Talk:Shippea Hill 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 Low-importance).

There is a hill at Shippea Hill, but it's underground. The "hill" is a ridge of firm ground between two areas of fenland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Librarian16 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Annual rail passenger usage

We should try to comment on the extraordinary fluctuations in the passenger usage figures. These might be caused by changes in the measurement methodology, by changes to the train timetable, or an external cause such as the use of the station by seasonal agricultural workers. Or the figures may just be wrong. Has anyone checked the cited source, which appears to be a set of spreadsheets with raw numbers? Verbcatcher (talk) 00:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The changes from 2005/6 to 2006/7, and then from 2011/12 to 2012/13, were, to the best of my knowledge, caused by timetable changes. But without access to archived timetables for the periods in question, putting that in the main article is just begging for a "citation needed" edit. It's possible that archive.org may have preserved them from the relevant TOC websites. I'll have a look later when I've got a bit more spare time. The figures quoted here are correct, at least insofar as they are the same as those in the official data. A significant proportion of those (more than 75%) were season tickets, suggesting that, when the station was served daily, it was used by (presumably) agricultural workers travelling to work from nearby towns. Well, actually, given that it's still a very low number, it might have been just a couple of workers travelling every day! MarkSG (talk) 10:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Odd Socks society

Zadradr has reverted my deletion at the paragraph on an event organised by the Odd Socks, which is said to be a society of the University of Cambridge. My edit summary for deletion was:

delete Odd Socks paragraph: unsourced and probably not noteworthy as we have no article on this society

Zadradr's edit summary for restoring the paragraph was:

The event comprised 43% of the passengers in the given year and represents a rare and notable instance of popular appreciation of this station, as a direct function of its status as a former least-used station.

A common rule of thumb is that if a topic is insufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article then any events relating to the topic are unlikely to be sufficiently noteworthy to mention is another article. We have no article on Odd Socks; there have been two attempts to the create this article which were deleted as 'not notable' and as 'spam'. There might be an article under a different title but there is no obvious candidate in Category:Clubs and societies of the University of Cambridge. A brief Google search uncovered no sources to confirm this event and no sources about the society. The paragraph is still unsourced. Without a source there is a risk that this may have been a hoax, possibly intended to raise the profile of the society. Please add a reliable source. Verbcatcher (talk) 11:59, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]