Talk:Midland Railway

Innovation section
The 'Innovation' section seems to require modification. Firstly, in the 1870s, all main lines had enclosed coaches for 3rd class. They normally had 'bare board' seats, but did at least have opening windows. From at least the 1850s, it was legally required that passengers be carried in enclosed vehicles. Open vehicles may have been used on some light or narrow-gauge lines, but their use was illegal on most lines. Secondly, I cannot be certain, but I believe that 1st class fares were reduced to 2nd class levels to attract more passengers. Most 3rd class coaches were upgraded with padded or sprung seats to 2nd class standards, but some received a major rebuild to 1st class standards. It also removed an unusual coach design, the brake tri-composite, a coach which contained all three classes and a luggage compartment for use on through-workings between branch and main lines. Before I add this to the article, I need sources to be confirmed. The last 3-class train in Britain was the Golden Arrow Pullman, which connected with 3-class French trains, where the three-class structure ended in 1956. See that article for more details.--86.164.168.150 (talk) 10:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

1800s mystery ledger
I have a mystery ledger and at the moment unable to unlock it. A lot of history. Happy to send photos. Woodynorfolk (talk) 10:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Still called Midland hotel
"multiple of its large railway hotels still hold the name Midland Hotel."

That would be Manchester, Bradford, and what others? (The Morecambe one was never an MR hotel.) Afterbrunel (talk) 11:22, 14 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Mansfield railway station, Nottinghamshire - look at this google streetview and spizel the view around.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 18:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I've now added a small section for the hotel at Mansfield railway station, Nottinghamshire, also seen your post at Talk:Midland Hotel.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 22:40, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Cheltenham and Marple Bridge are two more towns with Midland establishments, though not notable for their own articles. Rcsprinter123   (reason)  23:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Look, I don't intend to start a war of words over this. I was making the general point that some of the phraseology in the entire article is a bit quirky. I was going to have a go at streamlining it, but not if others would be offended if I do so. Life is too short. I used a specific quote as an example of what I meant:
 * That was "multiple of its large railway hotels still hold the name Midland Hotel." Manchester, yes wonderful hotel, Bradford, yes, quite decent, I have stayed in it; St Pancras doesn't "still hold the name Midland Hotel". I regret that as much as anyone else, but regretting it doesn't make the claim true. Mansfield was built in 1809 and has 30 rooms, so it's borderline whether it is one of the Midland's "large hotels". The Stockport one calls itself a pub and doesn't do accommodation; was it ever railway-owned? The Cheltenham one has ten rooms; was that ever owned by the Midland Railway? We aren't doing anything in support of the Midland Railway's memory if we write what we wish was true rather than what is true.
 * And finally, I would have preferred to read more about coal in the later years. Getting coal from the North and East Midlands to London and the south and eastern counties dominated the Midland in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. No-one produced publicity posters showing coal trains stuck in refuge sidings waiting for a path; they produced posters showing luxury passenger expresses going to Scotland for the grouse season. That was more sexy. But it wasn't what the Midland was about. Afterbrunel (talk) 06:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

OK, looking at the recent revisions, a further compromise would be to lose the lede word large, as your own argument above moots excluding the Mansfield site due to arbitrary size - very artificial, as it was a Midland Hotel since the 1800s. Specifically addressing whether the accomodation ever was historically borderline-large (without the pre-1980 extension) is indeterminate, as no info for that time (pre line-closure to passenger service) exists on-Wiki.

Concerning the coal from East Midlands to London and the south, I had no idea it was transported that far - presumably the Kent coalfield couldn't cope with demand? has undertaken research on the mineral rail lines and dedicated local stations, so may have info on this.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:09, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Various coalfields - and even different mines in the same field - produced coals of different types. Some were suitable for boiler fuel (hot flame), some for house coal (bright flame), some for gas production, some for coking (for the iron and steel industry), some for chemical extraction (ever heard of Wright's Coal Tar Soap?). So it often happened that coal was moved from one area of production to another, because the destination area was low in a particular type.
 * The Kent coalfield was developed quite late (just over 100 years ago), and its coals were of a different quality from the Midlands coalfield and not nearly so plentiful, so Kent (and the rest of southern and eastern England) relied on coal brought in from other areas. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 08:08, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, - makes me recall that South Wales anthracite was used in hopper-fed domestic situations. I guess that canals were used similarly for distribution, although very slow by comparison.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 23:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * We're getting bogged down here. The reason (I presume) that someone wrote some of its large railway hotels still bear the name Midland Hotel was to emphasise the prestige of the MR. The Mansfield and Cheltenham "Midland Hotels" add nothing to prestige. St Pancras doesn't "still bear the name Midland Hotel". It's called "St. Pancras Renaissance Hotel". Insisting that it is called "the Midland Hotel" is fake news.
 * But there is a much wider point. The purpose of this and all Wikipedia articles is to provide information to people who know a little about something and want to know more. Imagine you are a novice in railway history; consider the sub-section The Euston Square Confederacy -- The London and Birmingham Railway and its successor the London and North Western Railway had been under pressure from two directions. Firstly the Great Western Railway had been foiled in its attempt to enter Birmingham by the Midland, but it still had designs on Manchester. At the same time the LNWR was under threat from the GN's attempts to enter Manchester by the Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway.[citation needed]. Would you go away from that thinking what a helpful article this is? Look at the list of "Acquisitions". It's in alphabetical order so there is no logical succession. Were they a good thing or a waste of money? Why were they undertaken? Why is the Oakham Canal in there? (We know the answer to that, but our imaginary novice doesn't.) Afterbrunel (talk) 08:08, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well - you certainly like to write a text-wall - I thought I was bad enough. "..., and multiple of its large railway hotels still hold the name Midland Hotel. written by, 19 April 2020; changed to "... and some of its large railway hotels still bear the name [[Midland Hotel]."] by , 6 June 2022.


 * I've now deleted the word 'large', per BOLD, as being subjective, and implicitly denying the existence of others (contrary to NPOV) - which may or may not be deemed as large. Removal of the word large obviates some of your arguments; other editors are regularly warring about exactly this (large) on villages, towns, cities).--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 03:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Midland Railway Map at grouping into the LMS, in 1922
Does anyone think a minor addition to the main page on this topic, would be of interest? https://www.flickr.com/photos/terry_browne/44559366181/ Terry nyorks (talk) 16:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It's &copy; All rights reserved. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 20:25, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Redrose64, just because is marked as such on Flickr doesn't make it so. That work from 1922 will now be out of copyright and does not belong to the uploader there. Rcsprinter123   (confabulate)  00:36, 17 December 2023 (UTC)