Talk:Black Rock Halt railway station

Trains Portal

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 Stations.
	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.

Current artifacts[edit]

Having recently stopped at the local holiday camp, the location of the station interested me.

I managed to locate it using the Old Maps site http://www.old-maps.co.uk/

Entering Porthmadog as a start point, select the 1954 map. follow railway line to the west towards Criccieth. You will find it at the most southern point of the line. Having checked maps for other dates, there is no trace. Its existance must have been short --Keith 06:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the map reference, and could you give a pointer to the appropriate map. It is not obvious from this that the Halt existed. --80.177.114.73 (talk) 22:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strange comment? It is shown on the 1954 Caernarvonshire map available online, in the location described above. The location reference is OSGR SH519377, Lat:52:55:01N (52.91686) Lon:4:12:13W (-4.20359). It also appears in the ref books noted apparently. The reason I find it strange is that directions to the map to look at, had been previously given, and the actual co-ordinates are given on the front page

As far as I am aware, it existed for a short period and by map date, only under GWR and BR ownership. It did not seem to mention either company on the main page? I have reworded what is there to remove duplication of same comments --Keith 10:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aberystwith and Welsh Coast Railway / Black Rock[edit]

(Placed here, having been deleted from personal talk page, in order to validate information contained in main page)

Stewart, Why are you insistant in placing the AWCR reference on this page?. The halt never existed during its, AWCR, existance, and by the time it did exist, it would have been on the Cambrian section of the GWR, the route name that is still in use.

I note, since its existance was pointed out, that the other page made no refrence to the AWCR period either.

The AWCR only existed as such for a maximum of 5 years, and using it as opposed to Cambrian (with a 140+ year use) may confuse. --Keith 19:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Route through the site[edit]

The line through the site of this station was built by Aberystwith and Welsh Coast Railway. It is correct to say within the article that the halt was built on the route of the former Aberystwith and Welsh Coast Railway. To say any different infers a deviation in the line from the route as constructed. As correctly stated in the route the halt was built by the Great Western Railway, and did not exist in A&WCR or Cambrian Railways days. --Stewart^(talk) 21:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Railway Companies[edit]

I am confused by Keith's comment that the Cambrian existed for 140+ years. Surely it ceased to exist when taken over by the GWR. Looking at the article, I see no inaccuracyies with the comments provided. His comment that the AWCR is irrelevant puzzles me as if they did not build the line aas asserted by Stewart then a correction is necessary with the appropriate builder of the line put in place. The article does appear to correctly indicate that the station was built by the GWR (so where does the Cambrian come in?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.149.117.69 (talk) 09:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple enough to explain. Although the Cambrian Railway ceased to exist as such in 1922 as part of the regrouping, as that companies page/article states, "The name is continued today in the route known as the Cambrian Line." Given the ownership by the CR/GWR/BR/NR stretches from 1867 to present day, I would say a named reference that is 140 years old and current, is much better than a reference to a railway company that existed for 5 years, some 140 years ago. Please note, I have never said the comment was inaccurate, nor in anyway implied a "deviation" was constructed. PS Part of the reason for this, shall we say difference of opinion, is the fact the page was created showing the AWCR was the original operating company. Since we are talking of a station that didnt exist during that companies existance .... ???? --Keith 11:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cambrian Railways equals Cambrian Coast Line - I think not!

One is a Company name and the other is a marketing name. A large section of the Cambrian Railways network is now closed, and there are part of Cambrian Coast Line which was not part of the Cambrian Railways. You appear to be being denying the existence of the AWCR - Why? If they had not built the line - history would have been different.

As regards the builder of the station, a review of article history shows that the editor you have disagreed with has identified that the station was built on the route of the former AWCR - correcting the rror you had pointed out. You appear to be disgreeing with that - in fact your comment above post dates that edit. In which case why are you disagreeing with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.149.117.69 (talk) 11:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should check things before posting. I have actually updated the AWCR page, over a month ago to expand on the reasons for the mis-spelling, and since I bothered to research the information, I can hardly be accused of denying its existance. Please re-read the PS line of my previous post, and consider what you posted. --Keith 11:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should read what is in the previous paragraph before jumping to this conclusion. That paragraph does not mention the AWCR article, it refers to THIS article - see this edit and this edit. The first edit is showing the editor you are critising applying the changes you want, and the second reinstating the fact that this is on the former AWCR. What have you against the AWCR? The above examples show that you have not even read my comments, you have your own view which you stick to and still critise others, even when they take on board your comments. Again look at the identified edits. Are they wrong? The first removes reference to the AWCR as the original company, replacing it with the GWR. The second identifies the original builder of the route.

There are many stations around the country that did not exist when the original route was constructed - GWR constituents being prime examples - this does not invalidate the fact that these stations were built on the route of a former railway company. For example - Milton Keynes Central railway station was built on the route of the former London and Birmingham Railway by British Rail in the early 1980s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.149.117.69 (talk) 13:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

as you are incapable of either signing or identifying yourself or bothering to check what you write, I see no reason whatsoever in further responses to your id. I think you have missed the point entirely and are just out to cause trouble --Keith 13:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is going on?[edit]

Kieth - What has been happening. I spend a day at my desk and when come back to the article I find you have been having trouble with an anon editor. I think apart from a picture this article is nearly there. Not sure about your comment about the Project box as I would expect to see them on the talk page of Scottish stations - but this is Wales. Keep up the good work (and me on my toes). --Stewart^(talk) 14:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]