Talk:Lanchester Valley Railway

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lanchester Valley 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/20131230232717/http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=566 to http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=566

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) 06:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to the merge to go ahead.The joy of all things (talk) 19:41, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

---

Hello all. I propose to merge Lanchester Valley Railway Path into this article for a variety of reasons;

• 1) The LVRP article is just two paragraphs, both of which are already in the Lanchester Valley Railway article.
• 2) The LVRP article has had nothing added to it for 3 years - bots have made some amendments, but the last thing to be added was a category in 2013
• 3) The LVRP article is completely unsourced.
• Support for the reasons given above. The joy of all things (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
• Yeah I think I support this as well, the path is a nice postscript to the defunct railway...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:21, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.