Talk:Pendre railway station

History

@The Mirror Cracked: How are the details that you removed unnecessary? I do not wish to re-instate them if there is a good reason for their removal, but in it's current form the article could encourage several misconseptions, and bears little likeness to the sources cited. Please can you clarify. WT79 The Engineer (talk) 13:30, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

@WT79 The Engineer: here's a good example: " These changes also will affect the present North carriage shed, as this building is life-expired and requires urgent renewal/renovation work due to concerns about the asbestos insulation, which is in a poor condition" - this unnecessary detail for an encyclopedia article. It is interesting operational detail for the railway's own journal, but not of interest to a general reader. Other than that, the information is retained, but in simpler, clearer words. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: Ok, that specific example is understood. However, saying "After the last train of the day, the locomotive propels its carriages back to Pendre." I find much more misleading than what I wrote which was "trains are propelled up the cutting, after their last service for the day", as the former gives the impression that either the TR operates on a 'one engine in steam' basis, or that all coaching stock waits at Tywyn Wharf for the last train to arrive, before being propelled to Pendre. The overall effect is just pure confusion. WT79 The Engineer (talk) 08:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: Also, the current arrangement of the track plans being at the bottom of the page, among the references, means most people won't notice them, which is effectively removing them. WT79 The Engineer (talk) 08:12, 2 January 2020 (UTC)