Talk:Island Line, Isle of Wight

Class 484 and Ryde tunnel

What consideration has been given to the fact that Ryde tunnel currently has insufficient clearance for D78 stock that will form the basis of class 484? 87.75.117.183 (talk) 16:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

@87.75.117.183, Vivarail has confirmed the 484s will fit after a survey they took - British_Rail_Class_484#Trains : Go to The Section ‘Trains’ Nethertown station (talk) 14:51, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

4 Carriage units after upgrades

Will 4 Carriage Class 484’s run after upgrades on Busy days as with the old Class 483s?? Or will it be only 2 carriages always from now on? Nethertown station (talk) 15:20, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Passenger numbers

The Passenger numbers section quotes statistics for the use of the line as a whole and appears to have been calculated by taking the number of entries and exits for each station along the line and adding them together.

I think this methodology is flawed. The line is self-contained and every entry at one station has a corresponding exit at another. Therefore to estimate the total number of passenger journeys for the line as a whole you would need to add the journeys for each station and then divide by two.

This section is rightly flagged as requiring update, but there is no point in merely incorporating more recent figures into the narrative if it perpetuates an incorrect methodology. Edenlaridae (talk) 10:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Cross Over at Esplanade

The track has been severed and there is no longer access to Esplanade P2 or Pier Head P2. Instead of reverting it back to a what it was, rewording it to what the track layout is now, would be better. The current wording is not accurate at all. Zeoace (talk) 15:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

You need to provide sources, per the policy on verifiability. What you cannot do is to remove verifiably sourced content and replace it with completely unsourced content, as you did here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I've submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) from Network Rail on What Do They Know to confirm if this is a permanent thing or temporary. My intension wasn't to supply unsourced material as the photo showed the changes but I wasn't aware that 'editorial' references were not allowed. Zeoace (talk) 11:23, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth bothering them with a FoI request. Surely one or more of the reputable railway publications (such as Modern Railways or The Railway Magazine) has covered this? Or you could wait for the next edition of Padgett, David; Kelman, Leanne (November 2019) [1994]. Munsey, Myles (ed.). Railway Track Diagrams 5: Southern & TfL (4th ed.). Frome: Trackmaps. map 20A. ISBN 978-1-9996271-2-6. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:52, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it will be covered in the 4th edition, it would of been rather borderline, though I do need to personally purchase an up to date one for my train sim routes so I will take a gander and see if it mentioned.

I have submitted other questions that may help and expand the article including;

• Why was the east side was never reopened? I was told by engineers on my visit in August'20 there was no demand for it and that P2 at Esplanade track bed was to be used for new stopping markers, hence why the track was removed and points locked, but I need clarification
• When will the Foot Crossing (like Pig Lane) be upgraded with LED Lighting and gates for pedestrians, and speed restrictions lifted? This was meant to of been done during the upgrade works but was delayed and temp speed limits have been put in place, again clarification needed
• When is the Railway Pier being strengthened? This was never done during the upgrade works and I've been informed that it's to take place later this year [2022] but again, face to face conversations that need clarification.

I think there is a lot more that can be added and clarification on work that was planned but never happened during the 2020/21 upgrade works or why they were delayed. I would guess it was down to COVID and Global Supply Issues but assumption is not allowed, so getting clarification would be helpful. Zeoace (talk) 08:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing this. As per User:Redrose64 this is interesting, but not yet suitable for direct inclusion in Wikipedia. Assuming the issues that need to be clarified are actually so clarified in due course, these questions and answers may be relevant but need to be published somewhere so you can then quote them as a verifiable source. So, for example, if the County Press ran an article on it, or the local council made a statement on it, or something like that. Your personal FoI requests are not suitable sources on their own. This is nothing to do with the truth or importance of the subject; it's just how Wikipedia sources work. Naturenet | Talk 15:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@Zeoace: I don't think it will be covered in the 4th edition - correct, it's not, because the 4th is the current edition. The next edition, when it appears, will be the 5th edition; check here for availability. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:47, 10 February 2022 (UTC)