Talk:The Railway Children

message: Not sure about fraud - the father was a government offical and as far as a remember the implication was that he was falsely accused of espionage.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.51.102.49 (talk) 00:17, 17 March 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly. The whole Russian bloke subplot was related to this. Icundell 11:45, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Having just read the eText at Project Guttenberg, he was charged with selling state secrets to the Russians. Icundell 12:25, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "The story was adapted as a television series four times by the BBC. The first of these, in 1951, was an 8 episode series of 30 minutes each and was adapted for television by the author, Edith Nesbit." Hey! Edith Nesbit died in 1924 according to her Wiki page! Xxanthippe 04:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Adaptations

message: While the 1970 film clearly says Yorkshire, the book is not specific about location.  It is unlikely that anyone would be commuting daily from Yorkshire to London in ~1905 (especially on a 9:45 train!)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.45.232.14 (talk) 23:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Location

message: I added an image, it isn't the original though unfortunately, but if someone finds the first edition image they can just up-date (I don't know how to).  Anyway, I think it's a nice illustration and better than nothing for now. Sue Wallace 22:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this public domain title page from the 1906 edition? :Image:Nesbit-railway001.gif Unfortunately it's not a great scan. Jfire (talk) 00:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: I've just read the novel and the surname of the family is never mentioned, so where did the name Waterbury come from? Count de Ville (talk) 00:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The surname Waterbury 

message: The following has just been added:
: The book refers to the then current Russo-Japanese War and to attitudes taken by British people to the war. This dates the setting to the spring, summer and early autumn of 1905, and also accounts for the very hostile opinions of Tsarist Russia expressed in the book. Those opinions are now known to have been entirely justified, but when the book was published in 1906 that was controversial, the Conservatives (here represented by the Station-master) backing the authoritarian Russians, while the Liberals (represented by the Porter) back the Japanese.
I see the whole of this as unsourced, WP:OR and most of all, inaccurate.
I recall nothing in the book about the Russo-Japanese war, nor ever specifically to Tsarist Russia. Nor do I recall the station staff being used allegorically like this. Certainly we have The Russian, and glowing comments about his writings (which struck me as odd at first, but then E Nesbit was a founding Fabian, so it makes sense). To some extent, he's described as persecuted by the Tsarist state, but that's still focussed on him, not on the war or even Russia particularly.  
This needs sourcing if it's to stay. Primary sourcing from the book, with rough pages and quotes, or ideally some secondary discussion of it, as we are after all required to use. Now I'm known for being lenient on OR generally, but it has to at least stand up to the text itself.  Andy Dingley (talk) 00:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, that's very useful.  Can we source when this was cut?  Is there any secondary discussion of it around? Andy Dingley (talk) 23:01, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  The 1906 version is available online at http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu Impregnable (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics 

message: :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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: pages not moved to the proposed titles at this time, per the discussion below.  Dekimasuよ! 08:07, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose - as per Nohomersryan - makes more sense to just have the disambiguation as a hatnote Stan traynor (talk) 20:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 1 June 2022