Talk:Winwick rail crash

Learn more about this page

Trains: in UK / Operations Low‑importance

Trains Portal

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

Low

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Operations task force.

More information:
/
	It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article.
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Cheshire

	Cheshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire 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.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Diagram anyone?

Well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabletop (talk • contribs) 06:54, June 7, 2006‎

Citation template

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I propose that the "citation needed" header be removed. For UK railway accidents of many years ago, the only single reliable source is the official Board of Trade accident report, which is also the source for subsequent books such as "Red for Danger". The accident report is correctly hyperlinked and the article is an effective summary of it. There are also other references quoted. Hence any previous omission has been fixed to the maximum extent possible. The header has been in place for nearly 5 years and I suggest that it now serves no useful purpose. Hyperman 42 (talk) 22:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add topic