Talk:Folkestone Harbour railway station

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

Channel Tunnel Terminal[edit]

I have changed the box for next station to "Channel Ferries". Previously the box stated that the next station was "Calais Ville via Channel Tunnel". However, the English side of the Channel Tunnel is at Cheriton, to the north of Folkestone. This can be verified by going to the Ordnance Survey Site's Quick Map facility and searching for Folkestone: the tunnel can be seen diving into the ground at one end of track loops at the top of the map. The tunnel does not begin in Folkestone. Actually the French terminal is at Sangatte so it doesn't go into Calais either. Britmax 22:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


However, if the VSOE puts its passengers on a coach and takes them to the Tunnel terminal it does. Or can be said to. Whatever. The moral is either read the article properly or don't edit at this time at night!! Britmax 22:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it will be closed[edit]

Unofficial as yet, so keep an eye on the news, but the Railway Herald thinks so. 86.132.137.5 (talk) 01:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

I've raise this because there is not a lot of information on the Branch page that is not on this page. Two pages increase the likelyhood that one of them will be out of date. Edgepedia (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've raised this again, as MickMacNee merged the articles, but this has been reverted twice, although there was no comment to my previous proposal. The edit history on the Branch Page is as follows:

  • 17:02, 23 March 2009 86.162.104.20 (talk) (1,555 bytes) (and I supose you want to merge Euston station into WCML as well then?) (undo)
  • 08:31, 21 March 2009 Edgepedia (talk | contribs) (48 bytes) (rv edits by 86.138.241.46; no reason given) (undo)
  • 08:25, 21 March 2009 86.138.241.46 (talk) (1,555 bytes) (no.) (undo)
  • 08:25, 21 March 2009 86.138.241.46 (talk) (1,675 bytes) (rvv) (undo)
  • 20:19, 20 March 2009 MickMacNee (talk | contribs) (48 bytes) (merge to Folkestone Harbour railway station) (undo)

I feel that the two articles are better merged as we have a short branch with one station. Both opened and closed at about the same time, so history and services are going to be the same. There does not seem to any advantage in have two pages, and two pages increase the likelihood that one of them will be out of date. The comparison with the WCML and Euston Station is not valid. Edgepedia (talk) 19:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is absurd. A station does not exist in isolation from the rest of the network. It is connected via a branch line. So, the station is part of the branch. The branch however is not part of the station. Hence the merge proposal is trying to merge a parent article into its child. Similar, equally absurd examples, are trying to merge WCML into Euston, or England into Kent. If the merger is needed, it should clearly be the other way round. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.217.238 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment Folkestone Harbour Branch is a WP:FORK of Folkestone harbour railway station, which is why I suggested the merge. However, there may be sources to create an article on the Folkestone Harbour Branch, but someone now looking at the article would get more and better information from the Folkestone Harbour railway station article.
Stations are WP:N. They also contain the position of the station, and this is linked from the likes of goggle maps. What notability does 1 mile of railway branch line built at the same time as the main line, and closed at the same time as the only station on that line? (If you can answer this question, improve the article!).
The comparison with the WCML and Euston station is not valid. WCML has many stations and a varied history to Euston station. However, perhaps if a merge is to be done, perhaps it is from the branch line into the main line article.
I am thinking that perhaps an article is possible, for an good example see Tunnel Railway. I'm therefore removing the merge tags, and adding improvement tags to the Folkestone Harbour branch article, to see what happens. Edgepedia (talk) 17:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How are stations deemed by you to be automatically notable, whereas railway lines which are larger entities often including several stations, apparently aren't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.79.50 (talk) 15:47, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Folkestone Harbour railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Folkestone Harbour railway station. 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: 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) 04:30, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Folkestone Harbour railway station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 09:20, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • Opening sentence is rather "and ... and ... and ..."
Split into two sentences
  • No mention of England or France here, perhaps the non-European readers could benefit from that.
Hmm, not sure, simply because the comparable St Pancras railway station and Ashford International railway station (which both serve international services) don't mention England or France either.
  • What's a "branch line"?
Linked
  • Consider linking viaduct as jargon.
  • "and Venice-Simplon Orient Express" our article italicises this.
So it does
  • Hythe is mentioned in the infobox and the category but nowhere in the prose.
    This is one of those awkward things. Template:Infobox station says "Country administrative subdivisions", which is currently Folkestone and Hythe District; however this has never existed concurrently with the station, so it is factually incorrect. I can change the infobox to say "Folkestone, Kent"; no idea what to do about the category as I tend to avoid those for fear of awakening the category dramah gods. What can you advise? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This is one of those things that was severely affected by the merger of {{Infobox UK disused station}} two years ago. Previously, we had two parameters |locale= and |borough=, the former being for the name of the locality in which the station was situated; the latter for the name of the present-day local authority in which the station was situated, see Special:PermaLink/953135311#Example. The merger into infobox station has led to a messy situation where different articles use different conventions. The category should similarly reflect the present-day local authority. Folkestone and Hythe District is one of twelve districts into which Kent is presently divided, see Subdivisions of England#Hierarchical list of regions, counties and districts. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent with relinking after the lead, e.g. you linked 1 in 32 there but not in the prose, yet SER gets relinked etc.
Done
  • Link for groyne?
Done
  • "at Folkestone East.[7] The" already linked (as "main station")
Fixed
  • " It moved in " the goods shed moved spontaneously, or it was moved?
Typo, should have been "was moved"
  • LCDR is abbreviated but the abb is never used.
It is, but LCDR is often seen in related railway articles, so I think it might still be useful for the reader
  • Could relink Calais and Boulogne for consistent approach to relinking...
Certainly
  • "of £436,000." can this be inflated to modern times please?
Done, though I'd like to know if Template:Inflation can be worked to say "£49.8 million as of 2021" instead of what's now there
  • "from Queenborough to " context for where this was?
Clarified; at the moment Port of Queenborough is a redlink, but this could be a suitable article for the encyclopedia
  • "shortage of steamers" link?
Linked
Done
  • "from Victoria to Paris via Ashford" link Vic and Ash.
Done (also linked Paris to Gare du Nord, which although not directly in the source is not, I believe, "information challenged or likely to be challenged")
  • "Grade II listed" link.
Done
  • "line. Network Rail decided" link.
Didn't think Network Rail was notable, but of course it is
  • "objected by" objected to by?
Fixed
  • "by DB Schenker, the" who??
Clarified
  • "future UKIP leader" expand per our article title on first use.
Done
  • " the Department for Transport published" overlinked.
Done (fixed earlier when I ran a duplicate links script)
  • " £3.5 million" non-breaking space before million.
Done (also, might it be useful to have a template, so this is done consistently)
  • "the Customs House" link?
Linked, also converted to lower case as this is merely an instance of a customs house, not a specific one
  • "stalls.[21]The" space after ref.
Tweaked
  • "no definitive plans of what to do with the land" ->"no definitive plans for the land"
Changed to "plans for development" which is tighter
  • What's a "platelayer"?
  • I would add a {{clear}} at the bottom of the Incidents section to stop the images crushing the reference columns.
Done, I was hoping to find some more incidents, but nothing leapt out in sources
  • Ref 32 really needs work on the content of the template!
Replaced with a better source
  • "No. 46 - Kent" en-dash. Same for last two sources.
I don't know how to do this, sorry
  • "Folkestone Harbour station information from kentrail.co.uk" previously this was .org.uk and not italics. Consistency.
There's no need to have a link here, it's being used as source, albeit sparingly for basic detail like dates and features, where I haven't found a good book source
  • First ext link is 404.
  • As is the third one.
  • Is the last ext link the same info as linked in ref 25? If so, not needed.
I've reviewed all the external links - they're all either dead or out of date (the Remembrance Line's last update is indefinite suspension of operations because of COVID in 2020, and because the line has been removed and the station is almost certainly never going to reopen, it's raison d'être has gone.
  • The 1960 closure isn't captured in the categories.
I've simplified the categories; "open 1849" and "closed 2014" will suffice
  • "2009 disestablishments in England" despite the fact it wasn't closed until 2014?
See above

That's all I have. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've gone through all the issues now, can you take another look? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Folkestone_Harbour_railway_station&oldid=1202069347"