Template talk:St Ives Bay Line

Formatting
I edited the diagram and left a comment "Formatting to match other local line diagrams". reverted this edit – taking out some ammendments as well as the formatting – with the comment: "Formatting to match major route diagram templates."

This is actually untrue. Many main lines use similar formatting, including Cornish Main Line, Reading to Plymouth Line, West of England Main Line, and other routes serving the south and west. While there are a few routes that do not follow the style, these seem to be those that only list stations in their diagram, and have not been expanded to include other infrastructure; there is even an example on the WP:TRAIL page that governs the use of these diagrams.

In my opinion, the diagrams that have been extended to include infrastrucure need to have distinctive and consistent formatting to help identify the different items shown. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I have been working on the Scottish lines, aas part of WP:TIS - historic and current over the past two years (dabbling a little in the West Country diagrams). The open Scottish Routes with the exception of the Paisley Canal Line are relatively simple. However the Historic Lines contain more detail, this includes the Paisley Canal line as at the time is was felt at the time that one article could cover both current and historical. The relative articles are being cross referenced against each other so that features can be picked up. There is still some way to go on the historical articles, however the Highland Railway constituents have been completed.


 * I would suggest that the St Ives Bay Line probably fits into the Paisley Canal Line format, however I would agree with Geof Sheppard that consistency is required. --Stewart (talk)  13:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)