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
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
According to Butt, it had that name between 1905 and 1908, longer than it was called Ballachlish. The final name (according to Butt) was Ballachulish (Glencoe) for Kinlochleven. --
Stewart(
talk |
edits)22:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)reply
I've always seen it referred to as just "Ballachulish" on maps (including this old
OS map) and in books (and
RailScot). Early timetables had it as "Ballachulish (Glencoe) for Kinlochleven" whereas later ones had just "Ballachulish", with a footnote that it's the station for Glencoe and Kinlochleven. Photographs show an old nameboard reading "Ballachulish (Glencoe) for Kinlochleven" on Platform 2 but there was a large nameboard on the opposite platform, possibly BR-era, reading just "Ballachulish" in large capital letters. The station did acquire BR totems, but it's hard to tell from photos what was written on them; I suspect it was just "Ballachulish". Although the article has to acknowledge every name by which the station was known, "Ballachulish" should be the most prominent, and not just for reasons of brevity. –Signalhead< T >22:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)reply
Thinking about it, the name for the article should be the first or last name that the station had, with all the rest should be redirects. Given the name on the closure notice is the same as the opening name, I think that name should be used. --
Stewart(
talk |
edits)15:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)reply
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
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
According to Butt, it had that name between 1905 and 1908, longer than it was called Ballachlish. The final name (according to Butt) was Ballachulish (Glencoe) for Kinlochleven. --
Stewart(
talk |
edits)22:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)reply
I've always seen it referred to as just "Ballachulish" on maps (including this old
OS map) and in books (and
RailScot). Early timetables had it as "Ballachulish (Glencoe) for Kinlochleven" whereas later ones had just "Ballachulish", with a footnote that it's the station for Glencoe and Kinlochleven. Photographs show an old nameboard reading "Ballachulish (Glencoe) for Kinlochleven" on Platform 2 but there was a large nameboard on the opposite platform, possibly BR-era, reading just "Ballachulish" in large capital letters. The station did acquire BR totems, but it's hard to tell from photos what was written on them; I suspect it was just "Ballachulish". Although the article has to acknowledge every name by which the station was known, "Ballachulish" should be the most prominent, and not just for reasons of brevity. –Signalhead< T >22:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)reply
Thinking about it, the name for the article should be the first or last name that the station had, with all the rest should be redirects. Given the name on the closure notice is the same as the opening name, I think that name should be used. --
Stewart(
talk |
edits)15:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)reply