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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Trams, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.UK TramsWikipedia:WikiProject UK TramsTemplate:WikiProject UK TramsUK Trams articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire 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.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire articles
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because it is, for the most part, text taken from Grimsby District Light Railway which was part of that article when it was created on 3 May 2006. The page from which the text is said to be copied, i.e. Grace's Guide, is a wiki-clone site as it clearly states on the "about us page". The same page indicates that the site was created in 2007, i.e. after the creation of Grimsby District Light Railway. There is no copyvio here, only the bot picking up an external site which has copied our material. Lamberhurst (talk) 11:45, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the material. Sorry for the mistake. The bot got the source wrong. I hunted for it on Wikipedia, but since the material had already been removed from the source page, I did not find it. Copying within Wikipedia is of course permitted, but attribution is required. At a minimum, we are supposed to do this by saying in the edit summary on the destination article which article we copied the material from. There's also templates available, which should have been used in this case. This problem would have been avoided if that would have been done. I have restored the material and added the required attribution, but note there's a problem with the citations. I have taken a guess at what they are supposed to be, but if someone could check, that would be great. — Diannaa (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
