Talk:Meldon Viaduct railway station

Devon Low‑importance

	Devon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Devon 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.DevonWikipedia:WikiProject DevonTemplate:WikiProject DevonDevon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Stations / in UK Low‑importance

Trains Portal

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

Mining Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rename?

Is there a reason this page hasn't been renamed to its correct title--Dave F63 (talk) 00:59, 18 October 2020 (UTC)?[reply]

@Dave F63: The correct title doesn't end with a full stop. I have reverted your undiscussed move, and cleaned up some of the ancillary damage that you caused. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Could you show where it says it has to be discussed. If you are so concerned about this page why didn't you update it five years ago when the station name changed? Could you expand of what you mean by "over a redirect without leaving a redirect"--Dave F63 (talk) 23:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dave F63 Pages can be moved with relative ease, as you have found out. Wikipedia relies on the most common name (WP:COMMONNAME) for its article titles. This is dictated by reliable sources WP:RS. Currently, the name change is only supported by a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE, but reliable sources tend to be secondary and tertiary sources. The recent PDF of Quick's Stations, still lists the station as being Meldon Quarry, not Meldon Viaduct.^[1] In Essence, you will need sources to back this claim up and as it is now controversial, you will need to gain a consensus from the community about moving the page, demonstrating reliable sources to back this up (see an example of mine at Talk:Goathland Bank Top railway station) and look at Wikipedia:Requested moves for advice.

The redirect section occurs when you move a page to a new location. So when you moved the page from Meldon Quarry to Meldon Viaduct, the old page of Meldon Quarry was still there, and if anyone typed in the Words Meldon Quarry into the search box, then it would automatically redirect that person straight to the new page of Meldon Viaduct. As your move was reverted, Redrose64 had to cancel the redirects and return the pages to the previous states. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 09:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Come again? There's no "controversy" only one person wanting to be argumentative. If he'd just pointed out my error & asked me to amend, I would have done, but he didn't do that, did he?

Your citation from one PDF, edited by one person is ridiculous. Its one mention is of it closing over 50 years ago!. Please provide genuine evidence that 'Quarry' is the current usage.

A quick search (again) shows all the websites which describe it as such either mention it's been renamed in the text or haven't been updated in 5 years. The only current <cough> website which calls it 'Quarry' is wikipedia! The wikipage itself states 'Viaduct' twice! Along with other wiki pages:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Dartmoor_Railway

https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5124238

https://www.dartmoor-railway-sa.org/home

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnEYfSWLmp0

https://www.dartmoor-railway-sa.org/about

According to wikipedia renaming a renamed page will automatically revert any redirects, so there was no requirement to "cancel the redirects".--Dave F63 (talk) 10:37, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dave F63; please remember WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL and do not engage in personal attacks.

If an edit gets reverted, we talk about it calmly. It is part of the WP:BRD process. When a page move gets reverted, it is defined as controversial because editors are potentially warring over it.
I included the Quick reference as it is online, so easy for all to see. It was updated in 2019 and Quick makes no mention of it being reopened, either as Meldon Quarry or as Meldon Viaduct. The point being that it is a secondary reliable source.
The references you have given are not reliable. The wiki ones are certainly not due to WP:MIRROR. Anyone can edit any of those websites (Wikpedia included), so they are not reliable. I asked you to find reliable secondary and tertiary sources. The Dartmoor railway ones are conflicted. On one of the pages their own map shows its as Meldon Quarry! The picture further down the page shows it as Meldon Viaduct, but it is a Primary Source. Surely there must have been a news piece about this in the railway press of 2015?
No. The onus is on you to find reliable sources to prove that Meldon Quarry has been renamed, not on us to prove it otherwise.
When you moved the article page from Meldon Quarry to Meldon Viaduct it created a redirect. When Redrose64 moved it back, they had to delete/overwrite the redirect that was called Meldon Quarry to enable them to do so. Renaming a page that has already been renamed can be achieved, provided the article name you are moving it to does not already exist. If is does already exist, then it needs an Admin (or someone with similar rights) to enable them to do so.

We are driven by our sources. You need sources to back this up. No-one is saying you are incorrect; far from it. But you do need the citations to support this.The joy of all things (talk) 13:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Quick, Michael (2020). Railway Passenger Stations in Great Britain; a Chronology (PDF) (5 ed.). Market Drayton: The railway and Canal Historical Society. p. 292. Retrieved 19 October 2020.

Move again

Mattdaviesfsic all of the urls don't load for me on the page. Therefore, as stated in the rename section above, there is no cited evidence that the station name was changed. The only given cite, whose url does not load for me, is from the former railway itself, so is WP:PRIMARY. Just letting you know that this may be an issue sometime soon. Thanks and regards. The joy of all things (talk) 09:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Quick, Michael (2020). Railway Passenger Stations in Great Britain; a Chronology (PDF) (5 ed.). Market Drayton: The railway and Canal Historical Society. p. 292. Retrieved 19 October 2020.

[1]