Talk:Bristol–Exeter line
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bristol–Exeter line article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | A fact from Bristol–Exeter line appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 April 2008, and was viewed approximately 681 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Reading to Plymouth Line diagram. |
| The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Bristol to Exeter Line diagram. |
Wrong link
editExeter railway station currently links to a railway station in Australia btw. Someone should correct the links. I'm not sure where too though. G-13114 (talk) 01:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- Where in this article is this link? I can't find it. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:58, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Requested move 2 February 2017
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved to Bristol–Exeter line — Amakuru (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Bristol to Exeter Line → Bristol to Exeter line – Downcase per WP:NCCAPS; sources mostly do not cap it. Optionally, say if you prefer to use the symmetric dashed version Bristol–Exeter line (or Bristol and Exeter line) rather than "to" between place names. Dicklyon (talk) 15:36, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
- Evidence in sources
Please examine the searches, see if there is a common name, whether the dashed version is preferred, and whether caps are preferred. It is my impression that there is no proper name here and that the dashed form, or the equivalent symmetric "Bristol and Exeter line", is more common (and more logical and more consistent with other such lines). Dicklyon (talk) 15:36, 2 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. SkyWarrior 03:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support (as nom) preferring the dashed version for general consistency with other such articles: Bristol–Exeter line. Dicklyon (talk) 06:13, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support—and yes, I do prefer the typographical version: it's much easier for readers to apprehend. Tony (talk) 10:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bristol–Exeter line. 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/20130103135443/http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=258%3Awestons-rail-commuter-services-could-be-cut-warns-towns-mp&catid=48%3Acommunities-not-dormitories&Itemid=108 to http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=258%3Awestons-rail-commuter-services-could-be-cut-warns-towns-mp&catid=48%3Acommunities-not-dormitories&Itemid=108
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016121452/http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/MP-takes-drive-better-rail-services/story-13697379-detail/story.html to http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/MP-takes-drive-better-rail-services/story-13697379-detail/story.html
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) 00:45, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Updates required
editI have started updates. Electrification of GWML to Parkway etc has already happened GRALISTAIR (talk) 00:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Goods Yards status
editI do not think the yard for Hinckley Point C is the only operational yard. Freightliner's Bristol Railport is on this line as well. ValkyrieVP (talk) 17:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed GRALISTAIR (talk) 18:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- The current status (by original research) is
- Bristol Railport - occaisional traffic at the former container terminal (Freightliner)
- Bridgwater - regular nuclear waste traffic (Direct Rail Services)
- Fairwater (Taunton) - engineer's traffic (mostly Frieghtliner)
- Exeter Riverside - sporadic aggregates traffic from Whatley Quarry (Freightliner)
- Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- The current status (by original research) is