Talk:Dumfries, Lochmaben and Lockerbie Railway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lockerby??[edit]

I have removed the reference to "Lockerby" in this article. The justification for it is a citation to a website called Spellerweb, but the link is broken. Going to Spellerweb and searching on Lockerby brings up a blank. Looking in Google Books under that spelling brings a blank. My reference book (of authorising Acts) doesn't use this spelling. David Ross's comprehensive book doesn't use it. The contemporary large scale Ordnance Survey map doesn't use it.

I can only assume that it was a typo used by Speller and subsequently corrected. Afterbrunel (talk) 18:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. I very easily found multiple sources attesting to this spelling, including a map. --John (talk) 18:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please indicate them here. Afterbrunel (talk) 16:01, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I already put them onto the article. --John (talk) 16:42, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I now think you are right, but your primary source is Speller, who says (30-11-2014) "The spelling Lockerby is used in an additional Act of 1861." The other sources are a little indirect too, including the same "additional Act". The danger is that several weak sources don't add up to one powerful one. However I am hopeful that I can find a good source—a recital of the original Act—that supports your view on this, in the next few days; if I can I will insert it. I think I have a source for "St Mary's" as well—at present that is unreferenced.
There are some other issues that would improve the article: in particular what through (as opposed to local) passenger services used the line after the P&WJR was established? Do you have any information on this? Did the Caley completely abandon the line as a through route after the formation of the P&WJR?
Also the diagram still shows the line crossing the G&SW main line by a bridge. Not one of the contemporary OS maps shows this—they are all easily accessible on the NLS website—and study of Google Earth doesn't show any residual earthworks for any approach embankments. It seems certain that the Lochmaben line crossed the G&SWR main line on the flat. (I realise that's shown on a template, but if the template is wrong it diminishes the authority of the article.)
It would be useful to be able to say whether the interlocking at Dumfries North would have allowed a train from Lochmaben to run to the Up Through platform at Dumfries; it doesn't look like it from the pre-1956 track layout. Do you have any information on that? Did any regular train run from Lockerbie to Annan via Dumfries (without a backshunt)?
The line diagram shows the Lochmaben line as joining the Glasgow Dumfries and Carlisle Railway at Dumfries. I think the GD&C ceased to exist ten years before the DL&LR was opened.
Finally, I see that you don't approve of my orthography. I use "Company" (capitalised) to emphasise that the reference is to the DL&LR rather than any old company, and to avoid repetitiveness. But if you prefer an alternative, I don't mind.
Whatever, this is close to being an authoritative article, in the face of precious little published material on the subject. (Even Ross only manages a couple of sentences.) If we can collaborate on a final push it would be a good achievement. In accordance with Wikipedia rules, obviously this does not exclude anyone else's valid input. Afterbrunel (talk) 19:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some changes towards this. Afterbrunel (talk) 19:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see you have deleted my words "At this time, "Lockerby" as the anglicised spelling of Lockerbie, was used in official documents, an the official title of the railway company. Nearly all later writers use the Scottish spelling, and this (or DL&LJR) is used in the remainder of this article. However throughout the independent existence of the Company, the proper title was the anglicised version." Maybe you could explain your rationale for this? Afterbrunel (talk) 07:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Dead links[edit]

There are a couple of other dead links on this page. One at least can be rectified by citing to more reliable sources, but the cycle path one could probably stand alone. (Some facts are sufficiently non-controversial that excessive attention to citations can be troublesome) ... Afterbrunel (talk) 12:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture[edit]

Afterbrunel or anyone else: what do we think about adding this picture I took at the weekend? I am pretty sure it must be one of the bridges of the line. I was excited as I didn't know any were still standing. What else could it be? --John (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of you to ask me. I would say definitely add it to the article. It is certainly one of the original bridges of the line, and it's pretty much as it would have been when the line opened, apart from the modern height signs.
It is at http://streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=311910&Y=581535&A=Y&Z=115. I suggest you add some background to the caption when you put it on the article page, as not everyone is comfortable with finding a location from co-ordinates. You might say "underbridge where railway crossed minor road between Dryfesdalegate and Shillahill about a mile west of Lockerbie" or whatever wording you think; you would know the local names better than me.
It's in pretty good condition, isn't it? Those old stone arch bridges would last forever.
It looks as if the farmer uses it to get from field to field without going down on to the public road; did you manage to get a look at "track" level?
I think illustrations like this help to make Wikipedia articles more interesting. Well done for doing this by the way. Afterbrunel (talk) 15:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. This was the area I grew up in. I have never noticed the bridge until now. Another interesting railway article I had a hand in writing is at Talla Railway and I would be interested to have your input there as well. --John (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Continued as a PM. Afterbrunel (talk) 15:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dumfries, Lochmaben and Lockerbie 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:05, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dumfries,_Lochmaben_and_Lockerbie_Railway&oldid=1201683654"