Talk:Cumbrian Coast line

	North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Trains: in UK Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	October 5, 2021

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 UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).

It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article. The editor who added the request suggests the following:

add a geographic map

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Cumbrian Coast Line RDT.

History

Is there really any point in having Cumbrian Coast Line (history) as a separate article? Why not merge it with this? -- Dr Greg talk 18:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, why not? Unless someone comes along with a lot of information for both, go ahead. Britmax (talk) 09:24, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Not aware of any other lines with 2 pages and the History page is very thin. NRTurner (talk) 18:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No obvious compelling reason to have a separate page that I can see so I'd agree with a merge. Adambro (talk) 18:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have fleshed out the history of the Whitehaven companies, but even so I don't think there is enough there to justify giving them separate pages Rjccumbria (talk) 18:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Workington North

The link to this station is to the article about the town. Suggest the link is removed until there's a page about the new station. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 12:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All the links on the left are to towns; for links to the stations, use the column on the right. --Pretty Green (talk) 09:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Leander working down the Cumbrian Coast.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Leander working down the Cumbrian Coast.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Link

I have marked the only External Link as dead because I can't find a suitable alternative target. If you can find a new target url, please feel free to delete the tag. Tiger99 (talk) 05:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]