Talk:Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway

Trains: in UK Mid‑importance

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

Mid

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

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

Warwickshire

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.WarwickshireWikipedia:WikiProject WarwickshireTemplate:WikiProject WarwickshireWikiProject Warwickshire articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Gloucestershire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gloucestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gloucestershire 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.GloucestershireWikipedia:WikiProject GloucestershireTemplate:WikiProject GloucestershireWikiProject Gloucestershire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway.

Name: GWSR not GWR?

All the signs and literature I've seen of this line use the name "Gloucestershire Warwickshire Steam Railway" (abbreviated to GWSR) and not "Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway". Should this article be moved to Gloucestershire Warwickshire Steam Railway too? Andrew Oakley (talk) 11:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, looking through their website, this seems to be a figment of my imagination. Am I mistaken or can anyone clarify the name discrepancy? In any case their website clearly uses "Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway" without the "Steam" despite being located at the GWSR URL, so I withdraw my proposal to move this article. Andrew Oakley (talk) 11:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record. The railway is owned by GWSR "Gloucestershire Warwickshire Steam Railway PLC" who control the running of the track, but GWRL "Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway Limited" provide fund raising and other support for the railway, so GWR "Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway" is the generic name for the railway since Diesel locomotives are also supported on the line. Lsces (talk) 18:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheltenham High Street

Are we sure this station existed? The high street in Cheltenham is nowhere near the line, it's not listed on the list of disused stations, and there's no "station road" or anything. It's also not on the map. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto Cheltenham Race Course station. I've also removed a few halts which were on lines near this one (Great western, not LNWR). -mattbuck (Talk) 17:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broad Marston / Pebworth

I would suggest changing Broad Marston Halt on the route diagram to Pebworth Halt. Broad Marston was open for a relatively brief period of 12 years between 1904 and 1916 while Pebworth (at a site some 300 m away from the earlier halt) lasted from 1938 until 1966. -- Picapica (talk) 07:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1937 (not 1938) to be accurate - but why not have both on the diagram? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry: yes, 1937 (my typo). The only thing is, if we include Broad Marston Halt then we ought also to include the equally short-lived Chambers Crossing Halt and Evesham Road Crossing Halt (between Milcote and Stratford). Thoughts? -- Picapica (talk) 21:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1904-16 in both cases, according to Butt. There is a book with scanty information on all of these:

Mitchell, Victor E.; Smith, Keith (1998). Stratford upon Avon to Cheltenham. Country Railway Routes. Midhurst: Middleton Press. ISBN 1 901706 25 7. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

In this, Pebworth Halt gets a section of its own (Mitchell & Smith 1998, fig. 38 and map preceding fig. 39), but the others are merely mentioned as asides in other entries: Evesham Road Crossing Halt between Stratford-upon-Avon and Stratford-upon-Avon Racecourse Platform (Mitchell & Smith 1998, map following fig. 15) - I have also located it on a 1914 1:2500 OS map at grid reference SP196545; Chambers Crossing Halt between Stratford-upon-Avon Racecourse Platform and Milcote (Mitchell & Smith 1998, fig. 19); and Broad Marston Halt between Long Marston and Pebworth Halt (Mitchell & Smith 1998, fig. 38).

We could have all of them. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there's no doubt that all of these halts functioned in the period 1904-16. There is a photo of Evesham Road Crossing Halte [sic] at http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/eveshamroadcrossing.htm (it was sited immediately south of the level crossing). The idea of these additional stopping-places at just about every road crossing was a French one borrowed by the GWR –

Halte - Petite station à personnel réduit où le train ne prend que les voyageurs et où l'arrêt est même parfois facultatif. (1915 - Trésor de la Langue Française Informatisé) – Small station with a limited staff where trains pick up [and set down] passengers only and where stops are sometimes made by request only. (my translation)

– hence the French spelling. They even had – as the photo shows – French-style low-level platforms (no doubt all three halts were built to the same pattern). I remember at least one rail-motor carriage of the type that was used to call at these halts still being in service on occasional Stratford to Honeybourne services (especially the last journey of the evening) in the 1950s – and they were equipped with retractable steps. The experiment with these new stopping-places came to an end, as a wartime economy measure, in 1916.

I will add these additional calling-points over the weekend. -- Picapica (talk) 13:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Route diagram template now updated as per above. -- Picapica (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fire Department

Am I correct in thinking that this railway is the only one in the Country with its own ACTIVE private fire service? At least it has to be the largest in the Country exclusively serving a preserved railway. The Severn Valley Railway (SVR) had one a number of years ago (+15yrs) but I haven't heard or seen anything of that for a long time. Saqitus (talk) 16:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC) Simon Nash[reply]

The Bluebell Railway have one, it's based at Horsted Keynes. It doesn't serve the Bluebell exclusively - I don't think they're allowed to: they can be (and occasionally are) called out to respond to an emergency outside the railway's land by West Sussex Fire and Rescue Service if the Bluebell engine & crew happen to be in a better position than one of the W.S. fire engines. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought was the case, but their website says it has sadly been disbanded. Bluebell Railway Fire Service. The GWR FD also provide First Responder services, I'm pretty sure. Thanks. Saqitus (talk) 08:07, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Simon Nash[reply]

GWR or G-WR

Can we stop the reverts and have a discussion please? Evidence, policy, consensus, an ting? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just picked up two issues of The Railway Magazine at random (one is the current issue, it just happened to be closest), and find that they use the acronym G-WR.

Pigott, Nick, ed. (2012). "Chicken Curve repairs progress". The Railway Magazine. Vol. 158, no. 1334. Horncastle: Mortons Media Group. p. 66. ISSN 0033-8923. although the G-WR still needs to raise another £115,000 to complete the work {{cite magazine}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
Pigott, Nick, ed. (2010). "2-8-0 summer booking". The Railway Magazine. Vol. 156, no. 1311. London: IPC Media. p. 59. ISSN 0033-8923. to remain at the G-WR until the end of August {{cite magazine}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

If my memory serves me right, they've been doing this since the 1980s, to avoid confusion with the real GWR. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:43, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yup sounds reasonable. On the other hand, the railway's own website seems to quite consistently call it GWR with the very occasional hint of GWSR. Is this an important influence on how we should label it? I'm not sure. (I should add btw that I have no axe at all to grind here. I just want it to be stable, preferably because we could reach agreement here.<g>)

Being a GWR member, I can say that we use GWR rather than G-WR, as we are the Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway. It is clearly stated that we are a heritage railway and that we are different to the extinct Great Western Railway. I have made the necessary changes to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TPEditor (talk • contribs) 23:21, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest; and please note that what you describe yourselves as falls under WP:PRIMARY, whereas what others have written about you falls under WP:SECONDARY, which is preferred. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that they really are "the necessary changes" until a consensus is reached that they are. I don't mean this nastily but the "we" doesn't get you any special rights over the article - what other editors think is also important. The whole idea is to reach something that's agreed, not to just keep changing it. It would be good if you had a reply to Redrose64's point other than just changing it back. With thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Timeliness

I've tagged it for timeliness (or whatever you call it!) in that there are quite a few things that are "as of" January or last year or whenever and seem to be making predictions whose outcome might now be known. It would be great if it could be updated to avoid this. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the sortout. There's (I think) just one left, something which was "imminent" in January 2012. So it's finished now, right? :) Best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:27, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

under the "plans" section, it says as of March 2013, which is fine, but it later on goes on to talk about 2011 when the railway was cut in half, which surely should be moved under the landslips section, and also about the progress of the laverton loop, which I now believe to be complete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.174.61.115 (talk) 16:49, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tail, tale, or what?

Under Landslips, is this correct? "In the early 2010s the GWR has lately suffered a tail of two landslips" If "tale" is really meant then fine except it could perhaps be worded more clearly. If "tail" is really meant then I am confused - can you please clarify? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:29, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

for the time being I'm guessing that "tail" is just an typo for "tale". If not please advise. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 22:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080517172002/http://www.cheltenham4u.co.uk/localattractions_railway.asp to http://www.cheltenham4u.co.uk/localattractions_railway.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose that Broadway Extension be merged into Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway. I think that the content in the Broadway Extension article can easily be explained in the context of Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway, and the Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Broadway Extension will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. FDent (talk) 17:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This merge has presumably been completed now?

I consulted this article hoping to find out about the extension, and found that there is almost nothing about it, and what there is is repeated! I discovered that the ref (currently [6]) for the second mention appears to have disappeared from the GWR site.

There used to be more information in the article (I checked history briefly for vandalism), but this was removed from the 'future' section during 2018 and discarded.

A possible reference would be the GWR press release, but somewhat unbelievably, the web page does not quote the date of publication!: https://www.gwsr.com/0940_The_first_train_for_58_years_departs_broadway_spot_on_time_on_Good_Friday.html

I am only passing through (rarely edit these days -- too addictive!) so I don't have time to research or correct any of this myself. (Sorry.)

EdJogg (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extension to Cheltenham Spa National Rail Station

Is there any information on the alternative routing, west from the present terminus over open fields, to the main Cheltenham to Birmingham line? Lawrence18uk (talk) 17:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]