Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Hastings Line

Hastings Line[edit]

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page.

The result was: scheduled for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 13, 2015 by — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Hastings Line is a secondary railway line in Kent and East Sussex, England, linking Hastings with the main town of Tunbridge Wells, and from there into London via Tonbridge and Sevenoaks. Although primarily carrying passengers, a gypsum mine served by the railway is a source of freight traffic. Passenger trains on the line are operated by Southeastern.

The railway was constructed by the South Eastern Railway in the early 1850s across the difficult terrain of the High Weald. Supervision of the building of the line was lax, enabling contractors to take short cuts in the construction of the tunnels. These deficiencies showed up after the railway had opened. Rectifications led to a restricted loading gauge along the line, requiring the use of dedicated rolling stock.

Served by steam locomotives from opening until the late 1950s, passenger services were then taken over by a fleet of diesel-electric multiple units built to the line’s loading gauge. Freight was handled by diesel locomotives, also built to fit the loading gauge. The diesel-electric multiple units served on the line until 1986, when the line was electrified and the most severely affected tunnels were singled. (Full article...)

Most recent similar article(s): ~~As far as I can tell, this is the first FA covering a railway line, as opposed to a railway company.~~ Tunnel Railway, August 13, 2014.
Main editors: Mjroots
Promoted: 3 September 2015
Reasons for nomination: Relevant date - 14 October is the anniversary of the Battle of Hastings, the line serves both Battle and Hastings. Also my first FA, so first TFA too.
Support as nominator. Mjroots (talk) 07:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It would probably make more sense to use a photo of either a train or one of the more scenic bits of the railway line, rather than this photo. Unless one already knows that's a picture of Hastings Station, it's not going to mean anything to readers, and there's nothing particularly railway-ish about it. (I personally think File:Warrior square station.JPG would be the most visually striking at mainpage size, although File:Wells Tunnel south portal.jpg would work well as well—see right.) ‑ iridescent 11:57, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- If it's trains you want, the best showing the modern traction is File:375610 at Tonbridge.jpg. Other good photos showing the Schools Class, Hastings Units and Class 33/2 locomotive were not taken on the line itself. Photos on MP come with captions nowadays, which is why I chose the modern photo of Hastings railway station. Mjroots (talk) 12:52, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since you are tying this in with the battle date, why not Battle railway station? Brianboulton (talk) 15:29, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - There's File:Battle railway station 1772425 c791c446.jpg I suppose, but it's older than I am and in black & white. Mjroots (talk) 16:51, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - File:Looking south along the tracks, Battle Station - geograph.org.uk - 1721005.jpg is quite evocative, albeit architecturally uninteresting. (I'm not obsessed with images, but I know from experience that railway articles are a tough sell on the mainpage; those readers who are interested have probably already read it, while those who aren't take quite a bit of convincing that it will be worth their while to click. For some articles where there's something unusual about the line you can spin the blurb as "eccentric Victorian entrepreneur triumphs against the elements" or similar, but for something like this where the back-story isn't particularly exciting, the image is going to be responsible for hooking viewers.) ‑ iridescent 22:55, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        In which case the Wells Tunnel image is the best alternative to use. Now, how about some supports? Mjroots (talk) 05:01, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        Don't panic if you don't get any supports; TFAR isn't the vote-based process it used to be, and supports here are "yes, I agree" rather than votes. Basically, unless someone comes up with a reason not to run it, assume the schedulers will run it, although possibly not on the requested date if something else has a better claim on it. ‑ iridescent 16:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Totally agree Chelb (talk) 21:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Support as I see no reason not to run it; weak because Stockton and Darlington Railway is already scheduled for 27 September, and two UK railway articles in quick succession will provoke the usual "zomg systemic bias!" complaints on Talk:Main page. Despite the subject matter, the two articles aren't particularly similar, and Wikipedia is not about to run out of transport FAs any time soon, so I don't see this as causing any particular issue. ‑ iridescent 23:42, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The S&D article has a much stronger date connection than this, where the connection is tangential and nothing to do with the railway. I personally don't see any real problem in running railway articles 17 days apart, but it would be no great shakes if this one was deferred for a short while. Brianboulton (talk) 23:55, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The S&D article is about a railway company, not a specific railway line. If the article is deferred, other suitable dates are 19 September (1845, first section opened), 1 February (1852, completion), 27 April (1986, first day of public electric services) and 12 May (1986, start of full electric service). Mjroots (talk) 06:30, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I could make a decent argument that S&D is really an Engineering and Technology rather than a Transport article, as it's essentially an article about the impact of an emerging technology rather than a typical station-bridge-cutting-station transport article, and thus doesn't qualify as "similar", although I suspect the point would be lost on general readers. (FWIW, this isn't the first FA on a railway line as opposed to a railway company; Tunnel Railway, Hellingly Hospital Railway, Brill Tramway, Eastern Suburbs & Illawarra Line and—arguably—Talyllyn Railway got there first, although the first two at least were fairly insignificant specialist branch lines.) ‑ iridescent 19:39, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've amended the nom. Tunnel Railway was the most recent. Mjroots (talk) 05:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]