Jump to content

Talk:Central line (London Underground): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
 
(29 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
| algo = old(60d)
{{WikiProject London|class=B|importance=}}
| archive = Talk:Central line (London Underground)/Archive %(counter)d
{{WikiProject Essex|class=B|importance=mid}}
| counter = 1
{{WikiProject Trains|class=B|importance=mid|UK=yes|UK-importance=mid|Underground=yes|LT-importance=high|subway=yes|portalSAweek=7, 2016}}
| maxarchivesize = 100K
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 2
| minthreadsleft = 5
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProject London|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject East Anglia|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Trains|importance=mid|UK=yes|UK-importance=mid|Underground=yes|LT-importance=high|subway=yes|portalSAweek=7, 2016}}
}}
}}
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject London Transport/PLT-sa|19th May 2007 - 14th June 2007}}
{{BS template|Central Line}}
{{BS template|Central Line}}
{{archives|age=60|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}


== Requested move 21 February 2016 ==
==Early conversation==
Branch lines can be done with double indentation. Likewise closed sections. The Ongar thing is a minor point, that can be labelled. A diagram with just the names would allow accompanying text to be worked on, so that's probably best. -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]


<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
What i acutally meant about branch lines was it does not show which was it branches off also. Some parts ar very hard to do i mean the eastern bracnh of the central lines breaks off goes on its own route and connects again laster on.
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[WP:requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section. ''
-fonzy


The result of the move request was: '''moved''': Clear consensus that the page be moved, with no objections to it. {{rmnac}} '''[[User:Class455fan1|Class455fan1]] ([[User talk:Class455fan1|talk]])''' 17:15, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
If you did the distric line or metropolitan9which would conatain (east london and hamersmith and city too). IT WOULD BE A COMPLETE MESS.
* [[:Central line]] → {{no redirect|Central line (London Underground)}}
* [[:Central line (disambiguation)]] → {{no redirect|Central Line}}
– I'm really surprised that nobody has ever bothered to move this article to an unambiguous title. For as much as I know, "Central line" is just as, if not more, ambiguous as "[[Circle line]]"? Moreover, people outside of London will tend to think that "central line" would mean "[[central venous catheter]]" at first thought. [[User:Some Gadget Geek|&#60;&#60;&#60; SOME GADGET GEEK &#62;&#62;&#62;]] ([[User talk:Some Gadget Geek|talk]]) 01:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Strong support''' [[WP:ASTONISH]] This isn't the London Wikipedia, central lines are prominent in medicine. -- [[Special:Contributions/70.51.46.39|70.51.46.39]] ([[User talk:70.51.46.39|talk]]) 02:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Query''' - Are any of the other uses more notable than the London Underground line? Looking at [[Central line (disambiguation)]], the only one which pops out as potentially being more notable is the [[Central venous catheter]], and given that is on another page already we could just change the hatnote of this article. -''[[User:Mattbuck|mattbuck]]'' <small>([[User talk:Mattbuck|Talk]])</small> 11:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
::There's no such concept as "more notable" in deciding whether there's a primary topic. It would be hard to imagine an argument to make any of the topics primary here. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 01:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' – The present situation doesn't make much sense, and this is especially true if we are going to use lowercase "line" per [[WP:NCCAPS]]. The present title implies a generic category, as opposed to the specific London line, and there are "central lines" all over the place, in various fields. There is no reason to make navigation difficult in this way. [[User:RGloucester|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:12pt;color:#000000">RGloucester </span>]] — [[User talk:RGloucester|☎]] 20:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' as someone whose own city has a [[Central Link|central line]] (for now). '''[[User:SounderBruce|<span style="background:#5d9731; color:white; padding:2px;">Sounder</span>]][[User talk:SounderBruce|<span style="background:#1047AB; color:white; padding:2px;">Bruce</span>]]''' 22:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' –&nbsp;Clearly there's no primary topic here. However, I would not capitalize Line in the disambig page title. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 01:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' as common sense! [[User:Jeni|<span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:deeppink;">Jeni</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Jeni|<span style="color:deeppink;">talk</span>]])</sup> 01:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Partial support'''. OK for the London addition (Proposer seems to think that any ambiguous term should be 'clarified', but this is not the case here: Central L/line ''could'' be a primary topic (by [[WP:DAB]] standards). In that case, no DAB term would be needed. However, the London line does not convince as a primary topic, so indeed the DAB term should be added).
:wrt the capitalisation of Line/line? As is today, both [[Central Line]] and [[Central line]] are corvered in the [[Central line (disambiguation)]] page, which is OK per [[WP:DPAGE]]. With this, I think the DAB content should be in [[Central line]] (lowercase, as is today btw). Of course a redirect in the uppercase name page. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 08:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. No reason to think this is the primary topic. [[User:Egsan Bacon|Egsan Bacon]] ([[User talk:Egsan Bacon|talk]]) 13:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. No evidence that this is the primary topic. --[[User:BrownHairedGirl|<span style="color:#663200;">Brown</span>HairedGirl]] <small>[[User talk:BrownHairedGirl|(talk)]] • ([[Special:Contributions/BrownHairedGirl|contribs]])</small> 16:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. No clear primary topic. [[User:Oknazevad|oknazevad]] ([[User talk:Oknazevad|talk]]) 19:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per above. '''[[User:Class455fan1|Class455fan1]] ([[User talk:Class455fan1|talk]])''' 15:20, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' but make the dab not uppercase [[Special:Contributions/2601:541:4204:7760:B120:7ED4:256:E2D6|2601:541:4204:7760:B120:7ED4:256:E2D6]] ([[User talk:2601:541:4204:7760:B120:7ED4:256:E2D6|talk]]) 20:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
----
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section.''<!-- Template:RM bottom --></div>


== External links modified ==
Er, I have a feeling this is working from one of those "The London Underground: A Diagrammatic History" maps by Douglas Rose, for all the dates and so forth. Is that right? 'Cos if so, this may be copyright material. Then again, all the information he presents is presumably from the public domain, so maybe it's only the exact presentation he has copyright on. Can one of the copyright experts enlighten us? --[[User:Bth|Bth]]


Hello fellow Wikipedians,


I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Central line (London Underground)]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=750213740 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
The design with ticks for stations is the work of [[Harry Beck]]. I'm not sure if ''design schemes'' are copyright, but they might be and I'd rather err on the side of caution It's also more Wiki-like to give a text list that anyone can add information to. The District line just has many beanches -- some of these operate independently, eg the Edgware Road - Wimbledon line. Likewise the Metropolitan: it's now only Aldgate - "lots of branches in the back of beyond". Ham&City is seperate, so is EastLon. -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141029143253/http://www.london24.com/news/transport/tube_s_only_wooden_escalator_to_carry_last_passengers_1_3419976 to http://www.london24.com/news/transport/tube_s_only_wooden_escalator_to_carry_last_passengers_1_3419976


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).


{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
Yes i am getting the dates and old naems from ther. But i am trying to make it as different as possible. Douglas Ross did the whole underground map together. etc


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 11:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
It would be preferable to either have a horizontal diagram or to stick the diagram down the side of the page. Currently there's way too much wasted space. -- [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]


== External links modified ==
I WAS TRYING TO GET OUT OF TAHT BECUASE IT LOOKS TO FAMILIAR. COPYRIGHT ETC. -fonzy


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
Tarquin what i was saying about east london metropolitain is that orginally the east london line as part of metropolitain so it would come under the same map. Also the district has had 10 different branches (in a sence) - fonzy


I have just modified 3 external links on [[Central line (London Underground)]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=793496608 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
I suppose it would be possible to just forget branches and give a list of all stations. - fonzy
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/Performance_Data_Store_P2_2012-13_Issued%281%29.xlsm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140415231448/http://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/enwiki/static/cms/documents/wtt-67-central-15-september-2013.pdf to https://tfl.gov.uk/cdn/enwiki/static/cms/documents/wtt-67-central-15-september-2013.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.crossrail.co.uk/80256B090053AF4C/Files/chelsea-hackneyline/%24FILE/chl%2Bsafeguarding%2Bplans%2Bintroduction.pdf


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
:You could break the DL into branches from a main page. Also the ELL wouldn't necessarily need to be on the same page as the ML; they have different colours now after all. -- [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
Well the point about the ELL is that at the moment it has no stations of its own or lines. Unlike the jubilee line where it has some of its own and lines of its own. As orginally most of the jubillee line was part of the bakerloo line. - fonzy PS i'll just do lists for now. something can get sorted out later.


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 03:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
:You must be thinking about another line. The ELL most definitely has its own stations: New Cross Gate, New Cross, Surrey Quays, Canada Water, Wapping, etc... They're about to extend it up to Dalston and beyond. [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]


== History / chronology ==
Look originally the east london line was part of the metropolitain line. EVen though it did not connect. When i say it has no stations of its own i mean. It has had none built under its own name. (if that makes sence):-s. if you looke ata map of the tube 50 years ago. the line is there but showh in the purple of metropolitain line. Understand? Altough yes you are right tehy are plannng to extended it. -fonzy


Should this not mention the Loughton - Ongar section first as this was built before the "core" central line? [[User:Crookesmoor|Crookesmoor]] ([[User talk:Crookesmoor|talk]]) 17:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
:Sure, but it's now its own line. And should be shown here as such. What's so hard about that? -- [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]


== [[Central line (London)]] redirect? ==
i know what your trying to say. Its one of these little things. Well its sought of like saying do it for teh cricle line. The circle line has no sations of its own. It was as ervice invented by the district and metropolitain lines.


Would anyone object to the creation of [[Central line (London)]] as a redirect to this article? [[User:Fork99|Fork99]] ([[User talk:Fork99|talk]]) 21:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Well do you have any ideas how to deal with thes kinds of things?


:Why? [[User:Murgatroyd49|Murgatroyd49]] ([[User talk:Murgatroyd49|talk]]) 07:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
:"The '''East London Line''' is a [[London Underground]] line... It was formerly part of the [[Metropolitan Line]] but was redesignated as its own line, complete with its own colour, in 19xx."
::@[[User:Murgatroyd49|Murgatroyd49]]: Why what? Just as an FYI, [[Circle line (London)]] already redirects to [[Circle line (London Underground)]]. [[User:Fork99|Fork99]] ([[User talk:Fork99|talk]]) 08:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

:::Is it something that is a likely search term? Most people will search for Central Line and come up with the dab page which will send them where they want to go. I would have thought Central Line (tube) or similar would have been a more likely term. [[User:Murgatroyd49|Murgatroyd49]] ([[User talk:Murgatroyd49|talk]]) 08:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
:"The '''Metropolitan Line''' is a [[London Underground]] line... In 19xx, several parts of the extensive network were redesignated and became separate lines, including the [[East London Line]], ..."

:You can use that if you wish :-) -- [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]


:: I'm with Nairobiny on this one. Seperate according to their current names, and maybe split the District into component services. I've removed the abbreviation list & put it below. ''Wikipedia is not paper'': we have the space to write in words and not force the reader to decode information. -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]

I really do egta nnoyed when ppl keep telling em what do to all the time. I am fed up with it. I know your not trying to be horrible. But it does hurt me. Anyway I think more the est london line you could infact do it on the same page as the mrtropoltain line. but under the heading of eats london line section. AS it was a section. - fonzy


I am still more bothered about the distirct line particular becuase of all the branches below is a quick map:
[[Image:Vroughdistrictline.png]]

The dark blue was when the service was given to the picadily line. The light green are old branches. A couple closd because another line had a service along side it. -fonzy

: Best to decide what to do about the Met and the Dis on their respective pages. Putting EastLon on its own page doesn't preclude mentioning on the Met page that EastLon used to be a branch. The Wiki environment takes some getting used to, Fonzy. I remember -- I've only been here since January '02. No article belongs to any on person, so we're not telling ''you'' what to do, we're suggesting what ''we'' should do on this page. An important aspect of the project is that anyone can add information, which is why I've said we ought to have a text list. -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]

*O:Opened
*C:Closed
*RO:Re-opened
*FS:First Serverd
*RN:Re-named

When was that station ever called "NOTINGHILL Gate"??? [[User:KF|KF]]

Its always beeen called nottinghill gate.(from what i knwo) its right in fornt of me ona modenr underground map. - fonzy

Hey, look at my sentence and then at yours. See any difference?

NOTING is not NOTTING.

NOTTINGHILL is not NOTTING HILL.

Have a nice Sunday, [[User:KF|KF]]

You just wrote that to complain at a typo?! why didn;t you just correct it rather than go to teh talk page and shout about it?

Let's stop that now please, whoever you are. I DID correct the typo, and then fonzy changed it back to "Notinghill", and as he has been mentioning older station names I was just wondering. Anything wrong with that?? [[User:KF|KF]]

?? o i know what happened edit cnflict so i copied and pasted over the corrected typo :-s


Shouldn't the stations be given under their modern day names? Some of the history, name changes could be given in the article text and then some of it (rather like for the [[Mornington Crescent]] entry could be given in an individual station page. Tourists to London could be confused if they try to find ''Post Office'' station, unless they read the article carefully. -- [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]

I'm trying to be careful of copyright. :-s - fonzy If i say opened as: etc it is turning out more like the source i am getting it from.

:No need to worry. That the station is now called ''St Paul's'' is a statement of fact, not an issue of copyright. -- [[User:Nairobiny|Nairobiny]]

What i meant was if i write St pAULS OPENED AS popst office. etc it looks liek the soruce i am gtting it from where as the current way looks nothing like it.


: Names aren't copyright, and raw information isn't copyright. The phrase "opened as" can hardly be claimed as copyright, a) it's too short, and b) there's really no other way to express the same thing. I would say current name first, though I don't think we're writing for tourists -- they can find GIF and PDF maps on the LT website. I'm not sure we need a page for each station: how much text would be there? I would say stick to a page per line, and ''if'' a station eventually gets more than, say 3 paragraphs to it alone, ''then'' promote it to a page. -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]

Well could you quickly do the otehr stations (in that situation) please. - fonzy
no chanegd my mind luckliy the central line is wquite easy but some stations have ahd about 5 names changes. and that may be messy.

Example: Embankment o:hasjhk renamed charring cross(embankment):jadjkdakj renamed: charring cross:kkhfh renamed chrring cross embankment: akhakdhk renamed embankment: adhkdhkadk closed: dhjdhi reopen: dfkjdfkj


Embankment / Charing Cross is going to be tricky to lay out clearly. I remember once explaining it all to a friend over a pint or six in a pub. Not a trivial affair... -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]

Hmmm Also there's more than those stations that have been renamed more than once. King Cross and St Pancras for one. I think just keep the orginal style for now. - fonzy

Another point about Charing Cross itself The Bakerloo line sattion was known as Trafalgar Square until they decided to build an interchange betwen both stations and renamed it Charing Cross.


==Heritage Line etc==

This section should be updated.

Several open air stations on the eastern section of the line have "GER" ([[Great Eastern Railways]]) worked into the top of the awning support pillars.
[[User:Jackiespeel|Jackiespeel]] 17:57, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

==Fake Buildings==

Sorry if this sounds foolish but I heard some while ago that a certain part of the london subway - not sure which line, may even be gone now - was made in such a way that they couldn't have real buildings up anymore so they built fakes to either side of the road. I don't know much more about this but if it's true can you give me the name? [[User:Chooserr|Chooserr]]

: You're probably thinking of 23/24 Leinster Gardens. See [http://www.starfury.demon.co.uk/uground/cutncover.html#leinster]. [[User:BillyH|Billy]][[User talk:BillyH|H]] 02:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

::Would love to, but it's a broken link.
:::Yep, the link's changed since then. It's now at [http://underground-history.co.uk/cutncover.php]. [[User:BillyH|Billy]][[User talk:BillyH|H]] 15:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

== History ==

hello

Could someone please cite sources for some of the recent changes to this article? The line, I would argue, hasn't had a 'chequered' history - it was successful certainly after the initial issues with loco vibration - its a very subjective view. Secondly, the running tunnel diameter isn't 'unusual' - almost every London tube line has this diameter. Thirdly - I have no evidence for problems with gauging issues on the initial line, and it certainly isn't menioned in any of the major reference histories for the line.

==Woodford to Hainault==

Does anyone know when the shuttle only operation of this route started and stopped? The articles here and on the stations currently suggest it began in the 1960s but the 1939 tube map shows Hainault as a planned back to back terminus (although Woodford is shown as a through junction). [[User:Timrollpickering|Timrollpickering]] 16:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Removed:
"Until the closure of the Epping-Ongar section, the terminus at Ongar was the furthest point from London on the network."

both Amersham and Chesham on the Metropolitan Line are further from central London <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/163.1.85.206|163.1.85.206]] ([[User talk:163.1.85.206|talk]]) 17:55, 23 March 2007</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP -->

Maybe you can add in like this:
"Until the closure of the Epping-Ongar section, the terminus at Ongar was the furthest point in the Essex from London on the network."
Thank you. [[User:Vincent60030|Vincent60030]] ([[User talk:Vincent60030|talk]]) 07:27, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

== Central line, not Line ==

Same goes for all the LUL lines, the "line" is officially small case. [[User:Sunil060902|Sunil060902]] 15:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

== Central Line RDT ==

Currently this is under construction. I have done between Epping and White City, although i have omitted the different side runnings. I think these should be included as well the unique junctions and features around White City. Obviously the rest of the line needs to be finshed as well. See [[Template:Central Line]]. [[User:Simply south|Simply south]] ([[User talk:Simply south|talk]]) 23:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

:Now complete. [[User:Simply south|Simply south]] ([[User talk:Simply south|talk]]) 14:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

::This is my suggestion. I hope you can change the symbols a little bit by making stations look step-free with appropriate symbols. Also, for interchange stations, you can add roundels next to it to represent to interchange with another line. Eg: Use a yellow roundel if the station has an interchange with the circle line. You can also make interchange stations have that symbol too.

::Thank you.[[User:Vincent60030|Vincent60030]] ([[User talk:Vincent60030|talk]]) 07:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

== [[Ealing Broadway]] branch ==

Can you alter the [[template]] to make it that [[West Ruislip]] is a branch???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Fila934|Fila934]] ([[User talk:Fila934|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Fila934|contribs]]) 08:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Don't worry and yes i can. I will as that was the original way historically. [[User:Simply south|Simply south]] ([[User talk:Simply south|talk]]) 10:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


How are the track diagrams made? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/128.243.253.217|128.243.253.217]] ([[User talk:128.243.253.217|talk]]) 19:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:For a start, see [[WP:RDT]]. [[User:Simply south|Simply south]] ([[User talk:Simply south|talk]]) 15:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

== Proposed Central Line Services ==
Based on reading up on things, i have made SIMPLE diagrams of what i forsee for services on the future Central Line and with the proprosed Chelsea-Hackney Line. '''Just simple ideas in my sandbox'''. Check it out please.[[User:Dkpintar|Dkpintar]] ([[User talk:Dkpintar|talk]]) 13:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

== Copyvio ==

How? All the article did was link to TfL's line guide. [[User:D-Notice|D-Notice]] ([[User talk:D-Notice|talk]]) 19:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


The artical in question was a straight copy of TfL's line guide, not just a link. It really should have been rewritten or paraphrased before being included on wiki; indeed it even included the marketing speel from TfL's site (which is dubious, subjective AND in wrong tense anyway!). When I read the artical it sounded vaguely familiar, so I did a google search for a string from it, and the TfL artical came up. Hope this helps! :) [[User:OutrageousBenedict|OutrageousBenedict]] ([[User talk:OutrageousBenedict|talk]]) 23:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

== Copyright problem removed ==

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). {{#if:http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/modesoftransport/tube/linefacts/?line=central|The material was copied from this URL: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/modesoftransport/tube/linefacts/?line=central.|}} Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, ''unless'' it is duly released under a license compatible with [[GFDL]]. (For more information, please see [[Wikipedia:COPYRIGHT#Using_copyrighted_work_from_others|"using copyrighted works from others"]] if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or [[Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials|"donating copyrighted materials"]] if you are.) For [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|legal reasons]], we cannot accept [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyrighted]] text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of ''information'', but not as a source of ''sentences'' or ''phrases''. Accordingly, the material ''may'' be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original ''or'' [[plagiarize]] from that source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. <!-- User:Moonriddengirl/cclean --> --<!--Signature-->[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 15:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

== Requested move ==

There is a proposal to move all the articles of the Transport of London tube lines, capitalizing the "L" of "line". Please see the centralized discussion at [[Talk:Victoria line#Requested move]]. <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><b><i>[[User:Ed Fitzgerald|Ed Fitzgerald]]</i> <sub>[[User talk:Ed Fitzgerald|t]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ed Fitzgerald|c]]</sub></b></span> 23:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
:Now closed. --[[User:DavidCane|DavidCane]] ([[User talk:DavidCane|talk]]) 22:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

==Station Co ordinates==
Do we really need a screen full of station co-ordinates when they are given where I feel they belong anyway, in the individual articles for the stations concerned? [[User:Britmax|Britmax]] ([[User talk:Britmax|talk]]) 22:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

== Photo/detail request ==

Is there any chance, please, of a photo and/or two (or a bit more text, though less good without a photo) to explain the 2011/12 Central line rolling stock upgrades? I've read our article and the TfL leaflet and it's not obvious to me what to look for and whether the differences are easily discernable. Thanks and best wishes [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 10:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

== Material included in the introduction ==

Paras 2, 3 and 4 of the present lead all relate to rather obscure and frankly trivial facts of the "Guinness Book of Records" type -- oldest rail alignment, shortest escalator, shallowest platforms. I rather feel these are second-order points that don't really belong in the lead. Can we move them further down the page? I think a more significant fact to include in the lead would be that the line opened between Shepherd's Bush and Bank in 1900, and was gradually extended later to points much further out -- i.e. a very short summary of the highly complex "History" section. One could maybe briefly mention the "Twopenny Tube" nickname and, what is perhaps a more significant claim to fame, the fact that it was the first deep-level tube under the West End. -- [[User:Alarics|Alarics]] ([[User talk:Alarics|talk]]) 08:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:I agree. I did some work on the article and have been distracted elsewhere. [[User:Edgepedia|Edgepedia]] ([[User talk:Edgepedia|talk]]) 09:49, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
:Also the last wooden escalator thing is a bit of a problem as its currently sourced to a blog post that's nearly five years old. [[User:Edgepedia|Edgepedia]] ([[User talk:Edgepedia|talk]]) 09:54, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Central line]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=678366938 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120803065342/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/Performance_Data_Store_P2_2012-13_Issued(1).xlsm to http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/Performance_Data_Store_P2_2012-13_Issued(1).xlsm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}

Cheers. —[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 23:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

== Requested move 21 February 2016 ==

{{requested move/dated|multiple=yes
|current1=Central line|new1=Central line (London Underground)|current2=Central line (disambiguation)|new2=Central Line|}}

* [[:Central line]] → {{no redirect|Central line (London Underground)}}
* [[:Central line (disambiguation)]] → {{no redirect|Central Line}}
– I'm really surprised that nobody has ever bothered to move this article to an unambiguous title. For as much as I know, "Central line" is just as, if not more, ambiguous as "[[Circle line]]"? Moreover, people outside of London will tend to think that "central line" would mean "[[central venous catheter]]" at first thought. [[User:Some Gadget Geek|&#60;&#60;&#60; SOME GADGET GEEK &#62;&#62;&#62;]] ([[User talk:Some Gadget Geek|talk]]) 01:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Strong support''' [[WP:ASTONISH]] This isn't the London Wikipedia, central lines are prominent in medicine. -- [[Special:Contributions/70.51.46.39|70.51.46.39]] ([[User talk:70.51.46.39|talk]]) 02:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Query''' - Are any of the other uses more notable than the London Underground line? Looking at [[Central line (disambiguation)]], the only one which pops out as potentially being more notable is the [[Central venous catheter]], and given that is on another page already we could just change the hatnote of this article. -''[[User:Mattbuck|mattbuck]]'' <small>([[User talk:Mattbuck|Talk]])</small> 11:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
::There's no such concept as "more notable" in deciding whether there's a primary topic. It would be hard to imagine an argument to make any of the topics primary here. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 01:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' – The present situation doesn't make much sense, and this is especially true if we are going to use lowercase "line" per [[WP:NCCAPS]]. The present title implies a generic category, as opposed to the specific London line, and there are "central lines" all over the place, in various fields. There is no reason to make navigation difficult in this way. [[User:RGloucester|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:12pt;color:#000000">RGloucester </span>]] — [[User talk:RGloucester|☎]] 20:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' as someone whose own city has a [[Central Link|central line]] (for now). '''[[User:SounderBruce|<span style="background:#5d9731; color:white; padding:2px;">Sounder</span>]][[User talk:SounderBruce|<span style="background:#1047AB; color:white; padding:2px;">Bruce</span>]]''' 22:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' –&nbsp;Clearly there's no primary topic here. However, I would not capitalize Line in the disambig page title. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 01:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support''' as common sense! <span style="font-family:Papyrus">[[User:Jeni|<font color="deeppink">Jeni</font>]]</span> <sup>([[User talk:Jeni|<font color="deeppink">talk</font>]])</sup> 01:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Partial support'''. OK for the London addition (Proposer seems to think that any ambiguous term should be 'clarified', but this is not the case here: Central L/line ''could'' be a primary topic (by [[WP:DAB]] standards). In that case, no DAB term would be needed. However, the London line does not convince as a primary topic, so indeed the DAB term should be added).
:wrt the capitalisation of Line/line? As is today, both [[Central Line]] and [[Central line]] are corvered in the [[Central line (disambiguation)]] page, which is OK per [[WP:DPAGE]]. With this, I think the DAB content should be in [[Central line]] (lowercase, as is today btw). Of course a redirect in the uppercase name page. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 08:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. No reason to think this is the primary topic. [[User:Egsan Bacon|Egsan Bacon]] ([[User talk:Egsan Bacon|talk]]) 13:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:23, 14 May 2024

Requested move 21 February 2016

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved: Clear consensus that the page be moved, with no objections to it. (non-admin closure) Class455fan1 (talk) 17:15, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

– I'm really surprised that nobody has ever bothered to move this article to an unambiguous title. For as much as I know, "Central line" is just as, if not more, ambiguous as "Circle line"? Moreover, people outside of London will tend to think that "central line" would mean "central venous catheter" at first thought. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 01:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's no such concept as "more notable" in deciding whether there's a primary topic. It would be hard to imagine an argument to make any of the topics primary here. Dicklyon (talk) 01:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – The present situation doesn't make much sense, and this is especially true if we are going to use lowercase "line" per WP:NCCAPS. The present title implies a generic category, as opposed to the specific London line, and there are "central lines" all over the place, in various fields. There is no reason to make navigation difficult in this way. RGloucester — ☎ 20:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as someone whose own city has a central line (for now). SounderBruce 22:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Clearly there's no primary topic here. However, I would not capitalize Line in the disambig page title. Dicklyon (talk) 01:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as common sense! Jeni (talk) 01:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partial support. OK for the London addition (Proposer seems to think that any ambiguous term should be 'clarified', but this is not the case here: Central L/line could be a primary topic (by WP:DAB standards). In that case, no DAB term would be needed. However, the London line does not convince as a primary topic, so indeed the DAB term should be added).
wrt the capitalisation of Line/line? As is today, both Central Line and Central line are corvered in the Central line (disambiguation) page, which is OK per WP:DPAGE. With this, I think the DAB content should be in Central line (lowercase, as is today btw). Of course a redirect in the uppercase name page. -DePiep (talk) 08:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Central line (London Underground). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Central line (London Underground). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History / chronology

[edit]

Should this not mention the Loughton - Ongar section first as this was built before the "core" central line? Crookesmoor (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Central line (London) redirect?

[edit]

Would anyone object to the creation of Central line (London) as a redirect to this article? Fork99 (talk) 21:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Murgatroyd49: Why what? Just as an FYI, Circle line (London) already redirects to Circle line (London Underground). Fork99 (talk) 08:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it something that is a likely search term? Most people will search for Central Line and come up with the dab page which will send them where they want to go. I would have thought Central Line (tube) or similar would have been a more likely term. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Central_line_(London_Underground)&oldid=1223776103"