User talk:Pyrotec

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 2 Lickey 3 Advanced Passenger Train 4 Category parenting 5 Royal Navy Propellant Factory, Caerwent 6 M5 and Tawketbot2 7 Thanks 8 London matchgirls strike of 1888 9 License tagging for Image:Puriton-Church.jpg 10 ROF 11 Wiki-magic 12 Pailsey Gilmour Street 13 Inverclyde line turnstiles 14 Symington, Biggar and Broughton Railway Company 15 Woolwich Royal Arsenal 16 Eastriggs 17 Proposal 18 Glasgow, Paisley and Greenock Railway 19 Historic Scottish Railway Companies 20 Glasgow and Paisley Joint Railway 21 Kilmacolm railway station and historical lines 22 Glasgow South Western Line‎ - WCML diversions in early 1970s 23 Historical lines and boxes 24 SPT infobox 25 User:Ohconfucius deletion proposals 26 General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Railway and City Union Line 27 Lowtherton/Lowthertown 28 Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway 29 bryant and mary 30 Thomas Brassey 31 Project 32 My Sandbox3 Map 33 West Midlands WikiProject improvement drive 34 ARP stored ride TIS, and other stuff 35 Blackpowder

[edit] Welcome!

Hi Pyrotec, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Editing tutorial, learn to have fun with Wikipedia. Picture tutorial, instructions on uploading images. How to write a great article, to make it an featured article status. Manual of Style, how articles should be written.

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism. Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable. Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created. Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one. Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 17:06, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lickey

Hi There, Thanks for your comments on my user page - they are very interesting, and I'm sure you must be right, in the late 19th Century Lickey was even more a part of Worcestershire than it is today - so the "birmingham suburb" phraseology must be wrong.

The reasoning behind the assertion, or the evidence as you requested, are some old postcards which I have seen showing Barnt Green train station. They are probably early 20th century and show horse and carts bringing the well heeled down fiery hill road to Barnt Green station.

This image has stuck in my head, and is probably where my cast of the modern commuter idea back in history took root. These images show a long history of lickey's commuter role - I shall try and borrow them to scan in at some point.

However, I beleive despite this you are correct that the article ties Lickey too closely to Birmingham - this was not necessarily the case in the late 19th Century. Feel free to edit the article to improve as you see fit ! Cheers, Leonig Mig 06:40, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

It's the old Birmingham Road I think you mention - it runs from Rednal, up through the woods, past Lickey Grange and down to Lickey End and the M42 Junction. Lickey is the area running from the top of the hill down to Barnt Green, and the border of Lickey with Barnt Green is pretty vague to be honest. Most of the 19th Century housing is set back from Twatling Road, Plymouth Road and Mearse Lane. Leonig Mig 10:22, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Advanced Passenger Train

Re your addition about the technology being sent to Italy. Is it a good idea to put it there, as a great deal more of value accrued from it - as is outlined in the conclusion. Perhaps, if it is needed, the addition should be something like "Although the train did not enter service, the experience gained enabled the construction of other high speed trains, including tilting ones." or something like that. CheersChevin 06:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I've replied in your talk page. Pyrotec 09:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Advanced Passenger Train: Thanks for your message. When I first came across the article it read as though the whole thing was a waste of time and how French were doing it so much better, which I took great exception to, so I added a number of bits. I've tried not be too laudatory about it (neutral POV you know)

I'm not sure who Williams is, nor read him. My belief is that the APT was a project and as a project it was dead. The idea of an APT-U may have been to try and resurrect it. What I wanted to do was not to imply continuity, but to describe the spin-offs, some of which occurred right at the beginning with the High Speed Freight Vehicle. Originally the research people's idea for the APT was no more than to build a train to test the theories, I believe.

As for the unions, they did cause problems, but they weren't the main one. It may be significant that it was the CCE but not the CME that was originally asked to set up the research division. Noses out of joint? Perhaps more people should have been aware of the difference between 'research' and 'development', the latter being the CME's remit. The Loco Works, too, had a long history of reactionary attitudes, going back to Midland Railway axleboxes. But also the Board Members who specified the APT-P perhaps had the wrong idea of what it was all about. The American railways thought we were the best thing since sliced bread - they were placing job adverts in the local paper. Chevin 16:09, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I still don't remember a Williams. I guess as train supervisor I might not have come across him, as I was involved in instrumentation for short term projects rather than permanently set up ones. (Chevin)

[edit] Category parenting

The tree nature of the categorization system is such that you should be able to work your way up any chain of parents and gradually reach more and more general categories.

This kind of thing is so obvious (to me, at least) that it's very hard for me to put the reasoning into words. Sorry. I'll look up Categorization and try to find an official justification for it.

But it is of such importance, that there's a whole report on it in the Special Pages link on the left of of Wiki (Uncategorized Categories). It's that report that brought me to the ROF category. I'm slowly working my way through that report, trying to work as many categories as possible off the report.

I'm hitting lots of pages I know very little about, like ROF. I have to read the categories, and associated pages, and make judgement calls as to where to place things. One of the more effective ways to find out where to put a category is to check where the similar *article* lives. In the ROF case, the ROF *article* is a member of DC category (amoung others) and so it appeared to be a good enough fit.

I'm not trying for perfect fits. I don't have enough knowledge for that in many cases. But many times others have seen the things I placed pop up, and have quickly moved then into better fit categories. That's great. I have no problem with that. But simply removing the parent again just puts the item right back on the Uncategorized Categories report, which defeats the whole purpose. TexasAndroid 11:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Royal Navy Propellant Factory, Caerwent

Thanks for your valuable edits to the article Welsh 17:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Your recent edit to M5 motorway (England) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept our apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 08:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] M5 and Tawketbot2

First off, you were reverted by a bot. A computer program. The bot is very, very useful, but it's not perfect. In your specific case, you tried to convert the page into a redirect. But you misspelled the redirect command. The bot is programmed to recognize valid redirects, and I think it even recognizes some of the more common ways to mess-up a redirect. But it is impossible for the bot to know every single way that someone could mess up a redirect. And unless the bot recognizes what you did, all it knows is that you removed most of the page, a very common vandalism tactic.

You cannot give the problem to the bot, however. The bot fights vandalism. That's it. Sorry, but the bot cannot help you fix the mess on the M5 pages. I'm sorry you got reverted, but in the end, this incident let it be known that your redirect was faulty, so that a bad redirect was not left in the system. So there *is* a positive benefit from all this. - TexasAndroid 14:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks a lot for your work. I am a part of the Geelong Wikiproject, so at the moment I am working hard to get some of the Geelong mayors together. Thanks for your help, --themit 04:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] London matchgirls strike of 1888

Regarding your edits to London matchgirls strike of 1888: you've made some very good additions to the article. However, I was hoping you could provide some sources for the new info. I've tagged all the new content that I feel requires a citation. Even if you could just give me the source, I can take care of formatting the references for you.

Also, when you add See also entries, it's usually a good idea to explain why they are there. For example, it's not immediately obvious why you added a link to Albright and Wilson. You might want to add an explanation.

Again, thanks for the input! --JerryOrr 17:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for providing those sources; I added them to the article. I'd appreciate it if you could add some inline citations to the article (specifically the places I marked with {{fact}} tags). You can use Harvard notation if you'd like, and I'll convert it to the <ref> format. If you have page numbers, then you can give them; otherwise, just adding which book the different sections came from would be helpful. --JerryOrr 18:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the citations; I applied the <ref> format to them. The article could use some copyediting, which I'll get to later, but those are some excellent additions. Thanks for your help! --JerryOrr 19:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Puriton-Church.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Puriton-Church.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ROF

OK. I saw it later listed as a reference for one of the ROF pages. All the English Heritage books tend to be late out - there is one on WWII radar that has been promised for the last few years but still no sign of it appearing. I only came across the Civil Series when someone found one secondhandin a gift shop for a few quid! I am watching out for any others now as I would like to get some of them. I started mysewlf listing radar stations on a Wiki page, I think I have all the Chain Home stations and when I get time will add a list of Chain Home Low, perhaps later add pages with photographs for the ones i have visited. --jmb 22:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I take it that you have seen that there are some site visits to ROF sites on the Sub Brit website? --jmb 10:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki-magic

That thing which makes ISBNs show as links without special mark-up. In general anything on the wiki that does something "automagically". Rich Farmbrough 20:35 31 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Pailsey Gilmour Street

At the time of the crash at Wallneuk junction, Up/Down Gourock and Up/Down Ayr lines became Up/Down Slow and Up/Down Fast, by the means of double lead junctions both ways allowing parallel movements from the Fast to Gourock lines and Slow to Ayr Lines. Arkleston Junction 2 miles or so to the east of Paisley Gilmour Street was a single lead where the Fast and Slow Lines were combined (also the Up and Down Goods Loops).

Reading the crash report, the diamond where the Up Ayr crossed the link from the down fast to the down Gourock had recently been changed to a switch diamond. This resulted in the Class 126 being trailing through the first part of the diamond set for a down Gourock movement and being diverted from the Up Ayr into a head-on situation at the point mark X below.

Platform 4                               /---Up Goods Loop
Up Gourock------------\-------------/------/----Up Slow
Down Gourock--------\--\-----------/--/---------Down Slow
Platform 3           \  \         /  /       
Platform 2            \  \       /  /        
Up Ayr-----------------X--\--/--/--/------------Up Fast
Down Ayr----------------\---/-----/--------\----Down Fast
Platform 1                                  \---Down Goods Loop

Oops - sorry got the X in the wrong place --Stewart 21:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inverclyde line turnstiles

While the discussion is fascinating, it really belongs on the article talk page rather than my user page: any objection to moving it there? My memory's probably defective as I was only an occasional rail user. Photos I have are current, and there are certainly no barriers now at this end of the line: the history of the line could expand a little, and clarify the current situation. ..dave souza, talk 08:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, it would help to bring this discussion all together in an appropriate place. -- Stewart 08:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy for the decisions to be moved. My real objection is the way the article was reverted twice (three times if you include me). The whole article is unreferenced, but the information about turnstiles was accurate within its context and it was a collective memory, not simply mine - it said they were there in the 1970s & 1980s, but they were probably only there from about 1980 to 1986. It never claimed they were there now. I find it total unacceptable that a school boy can sensor the information in the way it was done, i.e. "information is totally wrong" and revert it and then have you revert me after I reinstated it. The information appeared accurate to me as a commutor on the line in the 1980s. Anthony cfc was not born then, so he has no memory of the 1970s/80s; you had a memory and expressed it. There must be several tens of 1000s people who used the line daily and the tickets. I provided information to you as I discovered it to prove you both wrong. It turns out this information is in the Public Record Office, and in railway journals of the time. As far as I discovered wikipedia has little or no information about BR tickets, APTIS, etc,Pyrotec 17:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Found a refernce to the commenncement of yellow tickets in 1973. Details in Talk:Inverclyde Line#Restart discussion here.

Must concede that I had to go through a barrier (showing my Rail-link ticket to a ticket inspector) when I started at Paisley College in 1980, however by the time I graduated in March 1986, Gilmour Street had become an open station and you could exit straight out into County Square by the doors at the bottom of the stairs (next to John Menzies).

-- Stewart 13:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Symington, Biggar and Broughton Railway Company

Thank you very much for expanding "my" article so quickly. I mean to write some more about the Caley network in Edinburgh, which is why I inserted the link under the heading I did; obviously most of these lines were not directly connected with the main line. No matter, I really appreciate your speedy attention. Best wishes --Guinnog 10:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion, it's a good one. Best wishes, --Guinnog 11:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Woolwich Royal Arsenal

Hi Pyrotec, thanks for the kind words about the British narrow gauge railways. I'm gradually adding to the list, but there's so much more still to document... On the Woolwich Arsenal, actually there was an extensive internal narrow gauge railway system at the Arsenal. The railway operated from 1873 to 1966 and had at least 100 miles of 1 ft 6 in (457 mm) gauge track. Ideally I'd like to create a separate article on the railway system linked to the main Woolwich Arsenal article, but I haven't found enough information to warrant it yet - military railways aren't as well documented as some others. If I could get enough information to justify a separate article, I'd put that into the WikiProjectTrains and remove the project tag from the main article. For now, I think there is enough to be written within the main article that it should be associated with the trains project. There is no reason why articles can't be in more than one project of course, and if you felt the current article shouldn't be in Trains I have no objection to you removing it. Best, Gwernol 20:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eastriggs

Hi Pyrotec, the inference of your last edit to the "Eastriggs" article is that it didn't exist or have an identity of its own prior to the shell and ammunition crisis of 1915. Are you sure of this? --Red Sunset 22:47, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your extensive and informative reply Pyrotec, it was much appreciated. I too watched the "Coast" TV production with some interest.--Red Sunset 22:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal

Hello

I was wondering if you were interested in a new proposed WikiProject. It is called Tranport around Glasgow and Edinburgh. The proposal can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Transport around Glasgow and Edinburgh. For the temp page, see User:Simply south/WikiProject Transport around Glasgow and Edinburgh. I was referred to you by Pencefn btw. Simply south 22:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposal now under Wikipedia:WikiProject Transport in Scotland. Simply south 13:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glasgow, Paisley and Greenock Railway

Hey, I've included the line extension to Gourock within the page and thought it would be best to keep it all as the same line, making a seperate 'Gourock Extension' page is unnecessary IMO. Similar way the Lanarkshire and Ayrshire Railway being all on the one page, despite part of it being an extension built years after it originally opened. --Dreamer84 23:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

My fault - now removed from Historical Rail Box. Stewart 23:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The Glasgow, Paisley and Greenock Railway was an independant company which merged with the Caledonian Railway. In contrast, the Gourock Extension was promoted by the Caledonian Railway, so I'm happy for it to be included, as you have, in the GP&GR article (and in the Caledonian Railway); and I agree it does not need its own article, as it was not an independant railway company. Pyrotec 23:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

D'oh, that's what I get for not paying more attention to who is making edits. --Dreamer84 00:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Historic Scottish Railway Companies

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 23:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glasgow and Paisley Joint Railway

I note that you have added St Enoch and Central to the route box. It was the City Union Line that ran into St Enoch as a G&SWR sole operation; with a similar operation into Central from the Caledonian. I do not think it is appropriate to add stations to the route box that were not part of this Joint Line. Stewart 09:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kilmacolm railway station and historical lines

Just thought I'd clarify why I've removed the Paisley Canal reference in the station boxes at the bottom of the article. Since it didn't become part of the PCL to the 1960s, doesn't really classify as part of the "Historical Railways" and the G&SW. I think the mention in the article is enough. Nice article, by the way. :) --Dreamer84 14:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

See my thoughts at User talk:Dreamer84#Historical station boxes, historical lines. Stewart 16:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Think my head is about to explode from the thought of all these different lines etc. :) First of all apologies for disrupting your experiment. Please feel free to continue. I was about to suggest changing G&SWR to British Rail but just noticed you're in the process of doing that! I completely agree about the flaws in the boxes as they are, will have to give some thought to something that reflects the true connections of the line. The 'End of Line' thing you were trying seems a much better substitute for now.

The only thing is knowing when to stop in terms of adding every single configuration of the lines. For example, the Paisley Canal Line had Kilmacolm as a terminus for around 20 years and is therefore notable, but, also for example, there was no Milliken Park station on the Ayrshire Coast Line for about the same length of time. Should there then be a box to reflect Lochwinnoch to Howwood without a station inbetween? I personally don't see the need to add every single configuration, but then where should the line (if you'll excuse the pun) be drawn? --Dreamer84 16:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Had a look what Dreamer84 has put in his Sandbox. Left a comment at User talk:Dreamer84#Historical station boxes., historical lines.. I see someone has been playing with Rutherglen. Have the right colours been used? (and the stats have not been completed - I will deal with that tomorrow). Any thoughts? Stewart 23:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The right colours are used on Rutherglen, there's just a few minor formatting issues (size of text mainly). Something that concerns me is the amount of information that is present in the 'History' section in the infobox. I'd assumed this section was kind of an brief overview of events with short descriptions, and a 'History' section in the main body of the article providing the main bulk of information. But more and more details seem to be cropping up into the infobox, with the Rutherglen being a prime example! Thoughts on that one? With so much in the infobox it leaves little to put in the main article without heavy duplication. --Dreamer84 23:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually on reflection maybe the information isn't that bad after all, I think it just caught my eye more on the Rutherglen page since there's nothing on the history in the main body yet. --Dreamer84 23:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glasgow South Western Line‎ - WCML diversions in early 1970s

Although I believed they was an almost total blockade of the WCML for electification works, I will bow to your greater knowledge on most of the diversions being at weekends. My knowledge came from being at Brownlee Camp in Abington at Easter 1972 and 1973 (Renfrewshire County Council Music Camps); travelling on midweek trains (one in each direction) in June 1972, and observing the further diversions via Dalry in July 1973 (during the Cook Street Bridge replacement). Stewart 22:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Historical lines and boxes

Like the changes you made in my sandbox, the removal of 'End of Line' makes it a bit more streamlined. Still can't think of a better wording for 'Services continue', only things I could come up were 'Line continues with X', an 'N/A', or just leaving the box blank! --Dreamer84 12:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SPT infobox

i have placed a reply in the WPTIS talk page. Simply south 01:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

THank you for the information and help. I have created the template today. Look at Template:Infobox SPT stations. The syntax is yet to be completed. Simply south 17:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Ohconfucius deletion proposals

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 19:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Railway and City Union Line

Are you sure there was a direct connection between these two lines. The reason for my query is when following remnants of the formation - it passed under the G&PJ and the adjancent lines for the City Union Line under Shields Road Station. Bits of platform are still visible. Considered the location of Shields Road, the now demolished Howdens Works, and Smithy Lye sidings, I am not sure how the line under Scotland Street would have reached the City Union Line (steep gradient and bridge over G&PJ across were Smithy Lye sidings are). Just a thought for you to ponder. --Stewart 13:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Aerial view from Google Earth of Shields Road railway station --Stewart 13:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Try this link

Pre-grouping map

There are more details in Hidden Glasgow, I'll post more links when I find them.

Pyrotec 14:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I have had another look and the aerial view in Google Earth. Guess the route is under Scotland either of them is mine, so the credit must go elsewhere. Here is a Post from Hidden Glasgow This also a map on the following page of Hidden Glasgow Map

The first week of the Glasgow Garden Festival, the proper entrances were not yet open so there was a temporary link down an abandoned railway line. I remember having to walk from Paisley Road along Shields Road and then down into a railway cutting; must get the photos out of the attic. I have some slides as well of the cranes and General Terminus Quay part demolished.Pyrotec 17:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

It now makes sense. I guess that the current arrangement of Shields Road (the road) obliterates any sign of the line passing under the road, and Smithy Lye sidings are the result of filling in the area where the line rose up from passing under the G&PJR. I commuted regularly to Paisley between 1980 and 1986, including sometimes going round the back of Smithy Lye to reach the City Union Lines when on a Paisley Canal service. I vaguely remember seeing the cranes at General Terminus from the Kingston Bridge.

It would be useful to find out when all this was filled in and the connection removed. I guess the Ore Trains to Ravenscraig only needed the lines to reach the Polloc and Govan Railway. ==Stewart 22:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Several points here so I'll take them one at a time.

I commuted from Gilmour Street, down river from April 1979 to 1988, so I only tended to go to Glasgow on Saturdays & Sundays. I used Canal Street only once or twice before it closed, but I did several excursions on mostly goods only lines, including the City Union line and Hunterston high and low levels. Shields Road Depot is said to be built on the original Paisley Canal Lines and presumably some of the City Union linking lines running back to Shields junction; its date of construction is said to tie in with the closure of St Enoch station. The re-opened Canal line runs slightly differently now around Shields depot.

There is talk in Hidden Glasgow of a railway tunnel under Scotland Street School. So there is a possibility of the GT&GHR running lines to Port Eglington Junction, which seem to cross under both Pollokshields and Shields Road stations, to the east, being in a tunnel. The GT&GHR lines to Cathcart, etc, cross to the west of both stations. I also seem to remember, from the Joint line, just before reaching Cook Street power box, looking across the cripple sidings, which were cleared quite a few years ago; it would I assume have been Salked Street goods depot, but was it Smithy Lye? The depot lines were at Joint Line level, the City Union lines were possibly a couple of metres higher; but in between there was a corridor at a lower level, running parallel to the City Union line: possibly this was were the GT&GHR lines climbed up.

General Terminus Quay was derelict in 1979 when I first started using the trains; it was superseded by Hunterston, so I assume it closed when Hunterston opened. I'm not sure when this was, but Hunterston is shown on the 1977 Geographia, BR system map.

When the Canal line closed, but Hunterston ore terminal and Ravenscraig were still open, the heavy goods trains got diverted through Gilmour street. A new diving junction was opened just after Howdens which led off from the left (travelling to Glasgow) and crossed under the joint line. I'm assuming that made use of the old GT&GHR lines to get to Motherwell. The line beyond that was blocked with gabbions.

This seems reasonable, except for a tunnel under Scotland Street School. I went to Paisley College, and at that time they had an extensive archive of Scottish railway maps from constructional days. I am not sure if they still have them, however if they do, I should be able to access them as an Alumnus. I think the Smithy Lye lead is worth following as I would expect that the junction must have been before the CUL and G&PJR crosses West Street (close to the Subway Station). The CUL line before this point is only a few metres above the sidings. The other side of the CUL at this is were the Paisley Canal Line will have joined (having crossed the site of Shields Road Depot). I think there are still signs of this line either side of Shields Road (the road), before it crossed over the line heading to Terminus Junction (GT&GHR and Polloc & Govan Railway). ==Stewart 18:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I think this is it comming under Shields Road bridge. [1]

The triangle piece above the bottom railway line. Pyrotec 20:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I think is the same picture that I have posted, but with north at the top (my picture has north at the bottom centred on the long closed station). Zooming out, the triangle of land with the building (Royal Mail depot) is where the Paisley Canal used to pass under the road, and over the Polloc and Govan/GT&GHR. The bulge of green between the top line (G&PJR) and the next line down (CUL) is/was Smithly Lye stabling sidings. I can not work out where the line passed under the G&PJR! ==Stewart 22:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Yes it is the same picture, it almost has the same cars on it.

Your drawing pin, which marks the station, also marks the left hand edge of the cutting of the GT&GHR connection to the P&GR. Other maps show the two connections to the CUL and the P&GR splitting off beyond the 'line' of the subway at the Scotland Street / Key Street bridge and crossing under the mid point of the Shields Road bridge. The 1982 version of OS 1:25000 sheet NS 46/56 shows a funnel shaped cutting, but no tracks at this point. It also shows blank space where the Canal line - St Enoch station running lines used to be. So I suspect that the car park has been extended a bit to the right over railway land; and the CUL cutting emerged in the trees to the left of the Shields Rd bridge somewhere between the red car and the black van above it (on your picture). I'll try and find my photographs, but the cutting was not very photogenic so I would have very few: much more were taken of the Garden Festival.Pyrotec 18:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lowtherton/Lowthertown

No problem Pyrotec, I ought to have consulted the OS map before editing. I've changed my edit to indicate that the spelling is now Lowthertown, and I'm hoping to take a photo of the Eastriggs church once the workmen's scaffolding and barriers have been removed.--Red Sunset 14:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway

Hi Dreamer84,

I remember travelling Glasgow to Euston particularly, on the sleeper services and on Sunday Intercity services, on this line in 1979 and through to the early to mid 1980s, whilst it was still double all the way down to Carlisle. So I don't think I would not agree with your date of 1973 as being a final service; perhaps it was for weekday services. I'll accept everything about Cook Street Bridge, as I was not using the services then. Pyrotec 18:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, are you referring to the Dalry to Kilmarnock section? The paragraph (about Cook Street etc) I moved to the GPK&A main article was originally written by Stewart so he's the best person to ask about that. There's a 1973 date mentioned as the last year for services in "Ayrshire's Last Days of Steam". RAILScot also gives a 1st October 1973 date as the day the line closed to all traffic. I'm not an expert on the section though, am I right in thinking it was singled at some point and then mostly lifted in the late 1980s? --Dreamer84 18:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying the Paisley and Renfrew sale date, I'll add it back in similar to the way you've worded and referenced it on the Paisley and Renfrew Railway article. --Dreamer84 21:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] bryant and mary

please, don't feel attacked. i just don't have time to change everything i encounter. so i tag, and someone else (or even me) can come back later. what's the problem ?-- ExpImp^talkcon 18:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas Brassey

My reference source says the contract was for 7 miles, so he did not build the entire 23 miles. I guess the additional mileage was added later by a different contractor. Much as I admire his achievements, I mustn't credit him with more than he actually did! So I have added "(part)" and changed it back to 7 miles. Hope this is OK. Peter I. Vardy 09:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. My source (Helps) is dated 1894 (reprinted 2006) and is I think as accurate was we are likely to get. I find the early railway companies and the lines they built somewhat confusing! As a matter of interest Helps states that the agents for the 7 miles of line were "Mr. Strapp and others". Peter I. Vardy 18:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project

Erm, that wasn't quite what i meant about the lul. See the reply. Simply south 19:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to update, i have finally started to construct assessment but the basics are nowhere near finished. Simply south 19:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Sandbox3 Map

Hey, I actually based the map on one I found at Template:England Labelled Map. There's a link to a little editor program on that page where you can load up an image, place where you want the links to be, and then it will output it as code you can just copy and paste into an article (usually requires some manual editing of co-ordinates to get it right though!). The actual map image was done by me in Paint Shop Pro, based on a scan of a 1926 OS Map. Its not the quickest of processes, but I think its worth it in the end. --Dreamer84 23:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] West Midlands WikiProject improvement drive

I wouldn't do this normally but the improvement drive nominations page has gone quiet all of a sudden. So, could you please add a nomination or support/object the current nomination on there. Thanks and happy editting! - Erebus555 21:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ARP stored ride TIS, and other stuff

Hi Pyrotec, I have moved your message from my user page to my talk page here, and will reply there in a moment. Thanks for your work so far on APTIS and PORTIS; I consider myself fairly knowledgeable on these systems, but there was quite a bit of stuff there I didn't know. I expect between us we can make some good progress on these. I may at some point create a sub-page on my user-page to prepare and hone my contributions separately from the main articles. If there's any more info you can provide - especially about the early days of APTIS and PORTIS, and especially if you have published sources (which I lack) - please do so, and let me know if you want to discuss anything. Cheers, Hassocks5489 22:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blackpowder

Dear Pyrotec, I have responded to your comments in my talkpage. Just to let you know I'm not dictating you on what should be done to those paragraphs. Its not your job to get the reference for me nor others, if it is too much troublesomes for you, then you should probably leave the article and let other make their citations. Other people could had reference the paragraphs and bring those materials back very soon, which was why I moved it to the talk page not by deleting them. I had did what other had did and to follow the rules that set here and removed these. As you said those are in need of references, since you are not prepared, it may be a sort of disruptive for you. I agreed with you that its take time to search references on those paragraphs. Many of the articles were not written by me either, and I rarely made contributing to them. As for improvements, hopefully you can achieved in your best way of aim. Regards Eiorgiomugini 01:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)