Talk:Welsh Highland Railway

Moving things and editing

I've moved a few sections of this article about as it did not seem to flow on first reading: hopefully no-one will mind too much! The main changes have been to move the locomotive data towards the end (it broke up the flow of the text); and to add a section on Phase 4 works which I hope can be updated as work progresses.

I've taken the opportunity to re-name various sub-sections WHR (Porthmadog) and WHR (Caernarfon) for continuity and to put them in the same order wherever they appear. I've no particular reason for putting WHR(P) above WHR(C) (see below!) other than that being the way round the majority were to start with. As a 'neutral' on the issue, I would however suggest that this is a sensible order as WHR(P) existed before WHR(C)...

The 'Route' section could do with expanding, probably on a historical basis as I have tried to give a brief outline of the route from Rhyd Ddu to Porthmadog in the 'Future' section which deals with Phase 4. Not least, the route map now causes a significant white space which needs to be got rid of, even afterswitching it to the left, which removes the conflict with the picture of Russell. vanoord 17:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Modified article some more to add information on Phases 1, 2 & 3. These mostly deal with the history of the reconstruction work, but could do with some more route information and possibly some illustrations. This might leave the "Route" section above to be used for a short-ish history of the original construction of the WHR. vanoord 19:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added a few pictures but I'm lacking anything from Phase 2, Phase 4 or indeed the WHR (P). No doubt one day I go out with the camera, but if anyone has anything, then it would brighten the article up somewhat. Without wishing to fan the flames too much, I suggest that the sections "Controversy and Complication", "Obstruction and Objections" and "Two Welsh Highland Railways" would benefit from some re-working and condensing. While the history of the disputes may be fresh in the minds of those involved (see below!), to me it doesn't justify that amount of space taken and I very much doubt the impartial observer will find it that interesting. If there are no objections or someone doesn,t beat me to it, I'll have a go at this in a while.

In the meantime, the sections on Phases 1, 2 and 3 would probably benefit from having some route description added in to complement the rebuilding history to give an overall picture of the railway as it is now. vanoord 19:00, 6 November 2006

Although there is now a subsite within the Festiniog Railway website dedicated to the operational WHR, may I suggest contacting either of the webmasters Ben Fisher at http://whr.bangor.ac.uk or Barrie Hughes at http://www.isengard.co.uk/

Either of these people, if asked nicely, would probably be quite willing to provide additional photographs in order to further the cause. Bens official site has very good pages describing, by phase, the route itself and its rebuilding, whilst Barries unofficial site gives an alternative view of the rebuilding. Keith 22:42, 10 February 2007

Welsh Translation

I have added what I have called the brand name (I don't think this is a very good name for it, but cannot think of a better one), as the direct translation is not the one that will be used. Rheilffordd Eryri will be used, which is Snowdon Railway (I believe, but I don't know Welsh), so I felt it important to include this. If you can think of a better way to include it, I'd be grateful.--John 08:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm got into a muddle trying to work it out too. Anyway, "Rheillffordd" = railway, and in Welsh the order of words is basically backwards to that in English. "Eyri" actually means Snowdonia, not Snowdon, e.g. "Awdurdod Parc Cenedlaethol Eyri" is Snowdonia National Park (compare "Awdurdod Parc Cenedlaethol Arfordir Penfro" Pembrokeshire Coast National Park). Note the Snowdon Mountain Railway is "Rheilffordd yr Wyddfa" which does mean "Snowdon Railway" (no mountain). Dunc|☺ 12:06, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Concerning Stations

In order to avoid conflict of description, the 1998 agreement (q.v.), between the two separate organisations working together in the restoration of the WHR, determined that where it became neccessary (during the reconstruction era) to diferentiate between the two halves of the endevour, the 'northern end' would be called WHR (Caernarfon) and the 'southern end' WHR (Porthmadog). I hope we can agree to follow the same convention. Whilst outside the said agreement, I hope we will also agree that Porthmadog railway station is not the southern terminus of WHR (Porthmadog). NoelWalley 16:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Ffestiniog Railway Category and proposed Welsh Highland Railway category

I recently created a new category for articles related to the Ffestiniog Railway. This spawned a debate about whether the category should include Welsh Highland Railway articles or whether it would make sense to create a separate Category:Welsh Highland Railway. This took place on User:Noel Walley's talk page. With permission of those taking part I have copied it here for wider discussion. I'll also link to this from the Ffestiniog Railway talk page.

One word from me: categories are a useful organizational tool on Wikipedia. I'd suggest we try to stay out of the politics of the WHR vs. FfR and concentrate on the question of what's the better organizational mechanism for Wikipedia articles. Best, Gwernol 16:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I see you have created Category:Ffestiniog Railway, however I am not convinced is it appropriate to include RhE in this. Surely there should be a separate Welsh Highland Railway category to cover the Porthmadog to Caernarfon activities (which then could also include the Gelert's Farm activities, and the constituent companies of the trackbed - PBSSR, Creosor Tramway, and the old WHR. It was an attempt to bring all the stations together that resulted in the Category:Heritage railway stations in Gwynedd. I know from personal experience on the ground it know this can get very messy. Pencefn 11:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually I created the category, not Noel. I have no problem with their being a separate Category:Welsh Highland Railway. However the Welsh Highland Railway article should be in both categories (as, for example, should Porthmadog) since the FfR plays a significant role in WHR history (and vice versa). Gwernol 12:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Good idea to create Category:Welsh Highland Railway. I think it would be more appropriate that Category:Heritage railway stations in Gwynedd. Yes there is an overlap due to the roles each played in their development. This would also allow issues like the Blaen Quarries to be tagged to the FR, whilst lines like the Nantlle Tramway could possible be tagged to the Welsh Highland Railway, along with Creosor, etc. An interesting selection would be where the line to the Prince of Wales Quarry above Penmorfa would go. -- Pencefn 12:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I totally agree, though we should beware of the subtelties. Croesor is an interesting case since at least the Rhosydd quarry did indeed ship slates out via the Ffestiniog in its early days [2] so an article on the quarry ought to be in both categories! The history of the two companies is inextricably linked right back to the earliest days. Gwernol 12:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I do appreciate and understand these various views. However, the fact is that the WHR, its track and stock and all its stations are owned by the Ffestiniog Railway Company and are managed by the FR. No train moves on the operational Welsh Highland Railway without explicit permission from the duty train controller at Porthmadog Harbour station who also controls all train movements on the FR. Many of the train operating volunteers working on the Ffestiniog Railway also work on the Welsh Highland Railway (having correctly learnt both routes) and in many cases allow the management to decide, on a day to day basis, which railway they will work on. At the time the WHR was formed in 1921, it and its constituent companies together with the FR were under a common majority ownership and that continued until after the WHR was closed in 1937. When the original WHR was opened in 1923, the first through trains from each end were hauled by FR locomotives.

The two railways have always been linked by ownership and management. There is a precedent for linking the two together symbolically. It is the existing coat of arms comprising a red dragon on a green and white ground with by a garter bearing the wording "Ffestiniog & Welsh Highland." and surmounted by the Prince of Wales feathers. I propose a single category: Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland. Regards NoelWalley 13:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's why I like the idea of two categories, for historical and organizational reasons.

While its true that the FfR and WHR are closely tied, its also true that the WHR was once a separate entity and even today the WHR(P) continues to exist as a separate but co-operating group to the FfR. Wikipedia needs to cover history as well as the present. The WHR category would be a good umbrella to cover earlier railway activities like the NWNGR, PB&SSR, Croesor Tramway and even the Gorseddau Tramway(s). These smaller operations probably don't need their own categories and wouldn't fit within the scope of the FfR but do make sense to under the WHR. Categories do not need to be strictly separate, so articles can exist within multiple categories. As I mentioned, Porthmadog would be under both categories, as would both railway articles. Best, Gwernol 13:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I must now declare an interest. I am one of those volunteers that works on both lines (I am a Guard and a Controller). I can however indicate a preference, and the FR Management has stated that no-one will be forced to work on one line or the other when they do not want to. There is then the case of ensuring that those who volunteer at Gelert's Farm do not feel alienated. In fact once the Trawth Mawr extension of WHR(P) is open, the FR controller will have to allow access onto the line at the beginning of the day. There are however a sizeable minority on both lines who have no interest in the other and feel that the distinct identities should be retained.

Enough of the politics, given that the FR was built primarily as a slate railway, and the WHR as a tourist/general freight line (the only sizable slate traffic appears to have been from Glan-y-afon and Creosor) I believe that two separate categories are appropriate to recoginse the two different heritages - yes I know the FR Heritage Group is very incestious in the this respect(I contribute to that).

Rhosydd is an interesting case - I was walking up there last Monday whilst seeking out the link between Cwmorthim and Creosor (of which more another time).

Indeed, the Croesor Tramway was used to get slate out of Rhosydd as well as Croesor, two of the larger mines in the industry after the 'central' Blaenau ones. This used the largest single-pitch incline in the Welsh slate industry, at the head of Cwm Croesor. Somewhat off-topic, though... vanoord 17:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

In conclusion, I think two categories - one for Welsh Highland and the other for Ffestiniog - are in order, and the other category Category:Heritage railway stations in Gwynedd I created a few days ago should be removed.

-- Pencefn 14:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

My personal preference remains to have separate categories for the WHR and FfR because there are articles that should be in one and not the other. What are everyone else's thoughts? Can we reach consensus? Gwernol 16:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Absent further discussion, I have gone ahead and created Category:Welsh Highland Railway and started tagging appropriate articles into that category. Thanks, Gwernol 20:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Stations

These could do with rearanging into a more logical order, fitting in with the route of the railway, ie Norh to South
--82.68.6.202 23:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Where are they not listed in this order? They are in that order in the article, unless I've missed something. There are quite a few articles, so I probably haven't spotted the place you mean. Thanks, Gwernol 00:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the query is refering to Welsh_Highland_Railway#Stations. Traeth Mawr is not listed, and when them stations from WHR(P) and WHR(C) are combined they do not following in order. == Stewart 00:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Overall Veracity of Information

There has been comment on the railway's e-group, from senior people involved in the reconstruction/management of the railway, regarding the entries on here.

Whilst coming from either side of the operation, they both express the same concern, and obviously appreciate it as a problem neither they or we can resolve.

The problem they refer to is simply (in the third person)

The north guy reckons its been written by a southern person. The south guy reckons its written by a north person. Must state there is no animosity in any comment.

Does this mean we have it impartially dead right, or we have a major problem????

I have suggested we put a rider in somewhere and my own first wording was to the effect:

"No definitive story can be written for another hundred years as with three different groups whos consistency has changed over the 50 years it has taken for a dream to become reality and many have written their personalized versions, dependant on which group at which time" (three groups = FR / WHR / Councils)

Comments please

--Keith 23:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I too feel this to be a real problem. Too many anonymous contributions, which fall into three groups:

• vandal,
• disruptive and
• apparent authoritative (seems to know about it but appears not to have edited on wiki before).

The latter is the real problem. I have just edited the bit about Dinas station building. The earlier version said too little and gave a false impression that the WHHG had done more than it had. Recent anon gives the impression that all they did was provide historical info and that WHLR did the rest, which was far from the case. The work was done in 1998/99 and I have spent some time this morning searching WH Heritage Journals and Snowdon Ranger Magazines over several years (I belong to both bodies). The former describes the situation in some detail, the latter makes no significant mention until it comes to the presentation of the award in 2001 by Ian Allan when it even includes a group photo taken by Dave Allan of WHHG. I hope my re-write of that paragraph is neutral and fair to all parties. What is clear is that there was, and indeed usually is, generosity and good will on all sides, which does not always show through in what we write.

With regard to wikipedia editing, while anyone may edit, it is considered bad form, indeed against the spirit of the venture, to edit with more than one name or pseudonym or anon source. NoelWalley 12:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

e-group post from Mike Schumann

Noel, I hold my hands up - didn't realise I wasn't logged in - I edited the Dinas building bit in response to comments ongoing on egroup. Not withstanding your above comments may I refer to this comment from an e-group post from Mike Schumann, and personal email from him, referring to wiki in general, and specifically this page

"" Take for instance this WHR revival story. In it the author claims that the WHR Heritage Group were responsible for the restoration of Dinas Station building. This is not exactly correct. The restoration of this building was undertaken by WHLR using WHLR funding. Approx half of this came from grant giving bodies and the other half from private donors, of which at the time i was the major contributor. Over £20,000 was spent re-roofing the building, repairing the external walls and windows, sorting out the services and re-plastering where needed. I also paid separately to have the round slate ridges fitted and they were by no means cheap. (I doubt that any other building will be restored with this feature) The WHHG Group made a very valuable contribution in sourcing old photos and helping determine to what state the building should be restored (Its external appearance changed several times in its life), supplying the cast iron guttering and downpipes and fitting out the public waiting room. So overall it was in fact a combined operation between WHLR and the WHR Heritage Group and both should be given credit. "" and in private email ""So i would expect something along the lines that it was restored by WHLR Ltd, as part of the project to build the railway from Caernarfon to Dinas, with support from the WHR Heritage Group and private sponsors to ensure replication of historic detail.""

Now, I will not put down the contribution of WHHG, of which I am also a member, and admit I have to some extent done that by accident. Hopefully the way I am leaving it momentarily will be acceptable to all (!??!) Additional PS (after looking again) - okay Noel, I couldn't have done much better than the way you have worded it now, so no change from me! --Keith 15:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear, sorry Keith! Well yes, and its a very great pity that these things happen, but in terms of citeable material with regard to the restoration of this little building at Dinas all that I have been able to find is in the WHHG Newsletter. There is the rub, personal knowledge is inadmissible, the facts must have been published and preferably not just in a house magazine like the WHHG Newsletter or 'Snowdon Ranger'. I certainly did not come across mention anywhere of the finances (£20,000 or otherwise) including £10,000 donations although It did mention Mike Schumann's very generous gift of the ridge slates and of course the WHHG's guttering and waiting room panelling etc. If anyone has access to alternative published material regarding this particular restoration, I would be happy to see it incorporated and cited.

However, I am very sorry, for the original paragraph is down to me, and Mike was quite right to draw attention to its onesidedness. My only defence was haste, in that I was desperately trying to move things forward from a run of acrimony to raising the article's value from something not worth tuppence to at least the price of a telephone call.

I most sincerely hope that there is somebody in the wings properly primed with the vital information and who can write the story of the WHR restoration as it actually happened and can give full credit to the very generous few who made it possible as well as to the very many members of this and that who also helped to make it happen.

Keith, with regard to your proposal for a disclaimer, I think it a very good idea and yet I suspect it would be totally misunderstood. What might also be valuable would be a version of the "which part of the WHR is which"? from Ben Fisher's website, but that also would be misunderstood. We will just have to be at our best in being objective.

Should anyone wish to contact me, my email address is on wikipedia and is noel@llandudno.com Sincerely, NoelWalley 19:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Disclaimer

Okay - had discussions offlist and come up with the following as a disclaimer. Am placing here for comment first - and inviting contribs to amend within it , rather than comment on end. Suggestion position in text 2.21 and prior to the current contents of 2.2 Controversy and Complication

Over the period since the railway effectively closed on 31 May 1937, there have been a number of groups that have had an interest, of some form, in the revitalisation of the WHR. From the FR itself, the WHR reciever, through to Official Recievers, scrap merchants, budding entrepraneurs (?), Sustrans Bike paths, government in the many forms and political persuasions of the past 70 years including local, regional and national varieties. All have had something to do with the railway and its return, Add changes in policy over the period, and .......... you get my meaning. Then we come to the "enthusiast groups", a loose term used here to describe the different bands of people, who cumulatively have brought the railway to its current position, that of shortly,(three years time), running trains its extended length A definitive list of the group names involved can be found on the official Rebuilding site here:- http://whr.bangor.ac.uk/whichwhr.htm A brief description of the parts these bands played are dealt with in the next section. Suffice to say for the casual reader, a full, objective, history cannot be written yet, and will remain unwritten until at least, the council records are released.

Keith 15:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Route Map

Welsh Highland Railway
Caernarfon Bontnewydd Dinas Waunfawr Plas-y-Nant SnowdonRanger Rhyd Ddu Meillionen Beddgelert Aberglaslyn Tunnels Pont Croesor Traeth Mawr Loop Pen-y-Mount Porthmadog cross town link Gelert's Farm Porthmadog Cambrian Line Porthmadog Harbour Ffestiniog Railway

I have created a route map for the restored Welsh Highland Railway using the Route diagram template. I've not included any road or river crossings as I think these would make it too complicated and it doesn't have the crossing of the Cambrian Line as there isn't a symbol for that. I've used the Metro/Light Rail Symbols for the Cambrian Line as that made things easier.

--Zabdiel 12:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Good work. Not sure what to do about the old stations and branches that connected to the route that are not being opened. --Stewart 20:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I though it best to leave them off as it would probably make the map confusing. Could have a separate map showing the old route. There's a jpg map in the article which covers the old stations - but not the old branch lines. Zabdiel 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Zabdiel, didnt know you had done this, when I started mine - which is part of more for FR, and expanded detail as well. Used the Metro/Light Rail Symbols for the line, and normal red for Cambrian (Sorry) --Keith]] 08:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I have now converted the route map to a template. --Stewart ^(talk) 19:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the route diagram to the stations section. Where it was it was causing 5 edit links to appear across the main article text (in firefox at least) which looked messy. Zabdiel (talk) 16:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

There is already a RDT for this railway at {{Welsh Highland Railway RDT}}. Has this been noticed? WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 09:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Map of original WHR

File:Welshhighrailmap.jpg

The route of the WHR (1923-1937)

I've removed this from the main article as a number of the station names do not match the names given in the history on the WHR(P) webpage. It's also missing the branch to Bryngwyn & Moel Tryfan Zabdiel (talk) 16:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Split?

The article is getting rather large - would it be better to split off and create a couple of additional articles?

One called:

• Rebuilding the Welsh Highland Railway or
• Restoration of the Welsh Highland Railway

Containing most of the details from the following sections:

3 Restoration
 3.1 Welsh Highland Railway Limited
 3.2 Controversy and Complication
 3.3 Obstruction and Objections
 3.4 Two Welsh Highland Railways
4 Rebuilding the WHR (Caernarfon)
 4.1 Phase 1: Caernarfon to Dinas
 4.2 Phase 2: Dinas to Waunfawr
 4.3 Phase 3: Waunfawr to Rhyd Ddu
5 The future
 5.1 WHR (Porthmadog)
 5.2 WHR (Caernarfon) - Phase 4: Rhyd Ddu to Porthmadog

And one called: Welsh Highland Railway rolling stock

-- Zabdiel 2 July 2007

The restoration section has been moved to Welsh Highland Railway Restoration by Pencefn. I've proposed on that article's talk page that more info is merged in. Zabdiel 15:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Festiniog v Ffestiniog

Re some usage of FF instead of F. It started by the link to the Ffestiniog Railways HG Wiki (!!!) - it hasnt got one. The Festiniog Railway is the name of the company, and has been for 175 years. There has been occasional usage of FF over that period, but the bulk of material and legal documentation has had a single F. (Try searching the HMSO site for single and double F versions!)

The use of the double FF, as a marketing ploy only started in the last 25 or so years, so any refs before then to FF are incorrect.

The FRS magazine did not change from single to double until issue 145, Summer 1994. Keith 22:42, 16:36, 24 October 2007.

      My personal opinion, as a reader of the magazine of the FR association, is that modern-day references should be Ff, and older references as F. 31.54.205.221 (talk) 16:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Built By

Refs to the PBSSR and the Croesor Tramway building the line is inaccurate in any shape.

The original line was, as correctly stated, built by the North Wales Narrow Gauge Railways, and ran from Dinas through to Rhyd Ddu.

The Portmadoc, Beddgelert and South Snowdon Railway started work on extending the line, but construction was never completed. The route were modified and completed by the WHR

The Croesor Tramway had a horse drawn, goods only line that ran for part of the route, but this was rebuilt for steam train, passenger use by the WHR.

The final section in Porthmadog, known as the Junction Railway, was,I think, in part financed by the Festiniog Railway. (at least they sponsored the legislation for this)

You then get the situation in the late 20th century, wherby the Festiniog Railway has, by various fund sources, organised the building of the Caernarfon section, rebuilding the Dinas to Porthmadog section, by use of seperate subcontracted construction companies of its own. --Keith 19:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Fact the WHR was not built in it entirety by the NWNGR which is what you are stating, the line from Porthmadog was the Croesor Tramway first. The WHR is a combination of different railways. For someone who is "heavily into Narrow gauge" your historically inaccurate.--Pandaplodder (talk) 21:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you re-read what I had written and re-read what you have written.

"Fact the WHR was not built in it entirety by the NWNGR which is what you are stating," is what you have said. If you read the comments above, you will realise this statement is ludicrous, as I said nothing of the sort.

The situation given previously in the infobox, leads one to beleieve the PBSSR and the Croesor had some part in building the WHR. Far from it. Both had ceased to be viable entities by the time the WHR was completed. Please consult the PBSSR and Croesor entries on this wikipedia, for relevant evidence. The same information can be found from usual other sources.

Keith 05:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I have just realised you are probably arguing (why I don't know) the point of the wording of the second line. Badly worded, but reasonably correct as it does say from Dinas to Rhyd Ddu, not to Porthmadog. Admittedly it was not the WHR at this point, but the only part of a grand NWNG plan that was built. Keith 05:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Preceding/Following stations

I've started a discussion on the Tryfan Junction talk page about the Preceding station and Following station templates. How should they look for stations which are no longer open? Probably best to respond on the Tryfan Junction page - though if people feel it'd be better to have the discussion here then feel free Zabdiel (talk) 10:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I've found a guide for what they are supposed to be used for on the UK Railways WikiProject. "Historical Rail" is for historical services over tracks still in use (e.g. Betws Garmon) and "Disused Rail" for stations on disused lines (e.g. Rhostryfan). Stations such as Waunfawr will need a "Heritage Rail" section for the preserved line where it is between Plas-y-Nant and Dinas and a "Historical Rail" for the original WHR where it was between Tryfan Junction & Betws Garmon. Zabdiel (talk) 14:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

It is getting wiki-pedantic, but you are right. And therefore the box on Tryfan Junction page would be i) Dinas<-Historical->Waunfawr and ii) jumnction<-disused->Rhostryfan for the Bryngwyn branch —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manstaruk (talk • contribs) 18:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

wiki-pedantic is a good word :) - I think a bit of padanticness is needed in encyclopaedias. I've done a few of the stations but there's still some which need changing. I've also not done anything with changing colours of the routes - they're all black at the moment. Zabdiel (talk) 10:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

References

Here's some links I've found which provide references or more info for this page and other WHR pages:

• Engineering the Welsh Highland Railway re-build
• The Welsh Highland Railway (Transfer) Light Railway Order 1995
• BBC Wales article about Volunteering on the Welsh Highland Railway (Porthmadog)
• Daily Post: Welsh Highland Railway revival is on track
• Match Funding – Welsh Highland Railway - The Deputy First Minister for Wales has agreed to the provision of £637,574 of match funding for this project
• All aboard the Welsh Highland Railway
• Google Book Search for Welsh Highland Railway

I don't have time to include them at the moment but if someone else has time that'd be great Zabdiel (talk) 11:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

And a couple more:

• [3]
• [4] - pdf around 13MB

Zabdiel (talk) 11:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• The Guardian - Travel - Patrick Barkham enjoys Wales's new scenic railway - I'm sure this can be used somewhere. Zabdiel (talk) 09:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Route

I think the stations section would be better if it were re-written into a description of the route in a similar style to the Route section of the Talyllyn article. I've started but only got as far as Waunfawr. It probably needs some work to make it read better. Zabdiel (talk) 11:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Had a think, and a look at the Talyllyn_Railway, and come to conclusion that as this line is three times the length, it isnt worth doing it. It would also duplicate the information that "should" be on the individual pages of each station. Admnittedly there are disused branches that will not be covered, but doing what you envisage purely for these may be a good idea. --Keith 09:38, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

---

The northern terminus of the modern WHR is at Caernarfon. From here the line runs to Bontnewydd and Dinas. This part of the line was built of the on the trackbed of the standard gauge Caernarvonshire Railway which was built in the 1860s on parts of the Nantlle tramway (a 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm) gauge horse drawn tramway. This was opened as the first stage of the Welsh Higland Railway (Caernarfon) in 1997.

From Dinas the heritage line is built on the course of the original line. Dinas was the main engineering works of the original line, and servers the same purpose for the WHR(C). The modern line runs from Dinas to Waunfawr with no intermediate stations. However the original line has two stations on this section and a branch at Tryfan Junction. Two miles after leaving Dinas the line reached Tryfan Junction where the Bryngwyn Branch left the main line heading towards the Moel Tryfan slate quarries. There were two stations on this branch, Rhostryfan after 3/4 mile and Bryngwyn after 2 1/4 miles . Past the station was a double track incline owned by the railway which served the slate quarries.

References

Information Validity

Some information has been put in, that has been interpreted from incorrect information. Some of this has now been been corrected.

This was left by manstaruk on my talkpage .........(edited)Trident13 (talk) 21:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

As such, I have removed the remainder as it duplicated his talk page. It did not contribute to the article. It can be found in the archive if really needed --Keith 21:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Ff

This was very common centuries ago. My own name for example was spelled thus in the distant past. Rich Ffarmbrough, 14:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC).

Name of the railway

The opening sentence states that the "The Welsh Highland Railway (WHR) (Welsh: Rheilffordd Eryri / Rheilffordd Ucheldir Cymru) is a narrow gauge railway in Wales" ....

The third paragraph also states "The restored line is known as both Rheilffordd Ucheldir Cymru AND Rheilffordd Eryri in Welsh."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the name "Rheilffordd Ucheldir Cymru" used by the Welsh Highland Heritage Railway (as it says on that site, by the picture), not by this one? Hogyn Lleol (talk) 16:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

You proabably have a valid point there - let me mull it over and converse with others --Keith 19:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it safe to say its a hark back to the agreement to use WHR(C) and WHR(P),titles which were due to change when the line reopened completely. In preparation for this the WHR(P) (more correctly the WHR Ltd trading name) morphed into the WHHR (sorry being a Mancunian, my welsh is non existant). The "whole" thing can be referred to by the welsh "Rheilffordd Ucheldir Cymru & Rheilffordd Eryri", although denoting different sections. It could be worded better (both in my descript here and on main page) --Keith 22:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Operations section - expansion?

Does the operations section really need the expansion tag, it seems fairly detailed? Dje84 (talk) 22:57, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of removing the tag. I've had a go at revising the first part of the operations section to try and flesh it out and add a bit more detail. It could do with a few more refs, but hopefully it's an improvement. Dje84 (talk) 00:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Legal Name

May I be as bold to place on record, my interpretation of the situation as it stands

1) The FESTINIOG RAILWAY COMPANY is the name of the company formed in 1832 to build, own and operate the railway from Porthmadog to Blaenau Ffestiniog. This is the company that, along with Ffestiniog Railway Holdings Limited and the Festiniog Railway Trust obtained the 1995 Light Railway Transfer order for the WHR trackbed and railway rights.

2) The Ffestiniog Railway Co is the name of the operating arm for the railway from Porthmadog to Blaenau Ffestiniog. This name only really came into usage from the late 1980's.

3) The Welsh Highland Railway** is the name of the operating arm for the railway from Caernarfon to Porthmadog.(** I appreciate the continuing situation between the WHRL and the FR Co. over the use of the name, there is no intention to antagonise!)

I add this as some edits on the stations have named the Ffestiniog as owner and operator. I appreciate there is a large amount of overlap, but as part of the original agreements, the operation is supposedly ring fenced to some extent, in order to safeguard the original FR operations.

--Keith 18:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is that the WHR is operated directly by the Ffestiniog Railway Company not a subsidiary company and that the phrases "Ffestiniog Railway" and "Welsh Highland Railway" were, in effect, brand names (although I believe some of the finances are ring-fenced to each railway). Indeed, the FR Co has started referring to itself as "The Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railway" in press releases.

As evidence for this, here is the opening text for the splash page at festrail.co.uk [5]:

"This is the website of the Ffestiniog & Welsh Highland Railways - two unique narrow gauge railways (both operated by the Ffestiniog Railway Company) with a fascinating past and an even more exciting future. We are currently re-instating the long-lost railway link between Caernarfon and Porthmadog. When trains start running over the completed link in 2011 you will be able to travel from Caernarfon right through to Blaenau Ffestiniog - almost 40 miles of narrow-gauge steam!"

The logo badges on both the FR & WHR sections of the site say "Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railways".

For the sake of accuracy, would it not be better to say that the stations are part of the Welsh Highland Railway, which is owned and operated by the Ffestiniog Railway Company?

Also, the section on locomotives still refers to the Welsh Highland Railway (Caernarvon) - has the time come to change this to "Welsh Highland Railway" or "Welsh Highland Railway (Rheilffordd Eyri)"? Dje84 (talk) 13:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned the terms Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railways; Rheilffordd Eryri; and Welsh Highland Railway are interchangeable. Legally the Ffestiniog Railway Group (my italics due to the minefield of the statutory company of 1832; holding company - Ffestiniog Railway Holdings; trust - Ffestiniog Trust; operating organisations; etc.) own and operation the line that runs south from Caernarfon towards Porthmadog. The construction company (whatever it is currently called) is also part of the FR Group of companies. I am not sure which are legal entities and which are trading names. All-in-all anything other than Ffestiniog Railway is probably a trading name or similar, however it is all part of The Group. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 17:03, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but I think you have both fallen into the F/Ff trap. Dje84 states he considers that WHR is a sub of Ff. But the Ff itself is the operating name of the railway. Contrary to Pencefn's comment, the company is still known as F. and as he is aware, it would take an act of Parliament to change this. It is still officially called F. as shown in the Transfer order. I would stand to be corrected, but I think the shares that are held by the Trust and the FRS and others are all in the Festiniog Railway Co. I understand some use of the Ff. name was established from the 1980's onwards. As for the term Ffestiniog Railway Group, I take it this is a generic name coined (reasonably) to group all the entities together, but does not seem to appear in any other documentation.

As for the original resaon, I appreciate there is also the problem of who actually owns what! Some vehicles were transferred to FfR Heritage, some are/were on loan, and some purchased "for" the WHR, in 1993. --Keith 18:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Not quite Keith - Ffestiniog Holdings (two Ff) is the holding company that contains all the various companies - the Welsh Highland construction company; Ffestiniog Travel; FfR Heritage; et al. Ffestiniog Trust (and a few other minor shareholders) own both - the Holdings Co and and the 1832 company - not sure how they are linked via the Trust or Holdings is a subsidary of the 1832 Co. There is probably a "sipder's web of interconnections with the various companies which is why the easiest way to described the owner/operator either by the 1980's name (with Ff) or the more recent branding of Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railways. Possibly the various connections would merit an article of its own. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 10:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I dont want to carry this conversation on!!! That isnt meant nastily, but you just hit the nail on the head with your last line!! A quagmire isnt in it! LoL --Keith 11:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Stewart's last comment sums up what I was trying to say in my first one - I didn't really do it very well! The FR's internal workings seem more convoluted than the big railway sometimes lol... Dje84 (talk) 18:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Trying to check further, recvd a response on my FRHG talk page --Keith 18:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

List of welsh highland railway (Caernarfon) rolling stock

I've started a discussion about whether the name for the above page needs to change here. I thought I would put a note here as this is the main page about the WHR. Dje84 (talk) 18:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Length of opening

The opening of the article is and always has been rather long. I think that some of the history of the original line could be taken out (some of it repeats the history section) and the rest of the text could be summarised better, while still containing the essential information (some of it probably just needs to go under a sub-heading, e.g. the last para on original welsh and modern welsh titles). I am working on a revision and I will post it here for comment before I make any major changes. The WHR is a complex and often controversial topic. I will, of course, keep it NPOV and give equal weight to both operators as needed! Leave a message here or on my talk page if you have any thoughts. Dje84 (talk) 01:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I have inserted a "Background" header, and slightly reworded, which reduces it to a single paragraph. I will also move the welsh translation bit to the "Background" section, making it less cluttered. I agree there is much duplication in there, but wull leave any other for the rewrite you are doing

I have noted a few questionables, which I have amended, and hope you will agree with

a) it read "which owns and operates the majority of the line." The company is solely responsible for operations. The use of the word "majority" in sentence indicates there is a partner. This is not the case. I think this might be a ref to the WHHR, in which case, it is definitely wrong. The FR Co. (even if & when the WHHR do get running rights) will still be solely responsible.

b) it read "company went into receivership in 1927 [3], when the line was taken over by the Festiniog Railway Company on a 42-year lease. This operation was also unsuccessful and all services ceased in 1937" This intimates FR Co. took over in 1927 as it is worded. This is wrong. The lease commenced 1 July 1934 and effectively ended 21 Sept 1936 - see [6]

c) it read "The track was lifted during scrap collections in World War II." Very much a inaccurate generalisation. Replaced with "Much of the line was demolished ....". Again refer to [7]. -- Keith 08:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree with all of those, great suggestions. I have copied the article into my userspace to do a draft to prevent causing problems with the current version, it is User:Dje84/WHR_Draft. I have added a few splits to the background section to give the WHHR & Welsh titles their own sections. I have also gone through and tried to summarise the opening section of the article even further and included information about some of the places the line passes through and that the restoration is award winning. I have also cut down the amount of history in the background section to a bare minimum to prevent duplication.

All of my edits have been done progressively, see the edit history for details. Its not perfect but it should be better than the the current version.

If no one has any huge objections, I will try to find a friendly admin who can advise on how I can merge my changes into the main article's edit history so they can go on the record.Dje84 (talk) 01:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

May have beaten you to it. The intro is now a one liner, explaining it "WAS" a railway, that "HAS" been rebuilt and extended. Any additions to that would be superflouous and repetitive. The next section, which occupies exactly a full screen, gives the background to the one liner, devoid of the detail that appears elsewhere. Note the comment on the "history 1942-1997" If you know any of this, you will understand why the comment is made there. If you dont, and for the sake of any other readers of this talk page, then its because the whole story would fill a book, have a "cast" of many, "cliff hanging" last minute deaths, and change of "actors" and attitudes of over a (number of generations) 55 year period.! And that would be before you take into account any personal point of views!! --Keith 09:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Your background section had useful information, but after looking at it and comparing it to similar pages (including the Ffestinog, Talyllyn, Severn Valley & Snowdon mountain railway pages) I think it was better incorporated into other parts of the article, which I have done. I have formatted it similarly to the FR page, with the history of the line first and using your background to fill the gaps (the history left out that the FR leased the line!).

I fully take on board your comments about history - I was already aware of this and completely agree. I took out the bit you wrote in the background about the restoration history it not being described here, as I felt it wasn't needed - if anything it stated the obvious, as the restoration history is fully described on its own page, which helpfully removes the controversy from this one! I have revised the summary that was previously on the page to the bare essentials and it is not too dissimilar to what you wrote in the background. I agree with you about personal views being a problem, but then NPOV is one of the cornerstones of WP! :)

I have put the information about the present day line and the way the FR markets it into a new section, similar to the 'Preserved Operations' section on the FR page. (Is the WHR a preserved operation? A can of worms for another discussion/day!).

I have given the WHHR it's own section, as although it has a main article I thought a summary of it's activities would be a good contrast to those of the FR Co's operations. I have also put in a sub-section mentioning a few details about the 1998 agreement as it is such an important part of their relationship. Not too much detail, I am not a lawyer, just the section from the prev version about the WHHR's operations on the mainline and a new section explaining that the agreement was the reason for the former names of the 2 lines (i.e. the old WHR C and WHR P titles) and why they are no longer called that.

The Welsh titles section has it's own section below that, as it didn't really fit anywhere else.

The opening of one line I felt was a bit short - I have put in a bit more detail, some from your background and some new information (including highlights from the WHR's route), similar to that of other heritage railway pages.

Hopefully all of the above explains why I made such a major revision to the article's structure. I think my additions help it flow better - the FR page was a good guide for structure! It probably needs a few tweaks here and there. In general the whole article could do with more references, it would be good to try and get GA or FA status for it. Dje84 (talk) 00:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, it does look a bit "bitty" BUT it does give a good intro, and I am happy with the result. There are so many facets to the history part alone, that that is probably the best way of doing it. I do not have books to hand, but one fact query. Was it not 1922 before all three (FR/WHR/SMR) actually came fully under the "Dalgarrog" umbrella? --Keith 05:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Early FR Co / WHRL Dispute Origins Sourcing

"The origins of the WHRL restoration efforts, tentatively began in 1961 when disagreements within the volunteers of the Festiniog Railway and a group like minded railway enthusiasts, joined to form The Welsh Highland Railway Society."

user:Manstaruk recently edited the article with the following information. I've deleted his reference and tagged it as I believe it refers to a primary source on an e-group. I have left messages on his talk page informing him of this and asking for a reliable citation Dje84 (talk) 08:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

user:Manstaruk duly found a relevant reference and used it! --Keith 12:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

References

Removal of inaccurate paragraph

The following para was removed - resaons below

It is fair to say that the relationship between the WHRL and FR has been less then perfect over the years. In part this comes from the way the FR handled the take over of the WHR fueling already existing resentment against the FR in the then '64 Company, but the way both entities are organised also plays an important role. The FR, as a commercial enterprise with a matching top-down organisation, has to safeguard its interests, whereas the WHRL is a democratic heritage organisation, with a structure to support this. One of the highlights in this relationship is the aformentioned 1998 Agreement, the latest low was the Spring 2010 WHRL Operations proposal, rejected by the FR on its merits, not its origins as has been suggested by individual WHRL supporters. In early summer 2010 the WHRL held its Annual General Meeting (AGM) where members elected a new Board. It is hoped this will bring a normalisation of relations with the FR, to the benefit of visitors to North Wales in general and the narrow gauge railways in particular.

For one, The "Spring 2010 WHRL Operations proposal" never existed! Proposal were made and rejected in 2008.

Placing this whole para, as it stands wouldn't be in the best interests of anyone, especially in the post AGM period. Whilst some of the facts are not questioned, a less controversial rewrite would be more acceptable --Keith 14:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Colonel Stephens

The famous H. F. Stephens managed the WHR for all or part of the period from c1923 until its closure. Surely this classic British eccentric must receive a mention somewhere in this article, which is cross-referred from the article H. F. Stephens. Is anyone able to do this? If not, let me know, as I have at least one book devoted to the Colonel which should provide some short but accurate data. Flying Stag (talk) 22:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

• Stephens is mentioned, twice, in relation to loco purchase.

One hopes the facts are right. Starting c1923 should read Jan 1925. (Engineer from April 1923) Stephens died in 1931 - the railway closed in 1937. If you wish to insert some information on him, please do so in the appropriate part. However, whilst I appreciate there may be a wealth of info from you sources, please dont overwhelm the article. --Keith 23:42, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Keith. My "facts" were solely from memory, broadly true but no detail checked. I will now do this, though it may be a few days. What I had in mind was something very brief and to the point. I'll publish a draft on this page for you to have a look at first Flying Stag (talk) 20:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Gauge

There has been discussion in several articles about the significance of differences between nominal gauges of 597, 600 and 610 millimeters. It appears this project may be one of the few contemporary instances where equipment from each of these gauges is being operated. Can someone associated with present maintenance operations provide maximum and minimum wheel gauge and rail gauge criteria now in use on this project?Thewellman (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Welsh Highland Railway/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Just who classifies these? Most of the people who have contributed have an interest/knowledge, in the railway itself - they are not into rating it for someone else's table. Another "wiki" idea of bureacracy -- Well, a comment is asked for, and so I have complied Keith 16:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 17:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Wrong map label

I have noticed that on the main map of the route, the labels on the Cambrian Line saying "to Aberystwyth" and "to Pwllheli" are the wrong way around. Furthermore though, the line doesn't even go the Aberystwyth; it goes to Dovey Junction and then Shrewsbury. Nathan A RF (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Unable to parse this sentence

"The origins of the WHRL restoration efforts, tentatively began in 1961 when disagreements within the volunteers of the Festiniog Railway[10] and a group of like-minded railway enthusiasts, joined to form The Welsh Highland Railway Society."

I'm not able to parse this. How can a disagreement join to form something?

I'm guessing that this might be rewritten as:

"The origins of the WHRL restoration efforts tentatively began in 1961 after disagreements within the volunteers of the Festiniog Railway[10]. Those volunteers who left the original group and a group of like-minded railway enthusiasts joined to form The Welsh Highland Railway Society."

But I have no idea whether that would be in agreement with the facts, so am posting here instead.

Thisisnotatest (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2018 (UTC)