Talk:Ruislip Lido Railway

Trains: 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 UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

London Transport Low‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London 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.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on April 26, 2011.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Ruislip Lido Railway RDT.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ruislip Lido Railway. 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/20110904080647/http://www.argosyplayers.org.uk/previous/madbess.htm to http://www.argosyplayers.org.uk/previous/madbess.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ruislip Lido history

I've tried unsuccessfully to record the correct ownership history of the Lido, which was purchased by the local council in 1951, not 1948. The British Waterways Board didn't even exist in 1948. Goodbye Wikipaedia! -- Ruislipian 08:44, 14 June 2020‎ (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the edit history, I'd say that the reason you were reverted was because you were editing the wrong article. The article about Ruislip Lido (including its history) is Ruislip Lido. This article (Ruislip Lido Railway) is about the Lido railway. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 17:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peter, as chris_j_wood points out, you need to edit the correct article. Also, I explained on your talk page, only yesterday, about Wikipedia policies including conflict of interest, original research, and deletion of references, all of which you need to take on board. You can't just delete citations and say "I have better personal knowledge than that reference". We are all happy to help, that's why we're here, but we all have to do so according to the rules. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 17:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However Peter does have a point. In referencing British Waterways, this article goes further than the citation it claims to be based on, which just says 'with nationalisation'. And that 'going further' is wrong, because British Waterways didn't exist until 1962. As this article is about the railway, who ended up owning the canals after nationalisation is pretty peripheral, and I will strip back the article to what the cite says, -- chris_j_wood (talk) 17:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It's not especially relevant to the article. The whole article was in a very strange condition a few months back, and has needed a lot of work, but it is looking much better now. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 18:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]