Talk:Lansdowne station (SkyTrain)

Trains: Stations Low‑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 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

Low

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.

This article lacks references.

Canada: British Columbia / Vancouver Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Vancouver (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

Is there a source for moving and renaming Alderbridge Station to Lansdowne? The Henry Man added this info to the article within the last few hours, but I cannot see any press release regarding this decision on TransLink's, the City of Richmond's, or the Canada Line websites. -Sewing - talk 01:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't found a press release, or any such reference, but there is a graphic on Richmond's RAV update site that has Lansdowne instead of Alderbridge, so I guess it's official. --Ckatz 18:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there enough info to make sections necessary?[edit]

Several of the stations have sections of only a single sentence. The Table of Contents is practically longer than some of the station articles -- and with the ToC one must scroll to read the article. I am suggesting more than just hiding the ToC. The only section needed that I can see in most cases is the references section --JimWae (talk) 03:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]