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
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I am satisfied this meets the GAN criteria, and will therefore pass the article accordingly. Great work! It may have DYK potential. Icepinner02:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
Why are there citations to the beginning sentence? The sources have referred to it as the Gasworks tunnel, so this shouldn't need a citation.
It has two names, Gasworks Tunnel (new) and Maiden Lane tunnel (old). There isn't anywhere else for me to put that in the article, so it made sense for me to cite both in the lead.
Eh fine. "Gasworks tunnel" is used in the design section and would therefore not need a citation in the lead, but I don't mind.
Also add "Gasworks tunnel" in place of "the tunnel" or similar terms
Done, although note that 'bore' refers to a single hole in the ground whereas tunnel refers to all three.
Infobox needs citations for information not already within the article
Done
You didn't do this. You need citations for the location, coordinates, and Down operation speed.
Location and co-ordinates are not needed per WP:CK as they can be obtained by a non-specialised map. The Down operation speed is stated in the sentence beginning "The speed limit..."; I have added parentheses for clarification.
These carry lines A–F It would be better to rephrase this to something like "six lines go through the tunnel" or something, many are not going to be familiar with lines A-F
Changed to "These carry six lines lettered A–F respectively" so people know what A–F is referring to.
Query: What is meant by "0 miles 22 chains" and the likes of it?
Miles are a unit of distance equivalent to 1.6 kilometres. A chain is an 80th of a mile (about 20.1 metres). Chains have always been used in British railway engineering as a subdivision of a mile based on what is convenient and useful, and is used in many other Wikipedia articles.
My question is why the two units are used together, considering it's 0 miles yet 22 chains, but some Googling revealed that the former was probably rounded to 0 considering how 22 chains is the equivalent of 0.275. Icepinner10:41, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikilinks done. The NESA (which is cited) includes mileages in miles and chains. King's Cross is 0.00, and the Gasworks Tunnel is 0.22–0.46; it's not used to measure the mileage, it has a measured mileage because it's on the line.
I think (but can't confirm) that the defined zero point at King's Cross is at the southern end of the main train shed. Some things that are certain include that the buffer stops for platforms 0 through 8 inclusive are 1 chain from that datum; the junctions just beyond the platform ends are at 14 chains; the south portal of the tunnel is at 22 chains and the north portals at 46/47 chains. See Kelman, Leanne (October 2020) [1988]. Brailsford, Martyn (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 2: Eastern (5th ed.). Frome: Trackmaps. map 14A. ISBN978-1-9996271-3-3.. Since a railway coach of the 1939-45 period was 63 ft 6 in overall, and one chain is 66 feet, it follows that a chain is approximately a coach length. Wartime trains were exceptionally long - to release locomotives for freight work, two consecutive passenger trains would often be combined into one so that a single locomotive would haul twice as many coaches as in prewar days. Hence trains of twenty or so coaches were not uncommon, which may well extend into the tunnel. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The proximity of the tunnels to King's Cross prevents the platforms being lengthened As the page for the source can't be accessed, I will assume it is for the station. The above sentence should indicate that platforms at King's Cross can't be extended, if that is the case.
But tunnels don't have platforms? I've clarified it anyway
The problem is that to get the tracks from the eleven platforms (there were once about seventeen) to come together as no more than six tracks through the three tunnel bores, there must necessarily be a number of junctions between the platform ends and the tunnels. It is those junctions that prevent platform extension. Some of the junctions were moved inside the tunnels during 2021, but that won't have made much space available. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All responses solved my query. Btw, you didn't link East Coast Main Line, but I have done it for you.
The other problem is that all the platforms are parallel except 9 and 10 as the station is mainly rectangular. That means that as tracks split off they have to bend back again to be parallel (I realise that's a poor way of wording it) which further restricts station space. I'd wondered before if they could push back the tunnel portals such that Goods Way is on a bridge so there's more junction space but I wouldn't even want to know how much that would cost to gain 20–30 metres of platform length. JacobTheRox(talk | contributions)19:12, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
be level Query: I understand what this is, but should this be less technical? Or is it simple enough to understand for the general audience?
During World War II, some express services ran by the London and North Eastern Railway were so long that they stretched into the Gasworks Tunnel when the locomotive stopped at the buffers at King's Cross, including trains of more than twenty cars This is very trivial imo
I thought it should be included to demonstrate how close the tunnels are and the impact it has on operations. If you go to King's Cross you will see the tunnels are literally right at the end of the platforms.
Although it's a pretty cool fact, it doesn't really pertain to the story of the tunnel.
Removed as it is trivia. Shame though as it's a cool fact
ECML's full name needs to be mentioned in the body with the brackets and stuff.
Removed acronym
throat of King's Cross station Maybe reword it as "throat" is a bit strange
Why is [1] used in The first LNER train passed through the Eastern bore at 07:01 on 26 April 2025, before arriving into the newly built platform zero? I can't find it supporting anything in that statement
Removed
to have new signal-boosting technology fitted inside. This stops devices from losing signal Clarify this is meant to be for mobile devices. "Devices" is really vague in this context.
Done
In the modern day I would avoid this under MOS:NOW
I know, I was just suggesting how the full PDF should be linked as some details in the cited statement don't appear in the abstract, but I really don't mind. Icepinner00:54, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What makes Michael Holden of Rail Advent a "subject matter expert"? As far As I know, he started a bunch of heritage groups.
What makes him need to be a subject matter expert. As he is giving a first-hand account of an event corroborated with information from LNER, I think its use as a source is fine. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources, but these claims are not very exceptional.
Others: I have found this paper, which could have potential use. I can't access the source, but I believe this paper could have a lot of valuable information.
I can't access it either, but I've added {{refideas}} on the talk page.
I went the other day and by coincidence the fire alarm went off :( Quite cool to see so many people being evacuated though. Don't thinnk there was an actual fire or anything.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
· 
· 
