Talk:Severn Bridge Railway

Trains: in UK Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	August 10, 2011

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 UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

This article lacks references.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Wales Low‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales 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.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gloucestershire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gloucestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gloucestershire 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.GloucestershireWikipedia:WikiProject GloucestershireTemplate:WikiProject GloucestershireWikiProject Gloucestershire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ridiculous number of sections

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just tried to read this page. But gave up. Can I suggest that a section header be added to almost every competed sentence to say what that sentence is about.

Sarcasm aside. What a load of crap. Almost two thirds of this article is unnecessary wordy section headers. Most of them should be consolidated into periods of time not events.

Awful article. Not content. Just layout. It is one of the worst I have seen in a long time.86.129.0.121 (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

You can blame Afterbrunel (talk · contribs) for that. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:04, 29 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic