Talk:Bradford Forster Square railway station

Changes in August 2006
I've just reverted some changes by User:84.70.178.190. The paragraphs I've removed or reverted were:

"In 1924. When Foster Square Finally Opened / Market Street Ended Half Its Mainline Passenger/Freight Traffic Trains To be transferred to foster square and makeway for better branch line traffic until 1990 / when foster square was rebuilt"

"The current Forster Square Station, a modern three-platform station, was built in 1990 somewhat to the north of the former station; the latter was Dismantled / Removed two years later In 1992 to make way for a £90 million shopping centre."

"The /Now/ Empty Market Street Station Site Is Still There And / Today / Yo uCan Still Visit The Old Bradford / Market Street Station Site, All You Will See Is Nothing But Empty Platforms Properties, And Landscape,"

I'm reluctant to describe these as vandalism (they may be well-intentioned) but they're incoherent and (in so far as I can make sense of them) wrong. ColinFine 09:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Station name
Oh dear. has just sent me some resources about the history of the station, and I've looked at the article and see that back in 2005 I put some original research into the "Station name" section. Would somebody who isn't me please remove the original research from the section? It seems to me that the first para and the bulleted items are OK, but I'm not sure if anything beyond that is salveageable (aqnd I don't want to throw out my baby, boo-hoo). I'll put a note on WT:WikiProject Trains too. ColinFine (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

I have had a go at it. I am concerned by the wording: "Throughout the 19th century, contemporary directories and maps either used the railway company name or a nearby street to identify the station.", I do not want to suggest that I have found all the sources in this period. Please change to indicate this. I have hidden the earlier version rather than remove the text so appropriate merging can be done.BlueWren0123 (talk) 04:34, 26 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid that your version is just as much OR as mine, BlueWren. If there is not a reliable source discussing the issue of the name changes then it should not be covered in the article, sadly. The best that can be done is to say what the reliable sources say about the name change, and leave it at that. That's why I didn't want to do it myself. ColinFine (talk) 13:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * According to the No original research I have complied with the requirement not to do original research. Where do you say that I have done otherwise? The heading is Station name. Are you reading more into that heading more than is actually there? Where do you read a statement that cannot be verified by the supplied reference? I have presented to the reader what the sources say. It is for the reader to decide for themselves if they want to infer something else. That is beyond my control having used a neutral tone. I ask these questions to understand as at the moment there is not a consensus.
 * I have not expressed an opinion in the article, but it is possible that the name change happened by local usage rather than a formal decision by the railway company. I have not said that because that would be original research. BlueWren0123 (talk) 09:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)