User talk:DavidCane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] crarch end

I am puzzled as to why you blanked Crouch End railway staton. I have restored it. -- RHaworth 02:30, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hackney and Homerton

Hi, noticed your Parkland Way edit (that needs better pix, I must say). Anyway, glad to see that you're thinking of expanding Hackney and Homerton. I've been largely concentrating on expanding and illustrating Hackney districts myself (adding to Upper Clapton right now, but after that it's Lower Clapton, Haggerston and De Beauvoir Town. I put some extra stuff on Homerton a little while ago, and was going to add more on the university hospital, which I have a rather grim pic of. I've been putting off fixing the 'Big Four' (Hackney Central, Stoke Newington, Shoreditch and Hoxton) and the borough page (and haven't even finished Dalston yet) because there's so much material, but glad to know someone else is on the case. Maybe we could collaborate. I was thinking, for example, about making quite sure that Hackney history prior to 1899 was on the Hackney Central page as opposed to the borough.

Living locally as I do, I can get pix - where things still exist, of course. I have some of St John's, Sutton House, the old Library and Wesleyan Hall and the new TLC and others that I have not used yet, but need more copy to justify them. Tarquin Binary 01:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sources for Frank Pick

Hello, good work on Frank Pick, and thanks for the contribution. However, you forgot to add any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. What websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Frank Pick? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? Thank you very much. - SimonP 04:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

Thanks for adding the extra info to the article on Park Royal. JanesDaddy 01:31, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Finsbury Park

Hello. First of all the rationale: They are two stations, they have separate facilities, management, ticket offices, usage statistics, histories etc. Aside from that without some sort of splitting out, for someone who has never been to the station the article did not make it easy to visualise it.

Thats said I'm not against everything you have said:

  • I've put back some more details to the infobox (but I have to say this looked ghastly before and near imposible to follow with all the TLAs)
  • The note that GNER and Hull trains services do not stop at the station - nothing against this going back in - but isn't it a bit superflous?

Mrsteviec 08:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Northern Heights

Well done. I've added a few odd bits to the station articles, including a reference to Tony Beard's book.

It occurs to me that your map should say 'Brent', not 'Brent Cross'. IIRC the station was renamed after the road junction in the 60's. --ColinFine 20:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UK Railway Wiki...

Hi Noted your UK Railways contributions on WP?

You might also be interested in the UK Railways Wiki that has started on WikiCites. () If interested you might want to port some of your articles or improve the existing ones :-).

There is also a project to catalouge routes, contribution to which would be much appreciated. ShakespeareFan00 15:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tube station edits

I will take that into mind. I just thought that on some of these articles, their intros were too long. But then again. Simply south 23:59, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] London stations

Glad you like it. :) Mrsteviec 06:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:London stations

Seems like a good idea, but I think it would be worthwhile to keep links to Transport for London and National Rail as well. btw, there's a discussion about the three station templates going on here. I've suggested merging them, and implementing the London features as options, but it's being suggested the London template be left seperate.Mtpt 18:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit to John Major: long articles

I noticed that after you had edited the page on John Major, the end of the article was missing. It looked as if your browser had cut off the end because the page was too long for it to handle. The John Major article isn't long enough to trigger the "long page" warning that Wikipedia sometimes gives. So I wondered, are you using a particularly old browser, or are you using Google Toolbar (which is known to cause some problems)? JRawle (Talk) 11:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I use Firefox (1.5.0.4, Linux) and tabs while editing, but haven't noticed any problems... perhaps I should keep an eye on that. Do you use the "Google Toolbar", which is known to cause problems? JRawle (Talk) 11:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I do use the google toolbar occassionally, is it known what it is particularly about the toolbar that causes the problems and is it just the Firefox version or also the Internet Explorer one as well?--DavidCane 22:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
If you edit a very long article, there is a message that mentions Firefox with Google Toolbar specifically. Edit United Kingdom for example, to see the message. They have told Google about the problem. I would never suggest anyone use Internet Explorer, and that would remove the tab capablity anyway. You could use a version of Firefox direct from Mozilla without the toolbar. JRawle (Talk) 16:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies

I did jump the gun a tad. I cleared a bunch of redlinks from it the other day and assumed someone was just putting one back. I do seem to have reversions on the brain as of late as my favourite articles keep getting vandalised. Erath 01:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moorgate

It's disappointing to see you revert my vandalism, but much more importantly it's great to see another tube enthusiast (are you on District Dave's fourm?) on WP - keep up the good work! 84.9.90.115 19:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wimbledon

I'm surprised to hear anybody would mispronounce Wimbledon, but I'll take your word for it! Lfh 19:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] London districts

Hi. I'd be inclined to include the template on any district article even those not in the list. It points the way to the main districts and they usually link to the smaller districts around them. I originally constructed the list by selecting (what I thought were) the most important districts from each borough. This was an attempt to not focus just on the central districts. I do think that all 47 of the most significant districts in the London Plan should be included and I've meant to x-ref the two but haven't got round to it. Certainly by that critera Tooting and Streatham (but not Balham) should be included. I'm aprehensive about adding anything "historic" to the list, as of course all parishes were abolished by 1965 (and many in the 1930s) so it seems wrong to present it in a contemporary list. Mrsteviec 14:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Historic parish

There are some other articles about historic parishes in Greater London. Stoke Newington (parish) and Hackney (parish) for example. Perhaps they could all be linked somehow. Perhaps by category, template or list. Mrsteviec 14:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I've created the category here: Category:Ancient parishes of Greater London. There are already a few articles in there. Mrsteviec 09:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rayners Lane

1934 platform picture link invalid. I've tracked the picture down to

http://photos.ltmcollection.org/ixbin/hixclient.exe?IXsort=sort+select%28lcase%28production_role%29%3d%3d%22photographer%22%2cproduction_date_from%29&IXsubject=&_IXsubject=&_IXDB_=ltm&_IXSS_=_IXFPFX_%3dfull%252ft%26_IXMAXHITS_%3d15%26%252asform%3dsearch_form%26IXsearch%3dRayners%2bLane%26_IXDB_%3dltm%26IXsort%3dsort%2bselect%2528lcase%2528production_role%2529%253d%253d%2522photographer%2522%252cproduction_date_from%2529%26_IXSESSION_%3dmRNLTzMxj_i%26IXsubject%3d%26_IXx_%252ex%3d19%26IXfromdate%3d1934%26IXtodate%3d%26IXlocation%3d%26_IXx_%252ey%3d9&_IXSR_=wt1&_IXSESSION_=mRNLTzMxj_i&_IXSPFX_=full/t&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXFIRST_=1&submit-button=summary&_IXSECTION=&IXsearch=Rayners%20Lane&IXfromdate=1934&IXtodate=&IXlocation=

but this seems an unnecessarily loong address. Can you repair the link somehow?

Thanks for spotting and reporting the broken link. These images do occassionally get renamed. I have fixed it now using the Template:Ltmcollection method - DavidCane 00:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to WP:LUL

Welcome to WikiProject Underground. I hope you enjoy being a member and helping to get lu, lo and dlr articles to their best! Unisouth 08:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1949 Stock

Hi, I removed the external link to the photo on the London Underground 1949 Stock page as it actually was a 1938 stock driving motor car in the photo, there were no 1949 stock driving motor cars. There is however a photo of a 1949 stock car in the ltm collections but I have no idea how to set up the link in the same way that you did. Can you tell me how? Jsp3970 18:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks that worked great. Added a couple of photos to London Underground 1920 Stock using the menthod you mentioned. Thanks for the advice. Jsp3970 13:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Turnham Green tube station

Thanks for your excellent work expanding this article! Obviously you have a great deal of knowledge of tube history -- any more contributions/expansions of the surrounding area District and Piccadilly line station articles would be well appreciated! Seann 11:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Great! I look forward to reading more history and details... Seann 12:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Extract of 1889 Railway Map Showing Grosvenor Road station.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Extract of 1889 Railway Map Showing Grosvenor Road station.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal Tube Image

It is permitted to use an image instead of the keyhole puzzle piece in portal templates. The standard width of the image is - 40px. Therefore the BR portal image is to small. Thats why it looks funny. Unisouth 09:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for fixing spelling errors for the WikiProject Underground pages. Unisouth 17:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New White City Station

Apparantly there is a lot of confusion about the new stations related to the white city development. The new hammersmith and city station is going to be called Wood Lane and H&Cs Shepards Bush is going to be renamed Shepards Bush Green. It is unknown what imput the central line will give. Unisouth 09:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

David, I noticed that you have changed the reference style formats that I added to the Goodge Street and Belsize Park tube station pages. As you could see, the method used by myself was Harvard referencing rather than in-line notes and this is a subject that has raised much discussion in the Wiki community. The format I used, though not templated, complied with the {cite-book} format although without the straight-jacket that an unforgiving template forces upon a sometimes complex citation.

That aside, when citing literature in either journals or books, it is customary in scholarly works – and I believe that Wikipedia aspires to this goal – to cite authors using their surnames first, rather than the order that appears on the book cover. Most traditional bibliographic referencing databases store and retrieve their data in this order.

I notice in the railway project group that there is no citation method discussed in the Manual of Style but I would earnestly suggest that professional looking Harvard referencing be adopted universally for citations and in-line marks reserved for footnotes and expansion of detail.

Best regards from a fellow enthusiast of the subject Hutch 11:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Train station co-ords

David, many thanks for all the hard work you've been putting in recently to various train station articles. Unfortunately, I notice that the co-ords used have been off by quite some distance, such as posts here and here. I have corrected some of them, to use a different geohack which seems to allow for more precise co-ords, but I wondered if you might have some time to double-check the others, and correct if needed? Thanks again, --Rebroad 22:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the comment. When I added the multimap links to the station articles you mentioned I wasn't trying to get the stations dead centre in the maps and give the geographical coordinates but rather position the stations on the maps so that they could be seen in the context of its surroundings. That's why the coordinates don't match the actual latitudes and longitudes of the stations. Personally, whilst I quite like the idea of having the coordinates at the top of the page, I think a quick direct link to a clear road map from the external links section is also useful for many readers. Many of the links from the Geohacks page produce large-scale satellite images which are not much use as they cover such large areas. --DavidCane 01:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi David. I agree, the page the user is taken to has a lot of links, most of which I don't use. Personally, I use just the google maps and google earth links, but I'm not sure what would be a better geohack to use than the one I changed it to. If you have any ideas, please let me know! I also agree that the co-ords would be just as good in the external links section as at the top of the page. --Rebroad 19:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Best of Merton

I am also puzzled as to why you keep deleting links to The Best of Merton? This is one of Wimbledon's most popular community and business web sites. Also, a precedent has been set by allowing links for the far more commercial sites such as Wimbledon Visitor (parading as The Complete Guide to Wimbledon) and the now defunct Wimbledon City. [Unsigned comment by 82.43.170.35 was added on 21 January].

  1. The reason for deleting the link to [http:// www thebestof.co.uk/merton thebestof.co.uk] is several fold:
    1. It is a localised section of a nationwide commercial portal site. - Therefore it is not local.
    2. It is a commercial franchise. I don't have any problem with franchises, but Wikipedia should not be treated as a free source of advertising.
    3. The majority of the content is paid-for local directory listings. There is a prominent "Advertise" button in the menu and the site admits its aims when it says "Thousands of businesses right across the UK are already alert to the huge benefits of being part of thebestof.co.uk."
    4. It contains only a limited number of items under each of the directory heading. It is not comprehensive.
    5. There is no actual information on the history or character of the area. It therefore provides nothing extra to the article.
  2. Wimbledon.Visitor.com provides more local information but I'm going to delete that as well.
  3. WimbledonCity.co.uk appears to be alive although the hit rate on sections is low, the Forum has virtual no members or posts and large parts of the text are reproductions of the Wikipedia article. WimbledonCity is also going to be deleted.
--DavidCane 13:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
FYI, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#thebestof.co.uk spam (January 2007). I broke the thebestof.co.uk link above since that domain is likely to get blacklisted at this rate.
Thanks for fighting spam! --A. B. (talk) 20:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Extract of 1930 map of Edgware.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Extract of 1930 map of Edgware.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Succession boxes for peerages

Hello. Would just like to let you known that it is not common practice to include all titles held by a peer in succession boxes, just the highest title. There are of course exceptions to this rule, for example when a peer is given a new title, then both peerages are included in separate succession boxes. Another exception is when a peer already holds one peerage and then succeeds to another, one example being when Edward Stanley, 4th Baron Stanley of Alderley succeeded to the barony of Sheffield in 1909 (however, the barony of eddisbury should not be included as this is a junior title to the barony of stanley). Also, we do not normally include ordinals in succession boxes for peerages. Regards, Tryde 17:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greater London outline map

Just a line to say I haven't forgot about fixing this. I'll recify your concerns within the next 36 hours! Jhamez84 01:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I've made the changes. It is likely there could be others required yet. Feel free to contact me should you find any. I'm more than happy to get it accurate, it doesn't take too long. Jhamez84 13:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mass deletion of articles on London postcodes

User:MRSC has done a mass deletion of London postcode articles by turning them into redirects, and in consequence some relevant templates have also been deleted. I am looking at the London N articles but lack time to do more.--Osidge 19:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Have you seen Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London N1?--Londoneye 12:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)--Londoneye 12:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Order of Merit

Thanks for pointing that out. I must say I feel a little foolish - next time I'll confirm vacancies (or not) before saving, actually taking the time (all five seconds of it) to verify things by counting the members on the list below!

Xdamrtalk 23:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Garth

Hi DavidCane. You are off to such a great start on the article Richard Garth that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 18:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know...

Updated DYK query On 8 July 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Richard Garth, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

---- tariqabjotu 02:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Updated DYK query On July 23, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wimbledon and Sutton Railway, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for putting Wimbledon on the map. Happy editing! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Updated DYK query On 29 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article City & South London Railway, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, Daniel 07:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Updated DYK query On 3 June 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wimbledon a suburb?

I disagree that Wimbledon is a 'suburb' because the population of Wimbledon is counted as part of the population of London; therefore by definition it should be considered part of the city. I said 'former' suburb because this was not the case in the past.

Reading a bit more, it seems the Brits are more liberal in their use of the word but in the U.S., it is generally considered incorrect; a distinct area within a city limit is generally called a 'neighborhood' or 'district.'

Regardless of the U.K. use, it is probably better to promote the technical definition because it accords with the ideas of 'one man, one vote'; being counted ONCE in the census; etc.

Ryoung122 03:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] London Gazette

Hi. I've noticed you are going around changing the page references to items of record in the London Gazette to page numbers which are clearly at fault (eg "{{LondonGazette|issue=28310|date=19 November 1909|startpage=15|endpage=18}}" to "{{LondonGazette|issue=28310|date=19 November 1909|startpage=8567|endpage=8570}}") (it was certainly not printed with over 10,000 pages in the 1920s and I'm pretty sure isn't now either). Could you clarify why you are doing this please before I wholesale revert the edits? Thanks. --AlisonW 18:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that info. Most weird and illogical, I feel! Keep up the good work then (and I rv'd my edit). --AlisonW 19:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Template:GBvosi

Thanks for the fix, I can now put this template back into the pages that I was using it on. Just one question—the older GBvoss used to be able to link directly to the large full screen version of the maps, has the new site made this not possible? —Jeremy (talk) 00:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peterborough

Firstly, thanks for contributing to the article. I should have left a message here when I reverted your edit, which was in response to this discussion. The use of citation templates is contentious and therefore optional. They should not be added against consensus, and editors should not change articles from one style to another if there are objections. At the very least I think we have to change all 106 refs. (a major task) or none. What do you think? Chrisieboy 09:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tower Subway

Why would this not be the first? I have read this in various literature. Simply south 12:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{LondonGazette}}

David, have you any thoughts on my recent comments at template talk:LondonGazette. I'm also about to post at Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance) to get some more visibility on this issue, and to see if there's a way the old urls can easily be converted. It would probably make future maintenance easier if we could get all refs converted to your template at this point, and it would be easier to do this if the only mandatory fields in the template corresponded to the url parameters which are actually required. David Underdown 16:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sandbox header

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You may make test edits in the sandbox, but for the convenience of others, please leave the sandbox heading alone. P51Mustang 21:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] City & South London Railway

I have just read the article after a link on the main page. Its an interesting read and I see your to thank for a great deal of the contributions. Well done and have a barnstar.

The Original Barnstar
Awarded for your contributions to the City & South London Railway article. LordHarris 18:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sandbox header

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You may make test edits in the sandbox, but for the convenience of others, please leave the sandbox heading alone. P51Mustang 23:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Northern_Heights_Map_Mockup.png

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Northern_Heights_Map_Mockup.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

See explanation given by author at WP:PUI, (and hopefully on image?)Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible accident

Did I accidentally use one of your icon names for one I derived from it? My apologies ClemRutter (talk) 01:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merton

I am thinking of moving Merton (historic parish) to Merton, London. See WT:LONDON#Merton. Simply south (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible project of interest

Hi David, as the author of the London Ringways material I thought you might be in interested in the UK Roads WikiProject. Regan123 (talk) 21:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rail icons

Thanks for the info; I've been searching around for the last seven (eep!) hours or so finding icons and each time the table gets wider! Will see how best to integrate the ones you've pointed out. If you are seeing wrong column headings it is probably that I've been switching them around a bit to create some 'logic' in presentation; it will settle eventually ;-P --AlisonW (talk) 19:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, please correct the category of your icons. They are combined icons and have not yet been discussed, so the correct category is /experimental. Regards, --MdE talk (de) (en) 11:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, rather than being held to ransom by the DE rail pictogram people, I'd suggest that any icon which is currently actually *in use* is, by definition, not "experimental". --AlisonW (talk) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Morden Map

Your Image:Morden to Sutton Map Mockup.png is great, but disagrees with the text commentary! I don't have the right font (Gill doesn't look closed enough) but "Morden" on the map should actually read "North Morden". --AlisonW (talk) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info; a bit 50:50 I suppose in the end ... --AlisonW (talk) 21:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rail Icons redux

Hi again! The 'mixed rails' icons you created (where "heavy rail" and "light rail" are in the same icon) ... they don';t seem to be used that often (some at all, so far as I can tell anyway). Would you have any major difficulty if they were recoded to remove the "v" from the start of the codes (as that had already been in use for parallel tracks) and was replaced by something else, probably a "b" (for 'both' I suppose, but because "b" is already used in the Amsterdam set of mixed rails. --AlisonW (talk) 18:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mixed Lines Proposal

There will be examples where the feature (eg a station) at the point of join could be open or closed and heavy or metro, as such we do need to 'break apart' the codes. Although you can't have an open station on a fully closed line (usually, anyway: I can think of examples in the UK though, annoyingly) then I think the following could work:

Icon prefix light rail
in operation		 light rail
not in operation
heavy rail
in operation		 mu@ mue@
heavy rail
not in operation		 meu@ mueu

ie. m-for-main (followed by 'e' if closed) then u-for-unter (again followed by 'e' if closed) and @ being an 'x' signifying the feature is closed( not required if both tail types closed) There is also a possible need for a 't' / tunnel addition too. There might also on some icons be the issue of which is 'on top' but hopefully that will be in the suffix codes ok. --AlisonW (talk) 21:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Pictogram codes

In trying to create (yet!) another icon I've noticed that your (Image:BSicon tUKRZu.svg and Image:BSicon tUKRZo.svg would appear to be wrongly coded. In each case a 'U' has been added although there is no U-bahn/light rail in the icon. I haven't worked out what the right code might be though yet! --AlisonW (talk) 16:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merton politics

I've restored external links to Merton Borough Lib Dems, Wimbledon Conservatives and Wimbledon Labour on the Merton Borough page - there is a great deal on that page about the local political situation and I think a reader might expect external links to Parties that organise locally. Also, in the External links section they're not promotional. Similarly, on the Wimbledon Parliamentary constituency, I've restored links in the "prospects for the next Gen Election" section as, again, this is not promotional but evidential references that prove who the Labour and Lib Dem candidates are. Not meaning to be awkward, but feel there should be appropriate references AnthonyFair (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

David; Nate and I decided on a compromise position of linking to "Merton Connects" on the Merton Borough page (I had inserted links to local Liberal Democrat, Labour and Conservative parties - which I believe are the only parties to have Merton-specific websites - originally I had added Liberal Democrat only). Nate removed them and we discussed a compromise. I do think that the borough page that discusses the local political situation should include direct links to all parties that organise locally. I don't think it is against the NPOV to add such links in the external links section: they were relevant local links with no commentary. I am happy with the compromise position, but I actually think it would be better to have the links for all political parties that organise locally and have a Merton-relevant website.

On Wimbledon constituency, I do think it's important to have evidence as to the official candidates selected for different parties - and I would re-insert all such references were they to be removed. As we are likely to get no more than 5-8 candidates in total, I don't think the references section will become a mess (and no other parties have yet selected candidates). It's important that readers can see that the statements made on the page are correct. The changes you've made seem largely stylistic, but it seems a good edit to me. Thanks for responding to my messageAnthonyFair (talk) 16:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FLRC:List of London Underground stations

Hello DavidCane, since you made substantial edits to the List of London Underground stations, I am letting you know that this list has been nominated for WP:FLRC.--Crzycheetah 21:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] British History Online

Thanks for bringing British History Online to my attention in Talk:List of eponymous roads in London. There's endless hours to be spent in improving the history sections of our road articles :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm much obliged again, especially for the London Gazette link. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hammersmith Tube stations

Hi David, thought this may be something you could answer. Neither Hammersmith Tube article states the distance between the two stations bearing this name, unlike articles on other such occurrences. Your comments on the proposed merge suggest they are directly opposite each other, separated only by Hammersmith Broadway. Is this correct? Grunners (talk) 19:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Have added to each article a line on the distance, and also linked to the map you found. Grunners (talk) 20:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Portal summaries

You seem to be good at writing Portal summaries, as you have done with the current on at P:LT. Could i ask you to look at (and possbly refine) the selected article at Portal:London and what both a waterway and canal are in the context of the UK at P:UKW? Simply south (talk) 21:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cound you help us?

..at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Finsbury Park station Platfrorm Changes.png. Did you use the diagram or the information given by it? Forrester (talk) 12:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The "Would Have Been" Maps

May I please ask, how do you make these maps? Is it difficult. I'm sorry if this isn't allowed post —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.253.217 (talk) 19:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Most of the diagrams you refer to were actually originally made by User:McDRye, who I would expect made them using a vector graphics tool before converting them to a .png bitmap format. Creating images in vector graphics format is relatively straightforward - the skill is to reproduce the style and look of the original and a part of that is matching the colours of the lines and using the correct font. As McDye hasn't made the vector format available, the ones that I have changed were made by editing the bitmap image in Paintshop Pro, cutting and pasting elements of the image as necessary including making changes to individual pixels where required to ensure colour matching. The cutting and pasting included copying individual letters to assemble the names of the stations, so it is a laborious process. --DavidCane (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] London Underground

Just wanted to say that you've done an awesome job on all your London Underground articles. LightPhoenix (talk) 07:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] City and Brixton Railway

David,

Whilst I utterly agree with you that there have been dozens of proposed but not constructed schemes, there are only a handful of schemes which received royal assent over the years; the only three I can think of are the C&B, the North West London, and the North East Suburban Electric Railways. They surely count in a different class, as legally they were allowed to be constructed, and were only not because of poor finance. This is unlike say the more extended version of the Fleet Line (stages 3 and 4) which from what I can tell [i]never[/i] even received royal assent, and remained mere ideas.

It is unfortunate that there is no seperate artical for tube proposals (and hopefully someone will rectify this soon) but I'm convinced that the railways which were allowed to be built should be detailed. The information on these is also quite hard to come by.

I intend to revert the artical for informations sake, but feel free to contact me at albanianposse at hotmail dot co dot uk to discuss this more. I too am on DD's forum if youre a member, so maybe see you there!

Benedict 131.231.250.38 (talk) 11:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Wikiproject London Transport banner

Hi. Thank you for contacting me and for clarifying the use of the project pages. I do see your point and so I will only add portal links instead of both portal links and project page links from now on. I did in fact add portal links to alot of the templates such as the bus infobox which previously did not have a portal link. See [1] . I just added a project link with it. So what was added was in fact both :) Thanks very much. Tbo 157(talk) 11:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway: FA candidature

I was sorry to see this article's FA candidature end without promotion. I had struck my oppose, was moving towards support, and I believe that the article was approaching FA standard and could easily have been assisted there, given a more positive attitude from the early opposers. I can't help seeing a disparity between the FAC treatment of this article, and others that attract huge amounts of FAC attention and comment, even when they are no more worthy candidates than yours. I'm sorry I didn't find the article earlier; I hope that at some stage it will return. Brianboulton (talk) 10:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)