User talk:Signalhead/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Signalhead. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This talk page starts with the discussions carried out prior to registering the wikipedia username.

Talk from 19:58, 8 December 2006 to 22:58, 8 December 2006

Thank you. Stewart 19:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. And THANK YOU, because I had been waiting for somebody to add the info boxes beforehand (I wouldn't know how to do that properly).

Why not register a User name with Wikipedia. You might be interested in participating in the new WikiProject Transport in Scotland Stewart 20:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I've been thinking about registering for some time. Just need to dream up a witty username...

When you decide on your name, this talk page will have to be moved across. Stewart 22:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, is that possible to do? Okay, I'll keep it in mind. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.64.136.238 (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

I think you can use the Move tab. That keeps the edit history. Failing that a paste-and-copy may work. Stewart 23:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello again. I don't know whether there's a policy on this, but I noticed an inconsistency with the opening dates given in the info boxes: Loch Awe railway station gives the original opening date, while Falls of Cruachan railway station gives the date of re-opening. 84.64.136.238 22:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I think all the dates should be shown. I have now modified the Template to handle up to 9 separate dated items. I have editted Falls of Cruachan railway station to suit. Stewart 22:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Excellent! 84.64.136.238 22:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

You give a date of 23 March 1966. According to my notes, the stations closed on 29 March. I've just looked in two books, both of which say 26 March! 84.64.136.238 22:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

This was finger trouble - followed by pasting and copying. Meant to add 26 March; however Railscot also indicated 1 March. Stewart 22:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk from 14:18, 9 December 2006 to 16:32, 9 December 2006

Are you User:84.64.136.238 from last night? Stewart 14:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I am, yes. 84.66.70.179 14:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

You really need to get a user name to consolidate all your edits.

Incidentally I have amended the Disused Station template with years and events as you have seen for the Open Station template (i.e. Loch Awe and Falls of Cruchan). For an example of how it looks see Partick Central railway station Stewart 15:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

That's good. Incidentally, is there any chance you could provide info boxes for the remainder of the WHL Stations? Then I can add the Gaelic names. 84.66.70.179 15:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Mother-in-Law visiting this evening, so will not have much time this evening, but will put in on my to-do list for the next few days. Incidenatally, articles are needed for the closed station between Helensburgh and Arrochar. What about Glen Douglas and Gorton? ==Stewart 16:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

While I'm not sure that those two stations had quite the same status as the others, since they don't seem to have appeared in the timetables, I do think they deserve articles of their own. There is plenty that could be written about them. 84.66.70.179 16:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your great work on the C&O and WHL stations. Why not create yourself an account? ----Stewart 21:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk from 21:34, 9 December 2006 to 23:02, 9 December 2006

Thanks for your great work on the Malliag station. Why not create yourself an account? ----Stewart 21:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my spelling of Mallaig. ----Stewart 22:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem. 81.79.95.108 22:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Does the Mallaig Extension Railway really qualify as a "Historical Railway", given that:

• it's still open from end to end, and
• it's actually of quite recent origin, relatively speaking?

81.79.95.108 22:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it does. Having worked along the C∨ and up the WHL to Fort William; Banavie Peir came to mind; and the Invergarry and For Augustus Railway. For completeness I felt it is relevant. Linking into the NBR and then onto the LNER - detail still to be added. Loch Eil Outward Bound is a station that is not included. The West Highland Railway is another issue that need thought - for the same reason. ----Stewart 23:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk from 13:39, 10 December 2006 to 17:17, 10 December 2006

Another challenge for you, following the other ones you have risen to over the past few days (providing I have guessed correctly that you are the same person who has been working of West Highland, etc stations over the past few days) - I have now added Rhu railway station. Very basic at present - it did have a loop in it latter days. There is now a Historic Page for the West Highland Railway to differentiate from the current situation described in West Highland Line. However more work is required. ----Stewart 13:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Good afternoon. I've just been looking at the Rhu page. I have the date of re-naming (from 'Row') noted as 7/3/1927. Also, the loop and second platform closed on 4/6/1950, so it only had one platform when the station closed. Keep up the good work. 84.64.166.58 13:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

In which case your information is more complete than mine. (Will be away from my computer for a few hours now).

PS - WHOIS is identifying your location as Bangor in North Wales ---- Stewart 13:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not in Wales, I'm at home in Glasgow. 84.64.166.58 13:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Figures - my IP address sometimes shows me in Denmark (don't ask), I am also in Glasgow. ----Stewart 17:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk from 18:37, 10 December 2006 to 19:12, 10 December 2006

Thanks for correcting my error with the number of platforms at Shandon.

WHOIS is now showing you at City: Manchester, England

===Stewart 18:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've just created an account... Signalhead 19:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I have created a starter user page for you. You can now customise it to your heart's content. I looked at other User Pages and copied bits I likes. There is is links to two Sandboxes that you can use to practice on. At present they are unpopulated, but you can experiment there. Stewart 20:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I like it. Thank you! Signalhead 20:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

My spelling's hopeless. --Amandajm 07:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

This article might be helpful for you then. Signalhead 22:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Following the extensive additions you have added to the C&O and WHR stations, it would be useful if you provide references to your information. Stewart 13:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll get around to that, some time. Signalhead 22:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Don't worry about editting all that stuff on Poland. The whole lot had been lifted straight from the Wiki article on the Polish Renaissance. All that was needed was a brief summary and a main article template.

Sometimes i feel as if I'm fighting a losing battle here! I had just finished moving Spain, France, Hungary etc etc etc to their own pages, having written summaries for each, and all of a sudden about 150 pages on Poland get dumped on the page. well, it's fixed.

--Amandajm 09:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Have put info boxes into all the Caithness stations this evening (except the Wick and Lybster line - which needs articles creating). Several of the articles need history added. Stewart 23:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Good stuff. I'm not so hot on the history of that line, but I will be able to write something in due course. If you can find time to do info boxes for the other open stations north of Inverness, I will be able to provide the Gaelic names for most of them (but I've not travelled north of Kildonan since Gaelic signs were installed). I also have a note of the Gaelic names for stations between Perth and Inverness. Signalhead 23:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Inverness and Nairn Railway added today with the intermediate stations. I beleive Dalcross had a loop and sidings, but not sure. And then there is Gollanfield Junction. --Stewart 17:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I have created a User Page - User:Pencefn/Historical Scottish Railways to assist of navigating around the various Historical Scottish Railway Companies, and also links to the associated Talk Pages and the relevant RAILSCOT website page. This is intended as an aide memoire whilst we are working on the various articles. Stewart 23:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Right, I'll take a look. Incidentally, I think that many of the articles we've been working on recently could be de-stubbed, as there's quite a lot in them now (even if they're far from complete). Not sure if there's an 'etiquette' to de-stubbing though. Signalhead 23:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for correcting my incomplete edit. Stewart 21:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Given you interest in signalling, now might be a useful opportunity to add some information about the various signalling schemes at Kilmarnock, up to the very unfortunate fire that occured in the signalbox on Christmas Day 2006. Stewart 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I had the same idea. I was just checking the article to see whether anything about the fire had been written yet (it hadn't). I'll hopefully get some useful details on the situation after I return to work tomorrow (I'm a signalling engineer). Happy New Year, by the way! Signalhead 21:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I must admit I was dubious about your claim that the Hademore bridge on the Trent Valley Line was already opened, as when I last saw it less than three months ago it was barely started. As I was driving near Lichfield this morning, I took a detour to look at it, and you're correct. I've taken another photo (in filthy weather conditions) and added it to the page, to make an interesting comparison. – Tivedshambo (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was interested to see your photo. The level crossing closed on 02/01/07, by the way. Signalhead 22:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Signalhead,

The para I entered, typos included, came from Nock. His words were: "It covers the area formerly controlled by the original Glasgow Central box, Bridge Street Junction, Eglinton Street and Cook Street. My presumption was that Nock should know what he is talking about; however it was before my time in Paisley.

I'd also assumed that with power boxes at Glasgow Central and Paisley, Cook Street box would not have been needed. Pyrotec 21:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there,

I have the official re-signalling notices and the book "The Register of Scottish Signal Boxes" as my sources:

Under the original scheme, Glasgow Central, Bridge Street Junction, Eglinton Street Junction and Eglinton Street Station signal boxes closed, on 2 January 1961.

Cook Street and Pollokshields signal boxes closed on 4 April 1966, when the Glasgow Central S.B. area of control was extended.

In the 1970s, the Glasgow Central Signalling Centre area was extended out to Rutherglen, East Kilbride and Barrhead etc., and many more signal boxes were closed as a result.

Regarding the 374-lever miniature frame in the old box, I did read that it was the longest one ever built in the world. Signalhead 21:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Donald Matheson, Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers, Vol 85, Paper given 10 November 1908, gives the length of the box as 106 feet and the interlocking frame as 82 feet 6 inches. Nock actually states largest ever built in this country, and he was living in Bath, England, at the time; which is why I used Great Britain. He also commented that it had 1,000 route capability, whereas York had 825 routes. You could be right about longest, it have not yet found a quotable reference for it. Pyrotec 21:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Well hello Signalhead, sorry for taking so long to repy. I'm glad you looked up the Names of the Irish state article, which was the general idea. To quote further from this same article:
"The state's official title, as in the Irish constitution, is simply Ireland (in English) and Éire (in the Irish language). The term the Republic of Ireland (Irish: Poblacht na hÉireann) is rather the official 'description' of the state, as defined by law."
I know of no higher authority re the name of a state than its own constitution.
My first real contribution to the ATP article was the inclusion of a "by system" summary where following on from the existing "by country" example I used the term "Ireland". It was your own good self who first started making changes in this area. I saw no confusion with NIR, in fact N. Ireland is not mentioned either "by system" or "by country" in the ATP article, its entry having been incorporated into the UK entry last November. Some NIR trains are actually fitted with CAWS to facilitate cross-border operation.
Perhaps the NI entry should be reinstated for clarity? If so, it would now have to include additional TPWS info, as this system is currently being fitted by NIR/Thales.
By the way, glad to see such a good description of the CAWS system, hope you didn't mind my attempts to expand it further. For completeness the article may have to include more info on the IE ATP version as used on the DART. Both CAWS and this ATP version are closely related. Both share certain equipment and are from the same supplier, but react differently to the same common codes i.e signal aspect (CAWS on diesels) or speed allowed (ATP on DARTS)Suckindiesel 22:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Suckindiesel,

Firstly, thanks for all the work you've done on the CAWS article. I have no big issue with anything that you've written there.

I'm more than happy to accept that "Ireland" is the country's official title, but the fact remains that there is a necessity to clarify the name when it's used in the lists, since "Ireland" by itself may reasonably be taken to refer to the whole island. That is my only concern, and I simply cannot see any reasonable objection to putting "Republic of Ireland" there for the avoidance of doubt.

I wouldn't want to see Northern Ireland mentioned separately in the lists, as it is already covered by "United Kingdom".

Just out of curiosity, why didn't you remove the words "Republic of" from the CAWS article? Signalhead 19:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I myself also used the description ROI in the CAWS article when referring to NI trains operating into the Republic. I thought it added some clarity in this case.
Earlier edits of the ATPS article included references to GB, UK, NI and Ireland, no doubt due to the additions by various editors over time. I changed the GB entries to UK & removed the separate NI entry. However, I left the term Ireland alone, as it stands up on its own, particularly in the absence of any NI entry.
I notice that you removed the GW prefix from GW ATP in the ATPS article. I had seen this description used in an EU doc & thought that this was its correct name. Presumably the prefix was used to distinguish the UK version from other versions of ATP.
To quote:
96/48-ST12EN06 CCS – part3 19.05.2006 - 36 / 152 -GW ATP Scheme Description: The GW ATP is an Automatic Train Protection (ATP) system used in the UK on the Great Western (GW) lines between London (Paddington), Bristol Temple Meads, Bristol Parkway and Newbury.
Suckindiesel 21:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed the "GW" because Network Rail has two lines fitted with ATP: the Great Western Main Line and the Chiltern Lines (with a different ATP system on each). Signalhead 21:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Ohconfucius has nominated a large number of Scottish Railway stations for deletion. Many of these are being developed as part of WP:TIS. I have removed the {{prod}}. However reading the user page he may contest this. Thoughts? I suggest replies are consolidated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Transport in Scotland. Stewart 19:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Just a thought: Is it appropriate to put the modern name Upper Tyndrum in the historical West Highland Railway article? There may be similar examples; in such cases, I would suggest using a contemporary name (while still linking to the same article as at present). This needn't necessarily be the original name, e.g. Tulloch is fine because it was renamed from "Inverlair" soon after opening. What do you think? Signalhead 19:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Now that is a thought. Exhibition Centre is another one which can cause confusion - as Stobcross and Finnieston. Not to confused with the former station also called Finnieston on the Queen Street Low Level line. Then there is Langside and Newlands. As the articles already exist to the modern names, there is not a lot can be done in that respect - and I do not think it is appropriate, however I think you are correct that whilst West Highland Line should refer to Upper Tyndrum, it is probably correct that West Highland Railway should refer to Tyndrum as that was its original name. Stewart 19:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference you pointed out on the WikiProject Trains talk page! As you have already spotted, I have updated the article to reflect this. Cheers →Ollie (talk • contribs) 23:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your great work on this article. Signalhead 23:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. my speling is terable. i'll tri tu spelchek everyting form now on. steve. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stevieboy4321 (talk • contribs) 10:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for the spelling corrections on my story summaries, it was silly of me not to write them out in Word first and spell-check them myself, which i will do for the rest of "Firewater" and "Winthrop was Stubborn" asap Orgone 16:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

hi thanks for cleaning up my article on ger spillane i got a bit over my head in it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bouse23 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Now I am puzzled. The Network Rail map of Edinburgh Waverley show 18 platforms, and there was a blaze of publicity as Christmas when four new platforms were brought into service. Where does 14 come from and does this infer that there were only 10 before the Christmas enlargement? --Stewart 16:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The official traincrew notice for the December 2006 alterations states that platforms 15 to 18 are (temporarily) taken out of use. Network Rail's public information map doesn't mention this. Recent photos on the Railscot site confirm that those platforms are very obviously not in use at the moment due to lack of track connecting them. Signalhead 16:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Not being a regular user of Waverley I was not aware of the situation with respect to platforms 15 to 18. I was certain that is was not 21 that another editor had put in. When to 15 to 18 return to use? --Stewart 16:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The next major stage of the alterations comes next month. I don't have all the details to hand but I guess that's when platforms 15 to 18 are brought back into use, and some other platforms will be taken out of use to allow for further track remodelling. Signalhead 16:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Quite a few comments and observations.

I would be inclined to show Fort William as a terminus as the lines are configured in that area. However that would get quite interesting with the stations. When I did the Ayrline, my one of my earlier preview attempts was the Largs and Ayr branches interleaved as you have done with the Oban branch. I changed it to the way I eventually filed it. --Stewart 22:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I've changed it in line with your suggestions. Signalhead 23:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my faux pas with the title on the route map. --Stewart 23:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. I wondered whether Craigendoran Upper should perhaps have a 'closed station' symbol, but then the wikilink does lead to an article for an open station, so now I'm not sure. Signalhead 23:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Craigendoran is a conundrum. It had six platforms - two WHR; two on the pier and two to Helensburgh. I suppose the Upper suffix help to increase the confusion. Other stations in similar situations include Carnforth and Dore where platforms at junctions have been removed from a still open line. --Stewart 23:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You are ambitious taking on the Argyle Line. Good luck. --Stewart 22:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

It seemed like a challenge, especially the southern end. Whether or not it works out remains to be seen... Signalhead 22:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Found the symbol for Subway Interchange and taken the liberty of adding it to Partick in your Sandbox diagram. --Stewart 22:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice, thank you. Signalhead 22:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Success - although I see the Coatbridge route has defeated the syntax. I cannot see a way to incorporate it any other way. --Stewart 20:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have added connecting branches to the WCML diagram for the northern end. --Stewart 22:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I created this from the german orignal to allow the line colour to be added. --Stewart 22:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it may also be possible for historical lines. The first one I may try is the City Union Line. --Stewart 22:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my errors on the Ayrline article. --Stewart 22:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Managed the Cathcart Circle Lines line diagram. What do you think? --Stewart 22:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, cool! Seeing that makes me feel a bit more confident about managing the Argyle Line. Signalhead 22:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Have tackled the Aberdeen Railway. Can you please check for any errors. Many thanks. --Stewart 21:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks okay. You've probably already noticed that I'm working on a C&OR map right now. Signalhead 21:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have added the route map into the Worksheet --Stewart 21:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have noticed you had moved onto the C&OR. --Stewart 21:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

We need a consistent approach for showing connections to other lines. Sometimes we show the line branching off, and other times we just write "- for XXX Line" after the station name. Any thoughts as to the 'rules' for when to use either method? Signalhead 22:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest "- for XXX Line" in the case of interchanges such as Partick station, Glasgow Central, Ayr, Troon, etc. Having just tweaked the MML for Nottingham, I prefer this way, however it is not always easy to portray - as you found with the Coatbridge service off the Argyle Line. I think junctions should be put in when we are creating diagrams for Historic Lines. Modern services, not sure... --Stewart 22:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Just tried to put junctions into West Coast Main Line and do not really like the result. Will reconsider tomorrow and probably remove. I think juctions to connecting lines are only really apt in Historical Lines. --Stewart 23:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your last comment. By the way, I think you may have used the wrong symbol for diverging lines in City Union Line and West Highland Railway. I think that the ninety-degrees divergence is for use when the full branch detail is being shown, and the shallow-angle divergence for when only the junction is shown. Signalhead 23:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

This is a unique route description as it covers both the Historical detail and route list and the current operations. I think it would be more appropriate to include the line as far as Johnstone North (showing as closed as appropriate). Or should a separate map for the Historical Line including juctions, etc be produced? --Stewart 23:31, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I was assuming that there would be separate articles (and therefore maps) for the historical railway and for the line as it is currently. Signalhead 23:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

This is conundrum because of the way that this article has developed. It may be prudent to create an new article for the historical information. Not quite sure what happened here. I will sleep on it and think about what to do - any thoughts? --Stewart 23:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought that the idea was to have the whole Scottish rail network covered by both 'current' and 'historical' articles. The Paisley Canal Line article stuck out as an inconsistency with all that historical detail, which I'd assumed would be duplicated on a historical railway article. If such an article doesn't exist, and if there is no plan to create one, then the historical stuff can be put onto the route map, but that would certainly be inconsistent. Signalhead 23:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for fixing curves at Lichfield and Tamworth, I had struggled for ages to work out how to portray them accurately and gave up! Thanks Pickle 16:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be nice to eliminate the kinks in the crossing routes, but new junction graphics are needed for that. Signalhead 17:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I was not sure of the plans on the website. I am sure you know the area as well as I do, and it was my expectation that the junction would be around the location of the extinct junction (Work No 2 oof the GARL overall plan) with the line to Linwood. Further east takes more property. I cannot recall exactly well the viaduct(raised section) from Gilmour Street ends, but I think it is immediately east of St James, where the connection to the good yard was and this is where the GARL plan identifies the connection.

I suppose at the end of the day it will be interesting to see what happens and how the plans are developed from proprosals to actual construction. --Stewart 17:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just seen what's been done to route map at Shotts Line - motorways added, station names in bold, small symbol for some stations, diverging routes added. I sincerely hope that the Scottish route maps don't all go the same way as some of the English ones, for example Watford DC Line & South Eastern Main Line, both of which are way over the top, in my opinion.

I thought we had it about right as far as the Scottish routes go, i.e.:

• For 'Current' lines' articles, I see the route map as being little more than a pictorial replacement for the list of (open) stations, with connecting lines mentioned. These articles, which are of a more general nature, should be kept free of clutter so that they remain relevant to the casual viewer who might be using the information to plan a train journey.
• For 'Historical' railway articles, which are likely to be of primary interest to rail enthusiasts, it is quite appropriate to show more detail, such as junction layouts, tunnels and closed stations (although I think we can do without the motorways and carriage sidings).

The sooner we can all agree on a standard presentation, the better. There might have to be a different standard for the Scottish lines, seeing as the English lines don't have separate current/historical articles like we do. Your views please? Signalhead 19:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. We (including User:Dreamer84, User:Douglasnicol, User:Adambro, etc.) have established a way forward for the Scottish lines - Current and Historical. The English Lines do not appear to have gone this way. Even if you look at the lines that User:Adambro has done in England, it appears to follow the way we have been moving forward in Scotland (check out his Sandbox).

I have a set of Sandboxes containing the Scottish route maps:-

• Work List for Historical Railways in Scotland
• Route Maps for ScotRail lines

I spent some time today on User:AlexTiefling/Railmaps making an attempt at the area between West Hampstead and Blackfriars. However this include rivers and motorways. Not convinced about this. I think it is a case of using symbols just because they are there.

I would agree with you and suggest that my Sandboxes show the standard for Scottish lines, and would support you if you revert the Shotts Line map. --Stewart 20:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I reverted it. It would be useful to have some written guidelines for WP:TRAIL usage in UK articles. Signalhead 23:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

...is closed, and almost all the associated sidings have been lifted. Signalhead 21:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Was not aware of this, hence my addition to the route map. I think we may have cross editted, especially as I was working in the Worksheet. --Stewart 21:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I was going to ask you to proof read this, however by the time I had replaced the batteries in my radio mouse, you had found the page. --Stewart 22:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I think Balloch station could do with a wee note to make clear that it's a relatively recent addition. Signalhead 22:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

In noticed that you altered an article on the Kent Coast Line, which I had tried to improve. As you seem to be more Scotland oriented, I was wondering if you could further explanation of your actions, and more importantly your intent. You know, if Scotland wants independence, then it really should stop "meddling" in the matters of "England". Sheepcot 23:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Stay out of England. Stay north of the "Wall". :-)

See WP:OWN. Signalhead 07:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that error on Terrorism in Russia. KazakhPol 17:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Signalhead 17:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

...and again with Terrorism in Uzbekistan :). I will make an effort to correct my spelling of 'withdrawal' in the future. KazakhPol 18:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I think our respective reverting of vandalism to hat may have overlapped. Hopefully the article is back to normal now: at least until the next purile idiotic! ThanxTheriac 18:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It should be clean now. I reverted it to quite an early version, after checking that all subsequent edits were either vandalism or reversions thereof. Signalhead 18:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi. You recently tagged the articles Emily Birch, Murdar Street, and 'Sunny side of the Street' for speedy deletion with the justification: suspected hoax. I'm just leaving a comment to remind you that being a hoax is not a criterion for speedy deletion (see WP:CSD#Non-criteria). I and another user have removed the speedy deletion tags, but have left the {{hoax}} tags. If you wish, you may try to have the articles deleted via Wikipedia:Proposed deletion or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 04:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for suggesting the merge. I think it's the right thing to do. As I mention on the discussion page, I will wait a week or so to see if there are any dissenting opinions (I'm not expecting any) and then I will do the merge. Thanks again. Truthanado 00:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I glad that you agree with the merge. As User:Ollie suggests, I doubt if there would be any problem with doing it straight off. Signalhead 21:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi there,

Can I ask where you got the information about the replacement Drumgelloch station being named "Katherine Park"? It's not actually going to be as far round as Katherine Park, and the official website for the new line project refers to it as Drumgelloch. The original station at that site is in, and was known as, Clarkston although this is probably not going to be used to avoid confusion with the station of that name on the Glasgow - East Kilbride line.

Cheers,

GreenArrow

Hi. My information about the change of name was obtained through being professionally involved in the re-opening project. I've been unsuccessful in seeking a publicly-accessible source to cite. No doubt the official website will catch up in due course. Signalhead 22:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for keeping an eye on my edits to railway signalling. The English needed quite a bit of work, but I will be the first to admit I know next to nothing about the topic itself, so I am pleased that someone has had a look at it. However, I am curious that you made a change with the summary "Distant signals don't show 'stop'", since that particular paragraph is about semaphore signalling in general, not about distant signals. I would have thought the "most restricive aspect" of any singalling system would have to be an instruction to stop? Regards--Shantavira 12:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello there. You are of course correct in saying that the 'most restrictive aspect' available is "stop" when considering a signalling system as a whole, but not every individual signal is capable of displaying a "stop" aspect. As the article says, "the most restrictive indication [of a semaphore signal] is when the arm is horizontal". For a stop signal, the arm in the horizontal position means "stop", but for a distant signal it means "caution", which is that type of signal's most restrictive indication. Therefore, "most restrictive indication" doesn't always equate to "stop or danger". Signalhead 16:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi; we are talking here to a kid trying to do a presentation. You are of course correct in saying that Auschwitz I was referred to as the main camp, but not until after Birkenau and Monowitz were established; I was trying to give her a simple answer. As to the pronunciation, it may be that you speak Polish, which I do not. But the phonetic which I gave her on the article talk page is how it was pronounced when I was there last year. Perhaps they simplified it for me; I can do only English, French, Italian and a little German and a bit of Latin, none of which come anywhere close to Polish.--Anthony.bradbury 20:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi - I'm new and unsure how to correct the ongoing situation re Somerfield (UK retailer) "crew events", which you, me and others have taken similar action on recently. Any advice, or action we could take? Thanks Georgethe23rd 22:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm fairly new here myself, but the procedure for dealing with persistent vandalism is found at: WP:vandalism. To sum up, leave the appropriate warning templates on the vandal's talk page, then alert an Admin if all the warnings are ignored. Signalhead 22:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Georgethe23rd 07:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

What I did to the Independence Day page wasn't vandalism because I only deleted parts from the goofs section that could have been and were easily explained. I would like it if you would not accuse me of things like that, and to change the section back the way it was.

Putting aside the fact that you have been warned before about blanking sections of articles, it would be helpful if you would provide edit summaries for your edits. Deletion of large sections of an article without any explanation is likely to appear as vandalism. Also, please sign your comments in future. Signalhead 21:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You might like to know that Simply south has been nominated as an Wikipedia Admin. See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Simply south‎ for the relevant page, and make your own decision. --Stewart 22:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Stewart, I'll take a look. Signalhead 23:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification of Mechanical vs Structural in the Railway slide fence article. I look forward to seeing your additions. Truthanado 17:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I've added a brief description of the mechanical system. To read about an actual installation that is still in use, see the Pass of Brander Stone Signals article, which I wrote. Signalhead 17:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. It's an interesting addition. I am more familiar with slide fences in the US and Canada, and this type of mechanical fence is not used (as far as I know). Is a mechanical fence common in the UK? Truthanado 17:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The mechanical fence was never common in the UK. Apart from the one that's still in use (covering a length in excess of 4 miles), I'm only aware of there having been two other short fences, which have both long since gone. Signalhead 17:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

There was only a month between the revolt by the Sonderkommando and the destruction of the remaining crematoria by the SS. I do not think it is reasonable to assume that this was enough time to rebuild the destroyed crematorium. We can, of course, disbelieve the whole sequence, but why should we?--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 23:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I started to describe the situation of bricklayers in germany in the article. In saw you worked on the article, so i thought may be you wanted to have a look. i do have links of references for the stuff i wrote, but for some reason i was not able to include them.

I thought may be you could help me with that.

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Signalhead. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.