Talk:Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway

Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 12, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
June 4, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
February 8, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Trains: in UK / in Scotland Mid‑importance

	Trains Portal
Sel	week 2, 2009

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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Transport in Scotland (assessed as Mid-importance).

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway.

Merge

I'm thinking the information on the Irvine and Kilmarnock line and Dalry to Kilmarnock line pages could be moved completely to this page now that this page covers all the stations on the GPKAR? Dreamer84 22:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - Good idea. It may be prudent to add a section detailing the dates of opening of the various sections to complement the section detailling the closure of the Dalry to Kilmarnock line. I was also think that also adding a section of connections to other railways (cf L&A Rly section

We can then get an Admin to delete the pages. Stewart 23:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newton-on-Ayr station

Come across something odd about this station. The Butt date of opening is in 1839 along with the rest of that section of line, however the book Ayrshire's Last Days of Steam gives the date as 1886! I'd actually be more inclined to go with the 1886 date as it doesn't seem possible for Newton-on-Ayr to lead into/out of the original Ayr station at the harbour, as the station is off to the south east of the location of the old Ayr junction, which would have made it a very odd terminus if it opened in 1839. --Dreamer84 01:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howwood name

I'm not really sure whether i should correct the station to its current name for the article. On the one hand it opened as Howwood\Howood and so this is currently how it is known. On the other hand, i moved the page some time ago as there are 2 Howwoods (or exceedingly close) in the UK, however neither are referred to by the counties in which they are in, in the names. They have their current names for disambig. Simply south 21:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

The GA review has been archived to this page. Dr. Cash (talk) 20:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opening dates

I'm currently working on improving this article to bring it up to GA (or better), and have noticed a contradiction of dates: Awdry states that the line opened from the south as far as Beith on 21 July 1840, with the rest of the line (all the way to Glasgow) opening on 12 August 1840. However, Butt gives 21 July as the opening date for all stations from Dalry to Paisley Gilmour St (except Lochwinnoch, which was apparently 12 August). Does anyone know of a third source that could back up either claim, or have any views themselves? --- Dreamer ⁸⁴ 16:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RAILSCOT just confuses the issue with Howwood to Paisley shown as opening on 21 July 1840, and through working from the Ardrossan Railway on 20 August 1840. Lochwinnoch opening may have been delayed due to construction difficulties. --Stewart^(talk) 17:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popperwell, Vol 1. gives: Paisley to Ayr opened 1839, Glasgow to Irvine 1840, Irvine to Ayr (5/8/1839); throughout 12/8/1840.

Robbertson, Table 25, gives: Ayr to Irvine 5/8/1839, joint line 15/7/1840, main line 21/7/1840, Kilmarnock branch 4/4/1843.

I'll see if I can get hold of both Whishall and Lewin, but might not be for 2 to 3 weeks.Pyrotec (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A digital copy of the 1842 edition of Whishaw can be downloaded from Google Books. It doesn't really give many clues about opening dates unfortunately, as it seems the line north of Irvine was still being built when most of the information was compilied. --- Dreamer ⁸⁴ 18:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't know about that, I'd been borrowing the D&C reprint. Popperwell has been through the SRO records (BR GPK/1/1), but also gives an interesting couple of refs: Warden J (1841): (1) The Glasgow & Ayr and Glasgow & Greenock Railway Companion; and, (2) Guide to the Glasgow & Ayrshire Railway. There is an illustration of the cover of ref (1) published in Ayr by McCormick & Gemmell, and in Glasgow by Andrew Rutherglen. Popperwell was living in Morar when Vol 1 was written (2/4/1989). Some of the building contracts also seem to have been discussed by T(erry?) Colman (1965) The Railway Navvies.Pyrotec (talk) 18:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. There are two templates for Whishaw, one refers to the D&C facsimile and the other to the original - until you told me I'd not worked out where copies of the original could be found.Pyrotec (talk) 18:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up on the template, I've changed it over now. Found the Warden book here, and although the title sounded interesting the book seems to focus very little on the railway itself and more on the towns! There are seemingly a few pages missing though from the introduction, wouldn't be surprised if the information needed is missing too. --- Dreamer ⁸⁴ 18:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I finally understand the confusion here after getting hold of a copy of The Glasgow and South Western Railway, published by the Stephenson Locomotive Society in 1950. The line was opened from Kilwinning to Beith on 21 July 1840, but also opened at the other end from Glasgow to How(w)ood on the same day. That's the reason Lochwinnoch didn't opened till the next month, as the line between Howwood and Beith hadn't opened yet. It must also explain why 'Howood' station had a short life: it must have been acting as a temporary terminal station until the line fully opened. So technically there was no contradiction after all, but maybe just a litle bit of miswording on the part of Awdry. --- Dreamer ⁸⁴ 17:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was some sort of requirement to start the work at both ends, sorry to put it that vaguely; it looks like that was carried through to opening both ends at the same time.Pyrotec (talk) 14:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GPK&AR locomotive

Hey, a couple of months ago you uploaded this diagram of a locomotive from Whishaw's book that you indicated as being of the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway. I was wondering, are you sure it was a GPK&AR loco? Its just the book's description of the engines used on the line at the time doesn't match this design (supposedly they only had 4 wheels for one thing). Whishaw also mentions that the GPK&AR locos were the same as the ones used on the London and Birmingham Railway, one of which is shown on Plate VI. --- Dreamer ⁸⁴ 17:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to Lowe British Steam Locomotive Builders,, Thomas Edington of Glasgow built four 2-2-2 engines for the G,P,K&R in 1840-1 to the specs of the company's engineer, Mr.J.Miller. They were 7 Phoenix, 8, Prince Albert, 10, Garnock, 15, Kyle. Number 8 was sold to the LNWR in 1847 and renamed Dunlop. He includes an indistinct manufacturers drawing that looks identical to the Wishaw drawing. Given that Wishaw was published in 1840, he may have included the pictures at the last minute but neglected to update his text. His 1842 edition seems only to have been a reprint. Best wishes Chevin (talk) 07:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GAC review notes

The GA review has been archived and can be accessed here. Dr. Cash (talk) 20:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GAR

Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:55, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness this article is bad. There are entire sections that are unsourced such as.

Development under the Glasgow and South Western Railway
Topography
1994 - present: Privatisation and current operations

And is this even written well? There's sections called

A resilient mood; but then collapse
Regaining momentum
The Glasgow and South Western Railway is formed

This article seems to have a lot of problems. This will take a lot of effort to fix. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. The article was assessed as GA way back in June 2008. Since then it's had the usual here-and-there editing, except for one of Afterbrunel's throw-everything-away-and-start-again expansions in December 2014. This, I believe, means that WP:GAC#5 is no longer met. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:47, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per Onegreatjoke. the stability criterion is: "it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute". That does not apply here. Femke (alt) (talk) 09:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per Onegreatjoke. This is an artifact from the early days of Wikipedia, and no longer meets our expectations for a good article. Unless someone quickly commits to serious improvements, this should not maintain GA status. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:32, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.