Template talk:Crossrail 2

Revisions
This template is now CORRECT. Please Please don't revert the errors back into it calling them "dross".  BRIANTIST  (talk) 14:37, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

If you don't want the trains per hour listed then please explain why they are not needed and remove them alone, the reversion deleted other corrections. As per how we do things here.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Again, please don't revert the corrections without reason.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 17:27, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

It seems that User:Useddenim didn't like the use of ↓ to denote a ditto. Replaced with repeated values  BRIANTIST  (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Please don't introduce erros into the Crossrail 2 map (Template:Crossrail). Thanks. If you want to remove "dross" please EXPLAIN why it is on the talk page for the template, as per the rules.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 14:46, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I believe the correct spelling is ‘erroRs’ (unless you meant ‘arrows’); but be specific about what you meant. A simple diff will show what was changed, and—as noted in the edit summary—most of what you added properly belongs in article text. And when you finally figure out how to use BSicons correctly, then maybe you can lecture me about ‘the rules’. Useddenim (talk) 16:06, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Please talk first and revert later.  I've been using BSicons correctly for many years, it seems to me that you're the one in error here!   Please don't take out the corrected line order for the top stations and the corrections to the station order on the optional sections.   There's actually a whole column in the BSicons template for timings, why are you removing the data?   BRIANTIST   (talk) 17:32, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Besides the items highlighted in your version of the diagram, to the right, there are the other issues that I have corrected, such as adding rws and rail-interchange templates to increase legibility and simplify editing. As far as the track geometry issue (is the West Anglia Main Line to the left or the right of Crosssrail 2?); well, based on the poor quality of your other edits, I decided to revert that to the previous configuration, as well. Useddenim (talk) 18:36, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I personally prefer the old version by Useddenim, however I think that 's side of the WAML is probably correct (the consultation documents weren't clear about it). But there are a few minor changes needed - most stations, especially south London, need to be HSTs not BHF; the WAML probably should be by CONTr so it doesn't look like it's pointing at the end of the ECML branch, also New Southgate needs the HUB stuff as it will be a single station, and thus also needs ECML arrows. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Starting a discussion one place (my talk page) but continuing it elsewhere is (at best) disingenuous, and in poor form. And in neither place did you actually explain what the alleged errors were. Useddenim (talk) 20:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)