Talk:Bennerley Viaduct

message: I specified Warren truss, but now I'm not so sure. - Denimadept (talk) 18:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: nevermind... - Denimadept (talk) 18:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which kind of truss is this? 

message: According to  wrought iron can be cut with an oxy torch. As such I think this sentence should be reworded or deleted. Wizard191 (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote the section with respect to the inability to demolish the viaduct using an oxy-acetylene torch. I personally agree with you, I believe it could have been, but the reference I cited gave that as the explanation and since I am not allowed to put my own research into Wikipedia, I did not change it. On the other hand if you or anybody else can correct a possible factual error then I would not object. Also remember, the date at which the intended demolition was suggested and the state of oxy-acetylene technology at the time. Also bear in mind that the demolition contractor may have given that as an excuse which was accepted by a gullible authority. Therefore even if it is factually incorrect it may still be the correct reason. Tina Cordon (talk) 12:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Re-reading the original, it did appear that I was presenting heresay as fact, therefore I have reworded the offending sentence. Have another look and if it satisfies please remove the Dubious-Discuss message. Tina Cordon (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks much better now. The new ref you added also helps as well. Thanks! Wizard191 (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: The article mentions "the L.20 (LZ 59) based at Tønder in Denmark." I'm fairly certain that the town was actually in Germany at that time: Denmark was a neutral, not a German ally. I think it was transferred to Denmark after the end of the War. However, it probably needs checking out more thoroughly. Sjwells53 (talk) 16:27, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious geography

message: The viaduct is owned by the charity Railway Paths Limited.  (Known, as is usual with charities, as 'Railway Paths' without the 'Limited'.)  It was purchased for £1 on 23 March 2001 from BRB (Residuary) Limited.  Title NT359061 was registered on 29 March 2001.  These facts may be verified by searching for the title at the H M Land Registry and paying £3.  I'm unable to publish the title (HMLR copyright) or share the original conveyance (commercial confidentiality).
British Rail was not privatized in a single year, as described elsewhere in Wikipedia, privatization spanned 1994-97.  By 2001 the organization that owned the remaining structures (aka burdensome estate) was BRB (Residuary) Limited.  It is their name that appears on the conveyance.
Since 2001 Railway Paths has been both owner and manager of Bennerley Viaduct.  On 10 October 2013 Sustrans was allowed to register an interest in the structure (see HMLR title NT359061).  The description of Sustrans' involvement to try to fund a significant reuse of the viaduct is accurate.  I have not altered this, but I have combined it in a single paragraph that now logically (and in the correct tense) records Sustrans' period of involvement.
The section on the Friends of Bennerley Viaduct may imply to some readers that they are owners/managers or the lead organization in the present restoration.  The viaduct remains in the ownership of Railway Paths, the fund-raising (£1.3m to March 20201) has been led by Railway Paths, contracts for the works have been let and managed by Railway Paths, and Railway Paths continues to bear the risks for the successful restoration (see here and here for multiple news items).  I have not sought to add/clarify this as I am unable to cite primary sources and any edits by me might be seen as critical of a stakeholder or an attempt to promote Railway Paths.
The reference to works being stopped due to COVID-19 could been seen as transient or not relevant.  It is, however, part of the history of the viaduct; to complete the COVID-19 story I have added the extra funding from the Cultural Recovery Fund.  I have also shown the current state of works by reference to current photographs.  An acceptable alternative would be to delete the section on COVID-19 as the works were stopped for just a few weeks, in a way that happened all over the UK at the same time, and did not introduce material delays.
My other edits to the entry were in respect of the Historic England listing and 'at risk' status where I replaced citations to BBC articles with citations to the primary sources.
Dpembert (talk) 11:11, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current ownership and management of Bennerley Viaduct 

message: *Victorian Web
*Grace's Guide (doesn't contain a lot of info; possible it copied Wikipedia or WP copied it)
*TATRB appearance
* (mentioned in Rail Engineer)
*
*
*Cultural significance from FoBV
*
*
—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Dumping ground