# Talk:Avonmouth railway station (Bristol Port Railway and Pier)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Avonmouth (BPRP) railway station's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CNX":
From Avonmouth railway station: Deaves, Phil. "Engineers' Line References: CNX Clifton Extension Line". Retrieved 22 October 2014.
From Shirehampton railway station: Deaves, Phil. "Engineers' Line References: CNX Clifton Extension Line". Retrieved 22 October 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 12:18, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Avonmouth (BPRP) railway station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 17:28, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'll review this article. FunkMonk (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Any source for the footnote?
That there are 80 chains to the mile is no more worth citing than "there are 1000 metres in a kilometre". That railways are measured in chains I think is probably also not actually citeable as such, but all the references which have exact measurements do so in chains, so it's implied. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok, just if you had something ready. FunkMonk (talk) 15:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
You do not mention which country this is located in, neither in the intro nor article body. May seem obvious that Bristol is in the UK, but not to everyone.
I have no idea how that got missed. Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Did G A Nicholls die more than 70 years ago? Otherwise we can't be sure whether the infobox image is PD old or not. It is PD-US in any case, which means it could at least be uploaded locally if it is not PD-old too.
I cannot find any information about them, so perhaps it should be changed to fair use. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Wouldn't have to be fair use, can just be uploaded here on EN Wikipedia with a PD-US tag. But not something I'll insist on, if someone nominates it for deletion on Commons, you can do it. FunkMonk (talk) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
"BPRP ran in to trouble" Ran into?
It's a common way of phrasing it. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
"a self-contained railway" What is meant by this?
It means it wasn't connected to the national network. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
"This was a joint venture by the BPRP, Great Western Railway (GWR) and Midland Railway (MR)" Why is this only mentioned so late in the artcle? It could be mentioned already under construction.
Because the GWR and MR had no part in building the original BPRP, they only came along when the Clifton Extension Railway was built. Reworded. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Who built it originally then? FunkMonk (talk) 22:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
The original railway was built by the BPRP. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
"when services began on the Bristol Port Railway and Pier (BPRP), a self-contained railway" You could mention this is also a company then? FunkMonk (talk) 08:48, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
My personal thought would have been that not saying it was run by another company means it is its own company. Perhaps something can be written stating why the railway was built, or who funded it. I'll have to check my books tomorrow. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Sounds good. To me, it isn't obvious that the name of a railway also refers to a company. FunkMonk (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
You could also mention that it was a self-contained railway and who ran it in the intro, which is very short (even for an article this length).
"and so refused to run" So would seem redundant.
The so makes explicit that the refusal was due to the track quality, not merely an unrelated thing. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
"It provided accommodation for many Europeans emigrating to the Americas" Why? Was it close to some transit area? Or cheap?
Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Is the hotel seen in the photo? Could be mentioned.
Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:29, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I think you could expand the intro. There is certainly more info that could be summarised.
Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:29, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
With the last issue solved, I will now pass the article. FunkMonk (talk) 14:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)