Talk:Heidelberg railway station

Australia: Melbourne / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Heidelberg railway station is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Trains: Stations 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 Stations.

Removal of content that is evidenced at the station[edit]

Perhaps people who wish to remove history that is cited at the station itself should visit the station rather than assuming it is not true. I go there at least 10 times a week and this information is readily available there and not questioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Religious Burp (talk • contribs) 23:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not what it used to be. Editors will delete first and ask questions later and are often unwilling to assume even reasonable uncontested statements are true, deleting them without even asking for a citation first, let alone helping to find citations. In the case of biographies WP:BLP where there is the possibility of libel this makes some sense but the "shoot first ask questions later" attitude is applied almost everywhere, and I find it increasingly difficult to deal with and keep telling myself I'm going to give up editing Wikipedia real soon now. I will revert if I see a delete without an edit summary to explain it is near impossible to know if it is vandalism or a good faith edit: providing an edit summary is the minimum I expect from a good faith edit. Given how much hassle it can be I hope I can give some suggestions that might be constructive or helpful but it might just seem like more bad news.

On this specific issue if you can provide references to books, newspaper articles or even a photograph of the plaque that would be ideal and act as something definitive. I realise it is a pain in the ass when these things all seem so obvious, sometimes they are that obvious and shouldn't need so many references but other times they really aren't as obvious as they seem if you aren't a local. Noting the plaque as a reference is a good start, if you could provide a quote of the text written on the plaque that might be nearly as good as a photograph. There may also be something in the wording of your edit that could be adjusted or improved so editors might be less likely to delete it. Even if information is not contested it can be good to include an inline reference if you have an additional source not already included in the article such as the second page on Vicsig.net.

Also please use -- ~~~~ to sign your comments. Hope that helps. -- Horkana (talk) 14:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Horks. Yep, the information I've added is quoted pretty much word for word what is written on the signs & plaques at the station. There is no independant research on my part, merely what is available at the station. As someone who enjoyed reading the history of some of the other train stations along my route, I thought this information was a necessary addition. --Religious Burp (talk) 22:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heidelberg railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140426090544/http://ptv.vic.gov.au/route/view/7458 to http://ptv.vic.gov.au/route/view/7458

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Heidelberg railway station.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]