![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This edit is in such poor English that it's difficult to comprehend what is meant. Besides being unsourced and vague ("60 odd years") it's technically inaccurate too. The three wires are not "Contact, Earth & Return Wires", but from bottom to top, are correctly known as the Contact, Support and Catenary wires; and, since the drop wires are not insulated from the others, all wires are energised at 25 kV. The return path is via the running rails.
Information about a change in the electrification should really be on the article about the line, because it's unlikely to be specific to this one station. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 20:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Why is this article still protected? Nothing has been posted here in talk for nearly two years. Whatever the dispute has been, surely it's moot by now - and there's plenty of misplaced italics in the text plus an erroneous date. Harfarhs ( talk) 20:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This edit is in such poor English that it's difficult to comprehend what is meant. Besides being unsourced and vague ("60 odd years") it's technically inaccurate too. The three wires are not "Contact, Earth & Return Wires", but from bottom to top, are correctly known as the Contact, Support and Catenary wires; and, since the drop wires are not insulated from the others, all wires are energised at 25 kV. The return path is via the running rails.
Information about a change in the electrification should really be on the article about the line, because it's unlikely to be specific to this one station. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 20:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Why is this article still protected? Nothing has been posted here in talk for nearly two years. Whatever the dispute has been, surely it's moot by now - and there's plenty of misplaced italics in the text plus an erroneous date. Harfarhs ( talk) 20:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)