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 London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Re queries on layout and context, this article does not appear to me to be markedly different to a number of other UK rail crash descriptions (see list) so consistency is needed - either all should be flagged, or none. Fair comment on lack of categories, I have not had time to add these yet. Hyperman 42 13:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is going on here? Why is this page being reverted to an earlier version that did not conform to WP:MoS and had no infobox? MRSC 12:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mrsteiec, Sorry to revert to a page without info box. That was not intended. However, please do not delete interesting and relevant links. Infobox was a mistake but you must take care in what you do and don't delete (and from infobox mistake, I do too!). Thank you. Nickg1980 12:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but the links you are adding are already in the article or the footer and to be honest are not that relevant. MRSC 12:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added archive links to one external link on Hither Green rail crash. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.
It seems quite inappropriate for there to be a warning message on the use of a single source when by definition the Railway Inspectorate report is the single definitive and comprehensive collation of the evidence. Can we therefore remove the box? No justification for it is given here. Hyperman 42 (talk) 22:11, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
