User talk:Simply south/August 2007 to January 2008 archive

Groundwork Trust
Well, I don't know. Perhaps start with "Groundwork Trust is a Welsh non-profit organization" or something similar, and then describe what it does. (The original article was a perfect example how not to do it, because it was a blatant promotional - probably a copied mission statement and similar material from the organization's pages. See our policy of neutrality.) Regards, Mike Rosoft 18:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

3-way junction
I've had a first bash at creating a three-way station - see commons:Image:BSicon BHFABZld.svg. It looks ok at large size, but could do with improving when scaled down: see example to right. – Tivedshambo (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I've been thinking about this - each side of a triangle can be open with open line with open platform, open line with closed platform, or closed line (consider Ambergate for example, which has all three). Each triangle can be in one of four orientations, and the whole set can be red/pink or blue/light blue. This gives 3x3x3x4x2=216 combinations. Apart from the length of time it'll take me to produce them all, how should we name them? – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Herts WikiProject
No problem, I was going to ask you about the template but I noticed you were on a Wikibreak, so I requested it on the WP:RT instead. If you're happy to do it then I'll remove the request. Many thanks! PeterSymonds 06:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject UK Waterways
Assessment works ...

Have fun ... -- Prove It (talk) 02:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Historical waterways
Thanks for the welcoming comments on my user page. I am a little unsure what to do about historical waterways. So the River Don Navigation was really only an entity in its own right from inception until 1895. After that it was part of the Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation. So if I want to add details about the upgrading to Eurobarge standards, should that go on the S&SYN page, rather than the RDN page? Similarly with the request for pictures. There are no pictures of it in RDN days, so is a current picture acceptable? Bob1960evens 19:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

River Thames Template
As far as I know, they're ordered. I took them from the main Thames article. Feel free to arrange them if any are out of place. Asdfasdf1231234 09:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't really know. I have limited knowledge of the Thames. So everything will be in the order the contributors listed them in the article, i.e. River_Thames, River_Thames and so onAsdfasdf1231234 15:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Pennine Waterways links
There is a discussion about the appropriateness or otherwise of some links that have been added to a number of pages, and subsequently removed. As you are a member of the project, you may wish to comment at

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Waterways —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayalld (talk • contribs) 14:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Borken template
Ooops. So it does. Working on fix now; thanks for the heads up! &mdash; Coren (talk) 19:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I see only move and moveoptions. They have some odd deep transclusion that I'm sorting out right now.  Have you seen others?


 * Found the boo-boo. The use of &amp;#123; to trick the rendering engine into not transcluding was the culprit.  Fixed by using actual   tags.  Thanks for the quick notice.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 19:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Part of the Wikipedia:Template standardisation effort. At this time, only article space templates are being edited, although I wouldn't be surprised if project space followed suit, then talk space.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

MOTD
Hey, I noticed you fixed a typo over at Motto of the day/Nominations/In review (thanks!), but in future just so you know, you don't need to make an "edit 1" subsection under a motto if you're correcting a typo - just go straight ahead and change it! Subsections are only really necessary if you're making any significant changes like changing the phrase or the links. Thanks! •97198  talk  11:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

General Mergers
I am not understanding the mergers and the reasoning of these

Supermini car --> Subcompact car --> Small family car --> Compact car --> Small family car

Simply south 20:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. Now corrected.

Supermini car --> <-- Subcompact car

Small family car --> <-- Compact car

SilkTork  *** SilkyTalk  16:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Template renaming
Previously the ICEC template was used on both the NXEC and the GNER pages. In summary, I created a new template for the GNER services, and renamed the ICEC template to NXEC. I did this so that the NEXC template could display the future London - Lincoln service without it appearing on the GNER page, as GNER won't be operating the service. --Jorvik 19:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Blue Peter pets categories
There's no need to add categories such as Category:Famous tortoises or Category:1986 animal births. These can be added to the redirect pages. --Philip Stevens 16:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Tower Subway
I acknowledge that there are some arguments that could be made for the Tower Subway as the first deep tube railway. It certainly was the first deep level tube tunnel, as indicated in the City & South London Railway article, but with regard to it being the first deep tube railway, I think that it falls down on the fact that it was it was cable hauled, had only one carriage and only covered a short distance. Christian Wolmar's assessment in his book "The Subterranean Railway", from which the citation is taken, is the following on page 4 (my emphasis):
 * London, in fact, pioneered two different types of underground railway, both of which were unique world firsts - those built using the 'cut and cover' method like the Metropolitan (now known prosaically as the sub-surface lines) and deep tube lines drilled out of the London clay deep below the surface in order to avoid the clutter of drains, sewers and utilities which had already built up in Victorian times. There is even less recognition of this colossal achievement. The first of these deep lines, the City & South London, ran between a now defunct station, King William Street (near the present Monument) and Stockwell and was completed in 1890.

See also the, somewhat disparaging, third paragraph in the Tower Subway article. --DavidCane 13:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Battersea Power Station
Because it is a proper noun. Cheers! Reginmund 22:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

DLR spoken version
Hi Simply south. I'm having a few problems with my microphone settings at the moment, but I'll try to do something with this later this month. I'll keep you posted. Hassocks5489 17:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Should i delve into that?
If you like. I'm going on TRP's assertion that the group is known as the "London station group" - but that is within the railway industry, where use of the word "railway" is probably superfluous. I'll raise it on the talk page & see if more concerns arise. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Small stations on the East Costway
Can I ask if you have seen the discussion that has started on the templates talk page, not withstanding the rational I gave there for keeping larger icons, what is a minor / small station, for example Moulseecoomb is a 'small' station physically but has a large catchment area (I'm not sure but I think all trains stop there)? (SouthernElectric 12:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC))


 * I think we should apply some nous. Stations like Brighton, Lewes, Eastbourne, Newhaven are clearly major stations and the map should differentiate between them and places like Moulescoumb, Cooden Beach etc. I think it requires a little commonsense.  But I will say that having all stations the same size (large or small icon) is not to my taste, and I would expect the majority of editors to concur. Canterberry 12:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I would not call Newhaven a major station, no these days, and on that score how do we rate Polgate - these days it's a minor station but historically is probably more important than Eastbourne... (SouthernElectric 12:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC))
 * I suppose what I'm trying to work out is how we decide what deserves a large or small icon, should it be present day service or it's on historical status? (SouthernElectric 12:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Reply from "Simply South" left on my talk page;


 * I'm not really sure. I'm mainly present day. Simply south 12:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The way I see all this, and I might well be way off the mark here, is that the railway line articles are a historic encyclopedia of the line that cross-refers to the station articles that are more a encyclopedia of locality (service/access) information etc. or very detailed history of the station that isn't covered elsewhere (an example of this would be the rebuilding of Chichester station) The route diagram serves both the line user and the historian. (SouthernElectric 13:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)) - altered at (14:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC))

See also my reply on Southern Electric's page. Simply south 12:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit query
I'm just curious now. How did you become the Wikipedian with the most edits? Simply south 22:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well various projects, tagging all the U.S. county maps GFDL was about 3-4000 edits, manually fixing half the album articles was thousands, testing out and refining SmackBot's fixes for the Rambot generated article was also thousands. Mainly lots of copy-editing to bring stuff in line with the WP:MoS. There's quite a bit of anti-vandal work there too. Rich Farmbrough, 08:00 15 October 2007 (GMT).

Canterberry & others
As one of the more active UK railway-related editors, just wanted to make you aware of this discussion at WP:AN. Canterberry has been indefblocked for abusive sockpuppetry (personally, I think possibly a little harsh, given that the worse-offending Lucy-marie was only blocked for 72 hours), so there may be fallout on assorted railway-related pages & templates. —  iride  scent  00:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Grove Park
Oh yes, near Chiswick station... sorry, that didn't occur to me when I saw that. Go ahead and move at will. - Zeibura (Talk) 18:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment desired
Your input would be very much appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 17:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

dyknow that
Hi - I'm worried that you are put off by our help at DYK. Don't be. I have nominated your article. Its currently too short at 1345 characters ... it needs to be at least 1500 characters. Some image would be good but they must be copyright free. You have two days!! Good luck. Ask if you need more help Victuallers 19:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * ...that Clyde Fastlink is a planned $42m dedicated bus service which is a pre-requisite of Glasgow's proposed light rail system? by Simply south nom by Victuallers 19:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * ...that I like in-jokes and that Ive never actually tried to go "to the line" and I know the rule is 5 days old and around then they'll check it and hopefully not reject it? -- Victuallers (talk) 20:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Well done. Our only issue is that its speculative... but I think youll make it! Victuallers (talk) 10:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean? brilliant - you have made it to DYK.... everything can be changed ... even now... have a go if you like... others should have changed it by tomorrow Victuallers (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Liverpool city centre stations
Hi, I just noticed that a template you created, Template:Liverpool city centre stations, is unused and appears to be abandoned. I've marked it as deprecated, meaning it'll be deleted in two weeks' time if nobody objects. If there's a reason to keep it please leave a note at Wikipedia talk:Deprecated and orphaned templates and feel free to remove the deprecated tag from the template. Thanks. Bryan Derksen (talk) 09:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:BUS
It seems to have become inactive. --NE2 14:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

St Neot/St Neots/Saint Neot
Of course moves can take place, actually it's a good idea to have a dab page for St Neot. I put the edit summary on more for the information of other editors - I certainly didn't mean any criticism. I think I've dabbed the links correctly, but do please let me know if I've got any wrong. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 19:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thinking about it more, it did seem a little terse of me to use that edit summary - so please accept my apologies. I've left a note at the Cornwall wikiproject to let other editors know about the move - which is probably what I should have done in the first place instead of using that summary. DuncanHill (talk) 19:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I had a slight advantage there - I recently created the template which links to the Cornish village, and so could remember pretty well which articles had template links! DuncanHill (talk) 20:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

London Overground
Check London Overground and you'll see that it is part of TfL, not national rail. There are some sections of shared line (as there are with the District line) but as with the latter we should consider their actual use. --AlisonW (talk) 16:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh indeed yes ;-P in fact I've found playing with the spoor program to result in hours of endless 'fun' lol --AlisonW (talk) 17:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I have been doing this for some time ;-P The London Overground lines are clearly now a 'Metro' service, and marketed / promoted as such. --AlisonW (talk) 17:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Then doesn't that confirm my view; London Overground is certainly a suburban (mostly in zone 2-3)\commuter service. --AlisonW (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

ps. Wikipedia_talk:Route_diagram_template re the East London line alignment problem. --AlisonW (talk) 17:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you! for finding OVERGROUND ROUNDEL.PNG ... I was looking for a better option but hadn't seen that one (trying to find an .svg) --AlisonW (talk) 17:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I quite like it with the lines as it relates it to the map, but yes, for accuracy it should probably just be the plain (orange) roundel. Given that there is a statement on the LU one justifying its usage as a simple geometric combination then I would see no difference in the creation and using of an LO one alongside it. --AlisonW (talk) 17:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it's there now...
I did a touch/revert and that finally flushed it. -- Prove It (talk) 01:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry I haven't a clue
Yes - I realized afterwards that it had already been made. Thanks Cooke (talk) 08:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Editor Review
I have given a brief review after quite a long dig through your contribs. Let me know your thoughts! Pedro : Chat  09:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Merger
Thats fine. I think the Penwith project has served its purpose now - it was always my intention to merge them at some point, but I've been rather busy the last few months. Good luck Mammal4 (talk) 16:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Closure of Gorbals
Well spotted! The 1928 date is the correct one, the 1962 date is a copy and paste error on my part (probably came from Strathbungo railway station). I've fixed it now, only a year after the article was created! --Dreamer84 (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Notification to Bryan Derker
Thank you for letting me know about what happened to Bryan Derker's talk page. I looked at the diffs after you left the note about the accident on my talk page; it appears, that TW didn't place the SD notice on the user's talk page, but instead removed half of the page. I can't explain why that happened. I will post an apology on the user's talk page. Regards  User  Doe ☻T☼C 21:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page; glad I could return the favor. Silly vandals...-- Kubigula (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Template Help
I've done a page for the Headcorn & Maidstone Junction Light Railway and had a go at a template for the line, but it hasn't worked. I wondered if you could apply your expertise to it? Thanks in advance. Mjroots 15:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for help, have managed to do further work on it and bashed it into shape. Have had to request a couple of new symbols though. Mjroots 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

As new symbols were refused by the powers that be, I rejigged the template to show the unbuilt portion in blue. I think I'm getting the hang of it now, have created a template for the Chemin de Fer de la Baie de Somme, Have a look, comments appreciated. Mjroots (talk) 16:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Penwith Wikiproject & Cornwall Wikiproject
Hi, just to let you know I have messaged all the participants of both the projects about the proposed merger, hopefully this will generate some movement and consensus. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 12:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll certainly do all I can to assist. I think one thing we shall certainly need to set up is auto-archiving of talk-page on the Wikiproject - the current one at Cornwall WP is overlong, and we get the problem of old threads being re-opened, when it would probably be easier if new threads were made, which coul dthen (if appropriate) include a link back to the archive. DuncanHill (talk) 15:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Date correction
Thanks for that date correction. My mind must be mentally in 2008 already! :-) Frankie Roberto (talk) 12:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Moving Telescope
Good so far. I'd like to see it on the trackbed but can't work out how to do it wothout gaps, so this is good. The Sub Brit site has a picture showing its position relative to Lord's Bridge station in the reference to that station. One of the pictures is an almost eerie counterpoint between the derelict station and the (literally) space age telescope. Britmax (talk) 14:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Personally I can see why you've kept it blue, as red it looks lika a heritage line or something. I'd keep it as it is and watch for developments in the Catalogue of Pictograms, to move it over when it can be done with no gaps. Britmax (talk) 15:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

You seem to uderstand this better than I do but there are several requests for new icons on the Catalog of Pictograms discussion page. Would that help? Britmax (talk) 15:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

varsity line template
I see you already have (implemented it). It's a bit wide though - on my screen (1024x768) it underlaps the drawing. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I've put the Hitchen line in as closely as the diagrams will allow. Any thoughts? Britmax (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Your version looked just like the revision I'd put on the template, except for the link south of the junction. So I've added that. Let me know what you think. Britmax (talk) 17:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Note re added curve and tweaks on my talk page Britmax (talk) 19:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Use the version you're happy with but keep the old one in case you back up the link with sources. Good Night! Britmax (talk) 22:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Interested?
Hi Simply South,

I just wondered if you'd be interested in giving us a hand over at Train Spotting World? Several WP users now help over there, and I wondered if you'd be interested. The main tasks at the moment are getting our Workforces online and their respective Portals, aswell as an assessment scheme and other things.

Please let me know if your interested!

 Bluegoblin  7   18:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

PS User:Tbo 157 said you might be interested!

Trains...
Hi Simply South,

Thought you might be interested in this: Over at Trains, were about to launch Workforce:Uk Railways and start Workforce:London Transport, and I wondered if you'd be interested.

Also, we are making a big push at the moment on new articles, not from WP - can you help?

Finally, if you would like to put something online that's relevant to a WP article but not allowed, add it at TSW, and link to it - we allow Maps, Videos, Spotting Reports, Rosters, and any other railway miscelany.

Thanks,

 Bluegoblin  7   18:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of London Buses route 688
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on London Buses route 688, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because London Buses route 688 is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting London Buses route 688, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Quick bot query
Was Gurch Bot 2 a trial bot? I don't think there is any standard for archives. Simply south (talk) 13:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There isn't a written standard, no. So what? I decided to move pages to conform to the most common pattern, and was given approval to do so. If everything we did had to have consensus and be codified in written guidelines, nothing would ever get done. Unfortunately since then more archives have been created following different patterns, but at least most of them follow that pattern now. The naming pattern is specified in Help:Archiving a talk page, largely because I put it there, which is about the only place that anything about archiving is written down. Why is it a good idea? Because it makes it easier to find things, stops mishaps like someone creating /archive1 and not linking it from the main discussion page so the next person comes along and creates /Archive 1, and just because consistency is good and should be encouraged wherever possible. Nobody's forcing users to archive their own discussion pages in this way, or indeed at all. If you have a better suggestion for how they should be named, feel free to rewrite the help page and ask for bot approval to move them all somewhere else. It's a wiki – Gurch 15:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

New Street
I was put off from reading the discussions because they are VERY long!

However, the main problem is that Wiki policy is Wiki policy. Why should New Street be any different? Ok, that photo says that it should be called "Birmingham New Street Station," but there are signs at many UK rail stations which do not feature "railway" in them. This proves that the argument over the photo is irrelevant. Ok, people do not call it B N S railway station, but that is the convention. I do not like inconsistencies. Surly redirects can prevent confusion! Dewarw (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Jordans
This is not undisputed. Thanks, SqueakBox 03:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * comment moved to talk page MickMacNee (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I have added a disambig template to the article. I hope this is sufficient but have also argued my case at WP:RM. Thanks, SqueakBox 15:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Highland Railway
I think we now have a complete set of articles for the Highland Railway. Some are still stub articles, but this is a milestone completed. This evening I have trawled through all the articles and templates. One thing I started doing recently is adding sources to the templates.

My working table of lines that became part of the Highland Railway will help.

There are also other associated lines (worked by the Highland Railway). This second table also includes the Cromarty and Dingwall Light Railway for completeness.

I have also adjusted the Template:Historical Scottish railway companies to reflect the worked by companies.

Your review of this would be much appreciated.

The CR, G&SWR and NBR will take quite a bit longer to reach the same state. I will see if I can make major inroads into the GNoSR lines over the remainder of the holiday period.

--Stewart (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not really sure what to give as a review. Here is a starter. It would be good if the History sections in many were not just given as chrnological lists and there was more text and expanBold textsion on these points. It may be good to also reference the books in the text as well as giving them at the end. Also, don't just use Railscot as a source, use others as well. Maybe on the lines talk about current and future uses, if any.


 * It looks good that you've compiled all\most of the branches.


 * I wish i knew more on Scottish rail history! Simply south (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this - now the stub articles are in place I hope this will act as a catalyst (not just for myself, but others) to improve the articles (especially the history sections). One thing I have found is that RAILSCOT is not 100% accurate; however Jowett does have its own errors with junctions / lines not always shown.


 * Any help you can provide will be very helpful --Stewart (talk) 18:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Elevated rails and embankments
On the DLR pages, I argued that "elevated" should be used where it was possible to 'walk underneath' the metals, which would include having roads or buildings under the track but not a standard embankment as that is really just 'ground level pushed up a bit'. There are clearly multiple opinions out there though ;-P --AlisonW (talk) 20:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I'd wondered if it was my change on that section that prompted your question. sfaiaa (from visual inspection) that whole section is bridge-like in that roads go under it and there are work units there, as opposed to ground being pushed up into a standard sloping-side embankment. --AlisonW (talk) 20:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * that's interesting; I'm sure we used to have a list of internet slang on WP. (sfaiaa anyway. To my knowledge, all the former stations on the route to Broad Street are elevated (on a manually-constructed series of continuous bridges) and that it being re-used as far as the crossing over to the former Bishopsgate yards (which meet my definition of embankment as the goods yard is mostly just earth). --AlisonW (talk) 21:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * yes, from Dalston it is mostly in cuttings. When to signify 'raised' and 'lowered' is always a matter of judgement of when it is actually relevant and when it is inconsequential (indeed, we don't currently deal much with cuttings, even where important). Arguably, St Pancras station should be treated as 'elevated' as it clearly always has been, as are Fenchurch Street and Blackfriars, but sometimes it gets too detailed! --AlisonW (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it is clear that the ELR section based on the old route (ie as far as alongside Bishopsgate) will be elevated as the old route was and it has to get across the main road, but exactly where it goes then - recalling all the fus about knocking down some very old railway arches - I have no idea yet! --AlisonW (talk) 23:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

London
It usual for that to happen when archiving a talk page. See: Help:Archiving a talk page. Happy New Year! MRSC • Talk 12:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * If nothing further is added to the current two conversations within the next few days, they can be moved over to Talk:London/Archive 7 to be reunited with their edit histories. But to be honest it doesn't really matter either way and isn't anything to worry about. MRSC • Talk 14:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Mudchute
I noticed you've removed the line into the old Mudchute that I created the icons for! If you check on the ground (or Google Earth, which is easier) you'll see the old line still exists as a reversing spur but with no platforms, hence my changes. --AlisonW (talk) 18:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that had been my alternate option to, except that the line remaining actually reaches the location of the former station (it is just over the wall behind the platform!) rather than stopping short, hence my replacement icon showing it reaching an unused station. Maybe easiest to just omit the stub altogether? --AlisonW (talk) 19:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Small thing ... (rfa)
... and a Happy New Year to you. That really is no small thing. My feeling is that I have no ambition to acquire the tools, but on the other hand I have a responsibility to contribute to the work. I would say pls go ahead, and if I get a moment, I'll have a look at the training forums. Cheers and thanks for the thought. Kbthompson (talk) 11:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I formally accept your nomination. Kbthompson (talk) 12:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's another small thing, you're making a wrong assumption about my gender! Must be the pic! Cheers. Kbthompson (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I'm still awaiting the curmudgeons! If the critics don't arrive soon, I'll not be able to get out of the door ... Kbthompson (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * [Blush]. Thank you. You're one of a number that I consider 'great' editors. You just get on with it, and there's rarely any contention. Everyone gets in trouble occasionally - why not you? What's your secret! Cheers. Kbthompson (talk) 12:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I try to be both patient and agreeable ... there have been occasions when it has got up people's noses ... and as for humour - I've been warned against using it! Kbthompson (talk) 12:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I take it all back! I'm trying to sort out the East London, England mess - and from the talk page - you're at the bottom of it all! I think you gave in too easily there, there are about 100-odd refs to the real one, and only a handful to S.Africa. This, surely, is a crime against humanity ... 8^) Kbthompson (talk) 12:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sneaky question - does that mean you're going to change your mind? Kbthompson (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I do think you should go for it, if only to give me the opportunity to ask you the same question ... I'd say it's mainly to identify if someone is self-reflective. Mistakes are inevitable, the question is what you do with them and whether you learn by them. And before you ask ... I'm still learning! Cheers. Kbthompson (talk) 14:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

 * I was very grateful for the nomination, although I must admit, it came completely out of the blue!
 * Kbthompson (talk) 15:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Manchester Central
A new version of the page (a 'real' page, not redirect) will be published later today.

Happy New Year ! --Jotel (talk) 12:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

About your editor review...
Why hello there, Simply south. I'm just here to bug you about your editor review; I was wondering if you'd consider archiving it. Of course, this is purely optional; there is no requirement at all. I'm just asking because the list is getting a bit crowded. Again, if you'd like to stay on longer to see if you get more reviews then by all means feel free to do so. Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺ )  04:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, sounds good, and thanks for the review! Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  17:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Whoops, probably meant your second one, haha. Sorry! Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  23:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hello Simply south, I was wondering, would you like rollback rights? I had a look through some of your contributions, and I believe I can trust you with rollback: you know the difference between a good-faith edit and vandalism, and I don't think you will abuse rollback by using it to revert-war or revert good-faith edits. What do you think? Thanks. Acalamari 22:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine: let me know when you decide. :) Acalamari 20:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

RfC
Thank you for moving the page. --BritandBeyonce 01:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Reminder
You still have a banner at the top of your userpage that states you are on a wikibreak. May, or may not, want to take it down [no response neccesary :-)].--Porsche997SBS (talk) 06:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Transport in Europe
Ok, no problem. 16@r (talk) 13:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Balham station
Slambo must be on a long weekend holiday or wiki break... he hasn't had any edit transacts for a few days, and the other WP:TR administrator has not been on line since Dec 23. So much for leadership. If we all don't follow the wiki guidelines for what we all do... editors will leave in droves and Wiki will go down the dumper. Has anyone posted the merge templates, and entries in WP yet.?? haven't had to check. Best regards, Lance.... LanceBarber (talk) 06:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

 * Thank you for the thought. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 10:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Your issue of The Metropolitan has arrived!
Thank you for participating in the trial. Unisouth (talk) 13:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

About rollback
It would be installed on the account the moment I grant it: no software needs to be installed on your computer. It's a user rights change like adminship or bureaucratship. Acalamari 20:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh. :) Love the humor. :) Thanks. Would you like rollback then? As soon as I grant it, you'll be able to use it immediately. Acalamari 21:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Rollback granted. Don't worry about using it rarely: I'd rather see it used occasionally and correctly rather than frequently and abused. See New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature for more information. If you decide at a later date that you don't want rollback, ask any admin, and they'll remove it for you. Good luck. Acalamari 21:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. :) Don't worry, you'll be fine. :) Acalamari 21:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Consecutive edits: if I make five edits to a page, and then press rollback after making those edits, it will revert all of my edits to the last person who edited the page before I did. Acalamari 17:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ha, ha, no webcams here. :) Acalamari 17:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Cosham
Yes, I must have mistyped it, sorry to have created a mystery for you! I was long long ago creating articles for stations on the Portsmouth Direct Line, but didn't have the knowledge to finish the articles for the following stations on lines that join/branch from that line, such as Cosham. Grunners (talk) 22:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Central Line route template
ahem .. yes, indeed! It currently appears over-complex and difficult I reckon ... I'll try to find some time later today / soon&trade; to see if I can improve it somewhat. (and yes, I do seem to like these routemaps so ta for pointing it out!). Great start though ;-) --AlisonW (talk) 15:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, Wood Lane and its history is a mess (three different routes through, etc. and currently being destroyed anyway!). I tend to belive that metro systems are inherently more complex. --AlisonW (talk) 15:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Pickle
Any idea what has happened to user:Pickle UK, has he left WP, taking time off or something even worse? SouthernElectric (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)