Talk:British narrow-gauge railways

message: Several of the railways listed in this section, such as Alton Towers, Bicton, Billing Aquadome, Great Bush, Whipsnade & Umfolozi seem to have little to do with Heritage (although Alton has the monorail from Expo 86, and did have a line since 1929) - and certainly no longer have anything of heritage value to be seen - and nothing to do with museums.  Should these be grouped into a separate category of "Theme Park Railways"?  There are a number of others that could also be added to that category, although sadly, most seem to be running very similar American-styled steam-outline modern diesels.
Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? Lynbarn 21:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are, of course, right. This makes complete sense. Let's do it. Gwernol 21:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section 3 Heritage and Museums 

message: Would it be useful to show an extra column (after gauge, perhaps) containing the mileage of each line, where known. If nobody objects, I will add the column in about a week - I don't know most of the values though, So I'll leave most blank...
Any thoughts? Lynbarn 22:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, its not super valuable right now as only two entries have lengths. What's more a number of these railways varied in length significantly over time. A number more we probably can't get lengths for. What about branches - how should they be treated? Until we have a reasonable spread of reliable data is it worth including this column just for two lines? Wouldn't that information be better off on the articles for those lines? Gwernol 00:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now you tell me!   I do know (or can find) the lengths of several of these lines, and I will be adding them as I can over the next few days/weeks, but I thought it better to add the column to all the tables first, even though they are blank.  As for variable lengths, several entries have various as their track gauge, so I still think the additional column is a valid addition Lynbarn 11:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, sorry about that. I'd meant to add a similar comment to your original announcement, but I forgot, sorry. Your most recent message reminded me. I think as long as we get a reasonable coverage of lengths (at least 50% of lines?) its fine. Gwernol 11:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mileage 

message: There is a narrow gauge railway in the grounds of Blenheim Palace, Oxfordshire, which does not appear to be listed here.  I'll leave someone more knowledgeable about railways to decide on the appropriate category for it.Rodparkes 03:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for reminding me of that line - I was there only about two years ago!  I have now added an entry to the list.  regards, Lynbarn 11:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: As I see it, A miniature railway (more or less scale models of full-size prototypes, able to carry passengers) is by definition a narrow gauge* (ie less that 4ft 8.5inches) railway but a narrow gauge railway (full-size prototypes running on rauils less than 4ft 8.5 inches) isn't necessarily a miniature railway.  In the case of the Blenheim line, I think it qualifies for both. (*although at the extreme, I guess a roughly 4/7ths scale model of a Brunel broad-gauge could be miniature but not narrow!) Regards, Lynbarn 00:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blenheim Palace 

message: Is it a deliberate decision to omit any reference to the various military narrow gauge systems that existed?
Examples include Woltham Abbey & Woolwich Arsenal (Army); Broughton Moor and Chattenden & Upnor (Navy); Calshot and Chilmark (RAF). Locos from 2 of these systems are still at work on the Talyllyn and Welshpool lines.Gawthorpe Dave 13:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No - if you have any information of military or former military lines or stock, please feel free to add it. Regards, Lynbarn 00:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a separate article British military narrow gauge railways which is linked from this article. It covers all these railways. Gwernol 13:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military Use 

message: I find having the word "Present" in the closed column confusing - does it mean that the railway is currently closed or "present" in the sense of answering the register, miss? I would suggest putting "Open" or where applicable, "Seasonal" or "Occasional". Britmax 10:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It means until the present - i.e. the railway is currently operating. The reason for this is that all the other entries in that column are dates, so having "1876 - open" is a misnomer, whereas "1876 - present" conveys that the line opened in 1876 and continues to operate. Gwernol 13:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Closed - Present?

message: I've merged a lot of the entries from the preserved/museums, as discussed above. Some of the entries are borderline as to whether they are museums or short demonstration lines, and I may have called some the wrong way, so feel free to move things as required. Both tables could do with a bit of clean-up, e.g. to get consistent formatting of lengths etc. Feel free to let me know if there's any other discrepancies. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 17:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table sorting 

message: The only major NG railway before the Gauge Commission of 1846 appears to be the Festiniog Railway of 1836 (horse) and 1863 (steam).  Given the large number of different narrow gauges that followed, it seems that the gauge commission did not give a lot of thought to standardising narrow gauges, like what Italy did.   Tabletop (talk) 04:24, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gauge Commission 

message: The sortable function sorts 2'6", 2'0", 3'6" which is not in correct order.   
It would also be neat to write 2' 0" instead of 2'.    Tabletop (talk) 13:34, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorting of gauges in table 

message: The Steepbridge Light Railway is an industrial line in UK.   
Tabletop (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steepbridge Light Railway 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on British narrow gauge railways. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071229231523/http://www.spt.co.uk/subway/facts.html to http://www.spt.co.uk/subway/facts.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051124083048/http://www.hfstephens-museum.org.uk:80/pages/his_railways/ryecamb.htm to http://www.hfstephens-museum.org.uk/pages/his_railways/ryecamb.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060822032507/http://members.shaw.ca/twofooter/ww2ftrr.htm to http://members.shaw.ca/twofooter/ww2ftrr.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Please summarize British quarrying and mining narrow-gauge railways and British narrow gauge slate railways like the rest of the summary sections, per WP:SUMMARY, instead of relegating these to "See also" were people are apt not to notice them.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  22:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unhelpful inconsistency problem 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on British narrow-gauge railways. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061005004155/http://www.almondvalley.co.uk/p_pict_rail.htm to http://www.almondvalley.co.uk/p_pict_rail.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051120115954/http://www.ashover.com/alr.htm to http://www.ashover.com/alr.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312084712/http://users.eggconnect.net/canda.stell/CaM.html to http://users.eggconnect.net/canda.stell/CaM.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070430001835/http://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/about/default.html to http://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/about/default.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hfstephens-museum.org.uk/pages/his_railways/ryecamb.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051216202119/http://malden-dsme.co.uk/News200010.htm to http://www.malden-dsme.co.uk/News200010.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.tumblydownfarm.co.uk/museum.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070428030755/http://www.neath-porttalbot.gov.uk/margampark/narrowgaugerailway.cfm to http://www.neath-porttalbot.gov.uk/margampark/narrowgaugerailway.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081021060921/http://membrane.com/~elmer/rail/units/uk.html to http://membrane.com/~elmer/rail/units/uk.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The Decline of the narrow gauge: 1900–1950 section claims - without a source - that the Ashover Light Railway was the "last narrow-gauge commercial carrier in Britain". I don't know what is meant by "commercial carrier". There were lots of industrial narrow-gauge railways after the ALR closed. The Talyllyn Railway was a common carrier and still operating when the ALR closed. I've tagged the claim as needing a source and as dubious, but I think it is so ill-defined that it should be removed. Thoughts? 157.131.122.202 (talk) 18:56, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last commercial carrier