Talk:Mansfield railway station (Nottinghamshire)

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).

Nottinghamshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nottinghamshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire 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.NottinghamshireWikipedia:WikiProject NottinghamshireTemplate:WikiProject NottinghamshireNottinghamshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

On 20 December 2017, it was proposed that this article be moved from Mansfield railway station to Mansfield railway station (England). The result of the discussion was moved.

Name[edit]

Actually, is the name of this station Mansfield or Mansfield Town? Simply south 22:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its present name is simply Mansfield, code MFT Chevin (talk) 12:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passenger usage 'healthy'?[edit]

The article makes the claim:

Although passenger usage figures remain 'healthy,' Mansfield is one of the few stations in the United Kingdom not to have experienced a large growth in usage since 2004 (see figures right).

It is true that the number of passengers has failed to grow inline with national trends, however whether or not the passenger numbers are healthy is a moot point. For instance Mansfield has a population of 99,000 and its railway station usage of 0.349 million; where as the similar sized town of Halifax (82,000) has a railway station with usage of 1.911 million. Even much smaller towns have railway stations with far greater use, for instance Dorking (population 11,000; annual station usage 1.2 million), Ilkley (population 14,000; annual station usage 1.2 million). If nobody has any objections I'll alter the statement. Mtaylor848 (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you didn't say how you proposed to change it I don't know whether I object or not! Be bold and make your edit and if you can add a citation or two, so much the better. The thing I don't like about passenger statistics is that the method used isn't the same each year, as noted in the infobox. 83.104.249.240 (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Future section[edit]

The section entitled Future doesn't contain any information relevant to its title. Perhaps Operations would be a better name? 83.104.249.240 (talk) 15:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Midland Railway sign?[edit]

I doubt that this sign is Midland Railway. It's enamel, and the typeface is Gill Sans. Both of these point to British Railways in the 1949-65 period. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History section[edit]

I rescued the second paragraph of this from being nothing more than non-sequitur, but if anyone can fill the section out with details that would be a good thing! Harfarhs (talk) 23:48, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 December 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. After 17 days and one relisting (long enough for two relistings) this is a supported page rename. Happy New Year to All! (closed by page mover) Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 18:25, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mansfield railway station → Mansfield railway station (England) – Does not receive notably more page views than the other ambiguous stations,[1] especially as it's at the base name "Mansfield railway station". It also has no more long-term historical significance (the Massachusetts station has been around longer, and the Australian station wasn't built long after), and it gets less use than the Massachusetts station. Disambiguation is per the guidelines at WP:UKSTATION following the RfC.Cúchullain ^t/c 22:22, 20 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 01:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support In ictu oculi (talk) 10:10, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The English town is the primary topic for Mansfield and is considerably larger and more significant than the other two. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what the size of the town has to do with whether the station is the primary topic among stations. In fact, I'd take it as a sign that it's definitely not the primary topic if it's in a more prominent community but is still isn't more prominent than all the other stations combined.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:01, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. feminist (talk) 03:48, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.