Talk:Clifton Rocks Railway

Piccies
I have added some pictures from Flickr into the Commons category for the railway. There are a large number of other freely available pictures of the railway that others may wish to transfer and use in the article. --TimTay (talk) 13:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Gauge
There are several contradictory sources for the gauge of the railway, with the answers varying wildly: These all seem like at least somewhat reliable sources. Which one should we have in the article? The Mirror Cracked (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * This 1894 article gives 3ft:
 * The article currently gives 3ft 2in, sourced to:
 * Maggie Shapland's 2017 book on the Clifton Rocks Railway (p28) gives the gauge as 3ft 2$1/2$in.
 * Martin Easdown's 2018 book gives 3ft 8in:
 * This 1957 book gives 3ft 8$1/2$in:


 * If there is ambiguity among the sources I think it is fair to reflect this for the reader. I would suggest something like: "There were four cars in two connected pairs, essentially forming two parallel funicular railways. The width/gauge of the tracks has reported as being between 3ft (ref) and 3ft 8$1/2$in (ref) (ref) with two others specifying the gauge at 3ft 2in (ref) and 3ft 2$1/2$in(ref)." (or similar) with suitable reference templates for each source and convert used for the feet and inches.&mdash; Rod talk 17:22, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks I think that's an excellent solution, at the least until a definitive answer can be arrived at. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 23:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Good work, nice solution. I note that John Robert Day et al. (1957) states "3ft $8 1/2$in" which is different from "3ft 8in" (Easdown, 2018). This would be a fifth gauge to be mentioned (Operations). For the purpose of Track gauge, and most likely in the original ordering papers, $1/2$in matters. -DePiep (talk) 08:50, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oops, it is the other way around: (Day, 1957) is in the article, but  (Easdown, 2018) is not. -DePiep (talk) 09:10, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Here in a picture from 2005/2006: rails still present back then, maybe ask them for the gauge. -DePiep (talk) 09:31, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * More from https://www.cliftonrocksrailway.org.uk:
 * track 38" (narrower than the expected 3'8" due to the problems of digging the tunnel) i.e., but also
 * The gauge of the railway was 3 feet -- variant #6 by now.
 * The 38" reason makes it plausible that this track had an unique gauge (tunneling problems could have made deviation from standards plausible). -DePiep (talk) 09:44, 4 November 2019 (UTC)