Talk:Ingatestone railway station

East Anglia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia 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.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Stations / in UK Low‑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

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).

Electrification[edit]

This edit is in such poor English that it's difficult to comprehend what is meant. Besides being unsourced and vague ("60 odd years") it's technically inaccurate too. The three wires are not "Contact, Earth & Return Wires", but from bottom to top, are correctly known as the Contact, Support and Catenary wires; and, since the drop wires are not insulated from the others, all wires are energised at 25 kV. The return path is via the running rails.

Information about a change in the electrification should really be on the article about the line, because it's unlikely to be specific to this one station. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request to edit[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit fully-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Why is this article still protected? Nothing has been posted here in talk for nearly two years. Whatever the dispute has been, surely it's moot by now - and there's plenty of misplaced italics in the text plus an erroneous date. Harfarhs (talk) 20:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 20:19, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Harfarhs and Technical 13: This article - like several others about stations on the railway line between London Liverpool Street and Ipswich - was protected for one week in an attempt to halt the frequent editing to the train services information: at least four different editors - both logged in and not - were altering the information, often in contradictory fashion, sometimes several times a day. It was difficult to work out who was correct and who not, since none of the edits gave a source, and few of them used an edit summary - even when they did, it never said why an earlier edit was "wrong". This was a repeat of an editing pattern that had occurred in November-December 2013, and although little actual reverting had occurred, it was to all intents and purposes a content dispute. I felt that it was safest to put the section back to a version that had been stable for several months, give the page a one-week full-prot, and see if the disputants could resolve it on the various article talk pages. So far, the only talk page posts related to these protections, other than this thread, have been at Template talk:Great Eastern Main Line RDT and Talk:Ilford railway station, and in no case has anybody said exactly what changes are required. They just want unrestricted permission to edit the article with no promise that the dispute will not resume. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:46, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]