User talk:Scriber en

Warning
Please stop avoiding discussion and moving article before you familiarize with our wp:naming convention policy. Your so-called "network" is how we acknowledge the Kowloon-Canton Railway today, so the disambiguation qualifier, "network", is not required in the article title. The "line" qualifier is just bad to disambiguate from the modern network, it's the historical part of the modern network, the year, 1906–1949, to indicate its existing period is the common practice in Wikipedia. If you move both articles without discussion again, I will report you at Administrators' noticeboard for your disruptive move. It has already been proven wrong in German, French and other Wikipedia, please don't make the same mistake again. Thx. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:54, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

My bad, the existing cross-border line already has its own article before your intervention. If you didn't intended to merely write the historical line, I see no reason to fork another article, so I merged yours into its modern counterpart. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 23:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Your existing cross-border line means passenger line "Guangdong Through Train" (i.e. trains passing along the nowadays Canton-Kowloon Railway & Guangshen Railway). But, I mean railroad section (physical rails line between Canton & Kowloon), named such a way before 1949, cause it really exist now (as not only me declare so - see commons:File:Guangzhou Shenzhen Hongkong Express Rail Link en.svg). And it doesn't worth mix modern pasenger service and 100-year railroad section. Scriber en (talk) 04:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * It no longer exists since its split in 1949. The map is wrong for that legend part. Stop quoting that map again. Its physical form was largely reworked. If the history of an entity is not big enough, it deserves to be merged into the history section of other article like Chinese version of Guangdong Through Train does now. See Content forking. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)