Talk:Birkenhead Railway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Birkenhead Railway. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Birkenhead Railway. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:58, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RDT- Error[edit]

On the RDT the position of Norton and Runcorn East stations need to be reversed as they are in the wrong order. Steamybrian2 (talk) 16:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this article justified?[edit]

This railway company only existed under this name for five months in 1859. It was a renaming of the Birkenhead, Lancashire and Cheshire Junction Railway prior to being taken over jointly by the LNWR and the GWR and becoming the Joint Line or Joint Railway.

The rather thin content of the article is already better handled in other articles. Afterbrunel (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Afterbrunel: It was jointly owned indeed, but remained a legal entity right down to nationalisation, since it is named in the Third Schedule of the Transport Act 1947, page 146 as "The Birkenhead Railway Company". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:02, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is so; it was (only) a legal entity. After 1860 the Birkenhead Railway Company didn't operate any trains, nor did it own any railway. It was just a financial entity that distributed share dividends from lease income.
The trouble with having this article in existence is that the casual reader may stumble across it and assume from the title that it was a railway, as opposed to a financial entity. I suggest it merits a mention in other articles, but not an article in its own right. There is no benefit to readers in giving every company in Awdry its own article, however insignificant. Afterbrunel (talk) 08:26, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]