Talk:Northern line - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Turini2 (talk | contribs) at 11:55, 10 June 2022 (→Requested move 9 June 2022: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:55, 10 June 2022 by Turini2 (talk | contribs) (→Requested move 9 June 2022: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

London Transport B‑class High‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: in UK B‑class Mid‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Misplaced Pages. 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

This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as High-importance).

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Northern Line map.

Archives

Battersea / Nine Elms

As of 20 september some parts of this article need rewriting to reflect changes brought about by the opening of Battersea & Nine Elms stations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.194.119.250 (talk) 11:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Has Bank Station Moved?

Angel is listed as a moved station. The station didn't move but one platform did. Originally it comprised a very large tunnel containing a skinny island platform with tracks on either side. A new tunnel was dug for the northbound line with a new platform and the southbound platform was widened by filling in the old northbound track. A similar exercise was performed at Euston to give cross-platform access to the Victoria line in 1968. Bank originally had two separate platforms that were very close together. The Northbound track was moved (that is a new tunnel was built) and the original tunnel converted into a concourse between the two platforms. Does this qualify as a moved station. If not then what about Angel. Should that remain a moved station? OrewaTel (talk) 07:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

@OrewaTel: The word "moved" does not occur in the article. Where are you seeing it? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

The section actually says, Resited Stations. It's a sub-section of Northern line#Stations. OrewaTel (talk) 11:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @OrewaTel:, I've removed it for the moment as per your comment.

If anyone disagrees feel free to reason here. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 12:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Note that I didn't say that Angel doesn't qualify. I simply asked the question. If Angel is removed then this calls into question the Euston (City Branch) entry. That station was moved in 1924 to be near to Euston (Charring Cross) Branch but the entry only mentions the re-routing of the northbound platform when the Victoria Line was built in 1967. As it stands this section is a mess. So I ask again. Does moving a single platform qualify as resiting the station? OrewaTel (talk) 13:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @OrewaTel:, personally I would say the whole station needs to be resited to count - i.e., the station itself should move (and thus one platform would be expansion, rather than resiting). Just my personal opinion... Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 13:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

There are two ways that an underground station can be resited. The surface entrance may be moved to an entirely different location, serving the original platforms, as with Chancery Lane; or new platforms may be constructed at a different position. Sometimes both happen, as with King's Cross (Metropolitan) or Aldgate East. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 9 June 2022

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

– Name is too ambiguous. Note that the specific method of disambiguation is already in use in Central line (London Underground) and Circle line (London Underground). Animal lover |666| 16:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Pinging the users who participated in the Central line discussion and have at leadt one edit in the past month: @BrownHairedGirl, DePiep, Egsan Bacon, Mattbuck, Oknazevad, and RGloucester: Animal lover |666| 16:50, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Support per nom. Highly ambiguous. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:57, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Support. There's another in the UK, and at least one more elsewhere in the world. Bazza (talk) 17:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

But that doesn't mean there isn't a primary topic. For example, the busiest station on the Merseyrail line, Liverpool Central, served around 18 million annual passengers in 2010, while the busiest station on the LU line, Waterloo, served over 100 million in 2016. Ritchie333 17:21, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Leaning oppose per precedent in Bakerloo line, District line, Hammersmith and City line, Victoria line and Waterloo and City line - unless evidence is provided showing that the London Underground version is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC against, say Northern Line (Sydney) or Northern Line (Thailand). Central line (London Underground) is disambiguated to avoid confusing with Central line (geometry) and Central line (medicine). Simply saying "highly ambiguous" is unhelpful without examples. Ritchie333 17:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Before we even ask about PRIMARYTOPIC, the first question is if it's ambiguous at all (the presence of a hatnote being a test for this). Using the hatnote test, Hammersmith&City and Waterloo&City have no hatnotes; Bakerloo has for the word "Bakerloo", but none of the other meanings could possibly be called Bakerloo line. Victoria has for Victoria lines, but not the singular. District has for "border", which would be unlikely to be called a district line, and an album. Northern actually has other lines which some reader may actually consider at least as PRIMARY, unlike the others. Animal lover |666| 17:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean. Of course there are other railway lines called Northern line, and also a boy band. Hence my comment that I would like to evaluate whether this article is overwhelmingly what people expect to find here (in which case I would oppose the move) or whether another one is reasonably likely too (in which case I would support). Ritchie333 17:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I'd also argue that Northern line meets the Misplaced Pages:COMMONNAME points - especially that my quick attempts at pan-global Google searches using a VPN have it consistently as the top result! Turini2 (talk) 11:55, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Support. This name is just too vague and ambiguous to be used as a primary topic, regardless of views. Adding a disambiguation helps readers clearly identify what article they are on, without them needing to read anything, and helps editors avoid linking to an incorrect page. As the dab page shows there are at least 7 other lines with the same name and others with similar names. Gonnym (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

That does not address the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC concerns I have mentioned multiple times. If you are trying to look for the boy band, or the Merseyrail line, and end up with the LU one, will you be that surprised? Ritchie333 19:15, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Oppose - As per the last 30 days of views for Northern line articles, and Misplaced Pages:PRIMARYTOPIC.

Northern line has at 16x as many views as the most popular other article ("A topic is primary for a term with respect to usage if it is highly likely - much more likely than any other topic"), and adding all the views up gets you to around 2,800 - around 5x less than the Northern line article ("A topic is primary for a term with respect to usage if it is highly likely - more likely than all the other topics combined"). I would therefore argue that the Northern line article meets both points of Primary Topic with flying colours, and therefore I oppose this move.

Northern line (14,856), Northern Line (group) (227), Linha do Norte (207), Northern Line (Sydney) (881), Northern line (Sri Lanka) (308), Northern Line (Thailand) (555), Northern Line (İZBAN) (43), Northern Line (Cape Town) (57), Northern line (Merseyrail) (587) Turini2 (talk) 18:51, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Support per nom.Sheehanpg93 (talk) 19:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Support per nom. I don't find the page view stats to be so overwhelming to make this a clear primary topic. oknazevad (talk) 23:22, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
You don't find sixteen times to be overwhelming? Words fail me. Ritchie333 09:17, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Support per nom. As there are various other Northern lines, being specific is surely an advance. Oculi (talk) 00:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Support per nom. XtraJovial (talk) 01:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose what do you mean when you say 'Northern Line' with no distinguishing adjective? The bare words 'Northern Line' always mean London Underground. To say there is the Sydney Northern Line, the Sri Lankan Northern Line or the Boy Band called Northern Line is irrelevant. OrewaTel (talk) 05:35, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Based on the votes currently present, it would appear that this opinion is specifically a UK-bias. Ritchie has user boxes about having promoted England-related topics, Turini lists articles he created and 11 out of 17 are England-related, and Orewa, according to his own talk page, "originally came from England" (and currently lives in New Zealand, which has no entries listed at Northern line (disambiguation)). Animal lover |666| 11:11, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Firstly, let's keep the points to factual points about the policy. (such as Misplaced Pages:CRITERIA). Secondly, please don't prejudge other people's reasoning for their votes. I would happily be supportive of this move if the readership numbers for other articles were in the opposite direction - my reasoning is categorically not a UK centric bias. I would therefore politely request that you retract (or at least caveat) your statement. Turini2 (talk) 11:47, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Support per nom. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 10:57, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Categories: