Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London Transport

WikiProject London Transport was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 5 September 2011.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

(Reposted from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways, where there was no response.)

In urban Britain, railway arches are almost ubiquitous. Searching online finds no end of shops in arches, cafes in arches, businesses run in arches, light industry in arches, arches for rent - almost all contemporary.

But railway arches have been around for at least 187 years. A search on WP finds them all over the place, but the information is all scattered. Does any one know of a history, or other deeper analysis, of railway arches? Sadly, this documentary is focussed on the homeless people in the arches, not the architecture - but they are still part of the bigger picture.

So: a book? website? PhD thesis? Photo essay? Radio or TV documentary? Is there anything out there that gives the arches the attention they surely deserve? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 16:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reposted to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 18:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on the ref desk resulted in Draft:Railway arches in London being started. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 17:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Streetcars#RfC: Notability and Tramlink stops, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Thryduulf (talk) 21:37, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently started an article on the Hammersmith Depot. Please feel free to add and expand if you can. Thanks. Elshad (talk) 21:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crossrail appear to have redirected all urls on their site e.g. [1] [2] to a Wayback Machine copy of their homepage [3]. This has of course broken a tonne of references. Anyone know an easy way to resolve this? the wub "?!" 11:01, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a request for a bot to fix the links. See Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests#crossrail.co.uk. Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! the wub "?!" 13:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The new names for the London Overground lines have been announced. [4] I propose the following to accommodate this.

• New article Mildmay line, we also have articles for North London line and West London line for the routes the service passes over and they have their own separate histories.
• New article Windrush line, we also have articles for East London line and South London line for the routes the service passes over and they have their own separate histories.
• New article Weaver line, we also have an article for Lea Valley lines but this covers services to Hertford and Stratford run by Greater Anglia.
• New article Lioness line, because the Watford DC line also carries the Bakerloo line.
• Move Romford–Upminster line to Liberty line, because the line and service pattern are the same and having two articles for this would be a duplication.
• Move Gospel Oak to Barking line to Suffragette line, because service pattern are the same and having two articles for this would be a duplication.

I deliberately put the Goblin last as it is the one I'm least certain about. Thoughts? MRSC (talk) 08:58, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:COMMONNAME we should wait a bit before moving anything as it's way to soon to know if these names will catch on (the initial reaction in the enthusiast community has not been positive, but again its too soon to know how representative that is), especially as the branding hasn't even begun to be implemented yet.

As for the Lioness line, I don't think that needs a separate article just a section (at most) about the name and moving the article (if it becomes the common name). We don't have a separate article for the Richmond branch just because it also carries the District line. Thryduulf (talk) 09:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"the initial reaction in the enthusiast community has not been positive" not my experience, but experiences differ!

Yes, we should wait until these are implemented before moving anything. Turini2 (talk) 09:55, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chessrat has proposed moves of the below on the talk on the Talk:Watford DC line...

• Watford DC line → Lioness line
• Gospel Oak to Barking line → Suffragette line
• Lea Valley lines → Weaver line
• Romford–Upminster line → Liberty line
• East London line → Windrush line
• North London line → Mildmay line

Turini2 (talk) 16:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Harlequin line, anybody? Will these last longer? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:09, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are the current names used by TfL from the timetables and notices at stations:

• Gospel Oak to Barking Riverside route
• Highbury & Islington to New Cross, Clapham Junction, Crystal Palace and West Croydon route
• Liverpool Street to Enfield Town, Cheshunt and Chingford route
• Richmond and Clapham Junction to Stratford route
• Romford to Upminster route
• Watford Junction to Euston route

Interestingly we didn't even have redirects for any of them. We probably should have made the articles align with these service patterns even if we didn't use these names before now. MRSC (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although I hastily updated my SVG rail diagrams per the TfL announcement, I have to admit that the new names aren't very popular after a quick forum/youtube surfing, so creating or moving articles right now could be too soon to proceed. As for Watford DC Line, I slightly lean towards "move (to Lioness line)" over "split" because its stations are dominantly served by Overground trains. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 07:35, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Has there been consensus to use these new names over the existing WP:COMMONNAMEs? Module:Adjacent stations/London Overground now has them as the primary names. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. The consensus of the requested move discussion was firmly against moving the articles to the new names, although this was in part due to the physical/line service distinction, COMMONNAME played a significant part. No other discussion has taken place that I can find. I would oppose using the new names as primary at this point, and don't think we should even consider doing so until the branding begins to be implemented by TfL. Thryduulf (talk) 12:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the module to its state prior to 27 February 2024, using previous route/line names and colours. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Southeastern (train operating company 2006–2021)#Requested move 16 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Talk:Clapham Junction railway station links to Wikiprojects Trains and London
• Talk:Balham station links to Wikiprojects Trains, London and London Transport
• Talk:South London line links to Wikiprojects Trains and London Transport
• Talk:Gospel Oak to Barking line links to Wikiprojects London and Trains
• Talk:London Underground 1938 Stock links to Wikiprojects Trains and London Transport
• Talk:British Rail Class 710 links to Wikiproject Trains
• Talk:London Overground links to Wikiprojects Trains, London and Hertfordshire

Are there guidelines or expectations for which projects should be linked to stations, lines, stock and similar railway articles relevant to the London area? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 17:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Verbarson: Generally speaking, it's not necessary to have {{WikiProject London Transport}} when {{WikiProject Trains}} is present. Instead, remove the {{WikiProject London Transport}} (if one is present) and add the parameter |Underground=yes to the {{WikiProject Trains}} and optionally also the parameter |LUL-importance= with a suitable value, like this.

{{WikiProject London}} is a separte matter. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 19:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a c1970 image of the interior of a Tube service. Any ideas about the line? I think I can make out "Central" by magnifying the line map in the upper left corner, but it doesn't exactly tie up with a 1970 Underground map. Lamberhurst (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Northern line. A long branch at one end, then a split into two lines that rejoin, a single station (Camden Town) then another split at the other end. No other line was that complicated. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 23:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lamberhurst (talk) 18:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]