Talk:Dore and Totley railway station
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] National Rail timetable link
The link to the National Railways timetable page, (via the station code in the info box) has been removed, twice, initially with the edit summary "(Rm stn art lnk, Wikipedia is not a timetable". The policy "Wikipedia is not a timetable" is refers to the fact that timetable information is not supposed to be entered onto Wikipedia, not that we should not link, where relevant, to it. Such links are included in the infoboxes for most UK railway stations, and I can see no good reason why they should not be. I propose to reinstate the link, unless there is demonstrable consensus against it. Andy Mabbett 11:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Other articles are of no significance in the discussion Pigsonthewing. You've demonstrated yourself in your dissertation above that timetable information is not suitable, it's been removed under those conventions. I propose you don't reinstate them. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 12:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- I've demonstrated exactly the opposite of what you claim. If you're arguing that your removal of the code is justified by a Wikipedia-wide policy, then other articles clearly are of relevance. And consensus here is clearly against you. Andy Mabbett 12:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- A feeling of déjà vu; There is no consensus. QED. ;) Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 12:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- On what grounds do you claim that there is no consensus in this case? Andy Mabbett 12:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Third Opinion
After reviewing the article, your arguments, and searching relevant policy, I find no reason the station code should not be included. This seems to me much like the ICAO codes for airports and a potentially useful piece of information in the infobox -- as is a link to a timetable itself. As for the claim that Wikipedia is not a timetable, that link is the only reference I can find to such a policy, and it has been clearly rejected by the community after no consensus could be formed in support of its adoption. --Selket Talk 05:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The information is in the infobox. Does the link also need to be in place then? No. Why duplicate information? It simply wastes space, leave it off. L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 00:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR (talk) 03:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Dore & Totley railway station → Dore and Totley railway station — "and" is used and not "&" —Year1989 (talk) 16:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''
or*'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with~~~~
. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
[edit] Discussion
- Any additional comments:
Can you provide evidence that the station has changed its name in the first place from Dore? Also, changing from ampersand to and would be classed as uncontroversial. Simply south (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
-
- The only proof I have is what I have seen with my own eyes. When I went past the other day the signs said "Dore and Totley". I would move the page myself but I am having problems as "Dore and Totley railway station" is used as a redirect page and it will not let me move it.Year1989 (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- After searching i cannot find sources but it does seem to be referred to as both. The current timteable still refers to as Dore. But otherwise, go ahead.
-
Simply south (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.