Contents

Template talk:Mainline railways around South Bank RDT

Trains: in UK Template‑class

Trains Portal This template 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 Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This template is supported by WikiProject UK Railways.

'Waterloo International' needs removing[edit]

Internations trains no longer serve Waterloo, this station needs removing from the template. I have no experience of editing rail network templates though so could somebody oblige? Thanks a_boardley (talk) 09:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see now that by the legend this line is actually marked 'not in use' so that's fine, although I wonder therefore if it is owrth keeping there at all as the international terminal is being redeveloped as domestic? Or wait until it is set up as domestic before changing? Also, there is a Waterloo -- Waterloo East line here marked 'not in use' but a look at map and aerial photographs (try Google Maps) shows no such link, not even an expired one. Can somebody with more knowledge of the situation review this whole template? Thanks a_boardley (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Waterloo-Waterloo East line ran through the main concourse and followed almost exactly the route of the present walkway/footbridge between the two stations, so the diagram is correct - it's just that no physical remains are obviously left. I say leave Waterloo International in, but 'not in use' until it's got trains running from it again. --Peeky44 _{What's on your mind?} 11:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Blackfriars Bridge railway station (on the ex-bridge) and Blackfriars Road railway station (next to Waterloo East)? --Rumping (talk) 01:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the through lines are now on the east (downstream) side of the station, consideration should be given to adjusting the template accordingly. Also if closed station are being displayed (i.e. Waterloo International), what about Holborn Viaduct? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 09:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should Holborn Viaduct be added as the closed extension north from Blackfriars. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 20:14, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The cluster of links, some of which are presented vertically while referring to a horizontal line, lower down this template than "Blackfriars Road (1864-1868)" is really difficult to follow — even as someone with a relatively good understanding of the local geography.

Perhaps another column of labels could be added on the left, to make this easier to read? Or the horizontal rail line could be oriented diagonally to make labels less ambiguous? — OwenBlacker (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Legend
1 Elephant & Castle 2 Blackfriars Bridge (1864–1885) 1 2 3 4 3 Blackfriars 4 City Thameslink

@OwenBlacker: I've tried, but I'm not sure how the directions at the bottom were supposed to be split, and I'm not sure it's actually better. Maybe the Thameslink stations would be clearer if they were marked with numbers? Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 12:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jc86035: Ooh, that's a good idea. Aside from the colour-contrast of the "2", that looks way clearer. Thank you! — OwenBlacker (talk) 16:44, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@OwenBlacker: I've updated the diagram; do you think it'd be better if all the labels were on one row? Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 05:11, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jc86035: Oh that's way better. Thank you so much! — OwenBlacker (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To my knowledge, the opening of the dive-under has changed a-lot of the routing from Rainham (Kent) to Luton. The diagram we have here seems to encapsulate decades of wiki-experience but is no longer current. Could some brave soul have a further look please? --ClemRutter (talk) 13:31, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can see, the dive-under actually falls outside the scope of the diagram. However, would I be correct in surmising that it is correctly shown on Template:Brighton Main Line, immediately below South Bermondsey?Useddenim (talk) 10:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Without going into further detail that is covered in the article- I dont think so. The doubling of lines over the Borough Market viaduct and the Bermondsey dive-under have enabled London Bridge to be reconfigured and we have 16tph passing through to St Pancras International via Farringdon.here

On the Brighton diagram the symbol used seems to be a flat crossover with line-switching. Again no mention there of Brighton- STP direct (1h22)

Legend
London Bridge maybe London Bridge

I am no expert on overlays but the icon on the 'London Bridge' line looks very strange to me. --ClemRutter (talk) 11:01, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would  (vÜWBl+lr)or (vÜWBr+lr) be the correct icon for {{Brighton Main Line}}?Useddenim (talk) 16:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that does look better on Firefox- whether it is correct I am still unsure. Everytime I look at the diagram I have further doubts. I will sit down in the next couple of days and list the problems. ClemRutter (talk) 22:59, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]