Talk:Clapham High Street railway station

Untitled
Shouldn't we add that the station will also be included on the Northern Line of the underground? TfL's website says it will:  --Maurice45 (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

It's just that Clapham High Street is right next door to Clapham North on the Northern Line. Maybe there's a plan to improve interchange between the two that I am not aware of but Clapham High Street won't "be included on the Northern Line". 217.43.82.73 (talk) 01:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite needed
The only item in History is about a different station. There is no who/when about its building. The old map shows it as Clapham Road. By Course there were two Clapham stations, LBSC and the adjoining LCDR which was open 1862-1916.--SilasW (talk) 21:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Colours
A great cottage industry is blobbing and splashing around "wrong" and "correct" colours at every mention of a railway service, which pretty though it may make the page (or not) and may give satisfaction to the painters, in no way improves the ease of reading the subsequently disjointed article and conveys no further information since nowhere in each article is the significance of the colours explained (as it should be if they are used and as it should not be if the articles are to be reasonably confined to important details.) At the worst we have articles beginning "The Eastern line is an LU line coloured skybluepink on ....". As with most trivial platform "Layout"s a whole purge might be desirable.--SilasW (talk) 10:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I explained why I carried out concisely in its edit summary, and in fuller fashion here. Basically: if TfL have an officially-approved orange for the route in question, why were we sometimes using that, and sometimes using another shade? I just wanted to achieve consistency.
 * I don't think I have made this article any less readable, whether you be reading the page text or the wikicode. Indeed, I believe that the wikicode is now more readable, since it now uses  instead of   - the editor gets the idea that a colour is involved (and might also get the idea that LOG = London OverGround), rather than what (to a non-geek) appears to be a random collection of letters and digits. I've worked with RGB hex triplets for years, but I don't assume that everybody else knows what they mean.
 * I certainly haven't made the article any more disjointed than it already was. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Southeastern service
The article shows a service at this station on the Victoria-Bromley line, but thus service no longer exists. --Redaktor (talk) 09:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Feb 2017 - still running, one train a day in each direction early morning Monday to Friday.--MBRZ48 (talk) 23:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Disused Railways
This seems to refer to an adjacent closed station on a route which is still in use thus erroneous and proper for removal.--MBRZ48 (talk) 23:49, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, although one of the stations (East Brixton) is closed, the line in both directions is open for passenger service, so we describe it as "historical" not "disused". -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Clapham High Street railway station. 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:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130423190827/http://urbandesign.tfl.gov.uk/Heritage-Library/LondonRail-(1)/Overground/ClaphamHighStreet.aspx to http://urbandesign.tfl.gov.uk/Heritage-Library/LondonRail-%281%29/Overground/ClaphamHighStreet.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728150730/http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/document/3704/get to http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/document/3704/get

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:58, 8 August 2017 (UTC)