ESL air about it. Besides the near-nonsensical style, parts of it are plain wrong: "Of course the station is quite well hidden you must as above turn off to your left almost as soon as you as you are under the viaduct and go up a steep hill." - well, no, you have to turn right almost as soon as you are under the viaduct and go up a steep hill. Stevekeiretsu (talk) 03:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I have been working on a cleanup, along with 2 unregistered users. The fourth phase has just been completed. Anywikiuser (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved.Number57 19:45, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Durham railway station → ? – This does not appear to be the primary topic of this term compared to two stations in the U.S. (North Carolina and New Hampshire. While "railway" isn't common in the U.S., but it's certainly not unheard of, and there are likely to be non-American readers of these articles getting confused. However, I honestly don't know what WP:UKSTATION would suggest for disambiguation here. Perhaps Durham railway station (England) would suffice? At any rate, the base name needs to point to the dab page. Cúchullaint/c 16:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Easy Oppose - Durham Station, UK gets 2.5 million entries and exits, with a further 9,060 interchanges. The North Carolina only has 83,232 (only the 2013 stats are on the article, but I doubt more recent stats are more different), with the other US station having a mere 58,894. Surely that's considerably more than enough to warrant primary topic - this is a common sense primary article and I'd argue that the nominator hasn't done their homework! Jeni(talk) 16:14, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
We don't base primary topic on "entries and exits". It doesn't get an overwhelming number of page views, for instance, even though it's essentially at the base name. The North Carolina station is also significant as a historical building (which wasn't originally a train station). Is it "highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—" that readers are looking for the East Coast Main Line station? It doesn't look like it.--Cúchullaint/c 16:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Looking at the stats you've just pasted, I'd suggest yes, it's more likely than all the other topics combined that readers are looking for the station on the ECML. Thanks for backing up my argument :-) Jeni(talk) 16:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. This is clearly the primary topic for the title "Durham railway station" - if there is not a primary topic for "Durham station" that is irrelevant to which article should be at any other title. Hatnotes exist to solve confusion of the sort you describe. Thryduulf (talk) 12:45, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Oppose, after looking at the page view statistics. sst✈ 13:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.