Talk:Staines to Windsor & Eton Line

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Berkshire, a collaborative effort to better organize information in articles related to Berkshire. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

Start

This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)

Low

This article has been rated as low-importance within the Trains WikiProject.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.

Low	Importance: low within UK Railways WikiProject.

[edit] Routemap

Shouldn't the routemap be the other way up? ie with Staines near the top and Windsor at the bottom? This would better fit with the article title. EdJogg 00:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I've redone it with BS5 and HBHF to show how its a branch. I think orientation is the right way up. Pickle 00:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup, it's much less of an issue like that. I have revised the text around Staines further to better show the direction of trains at Staines. If you think this looks OK, I know of a couple more branch line maps that would benefit from the same treatment (hadn't tried it before). -- EdJogg 09:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

The idea (of the arrows) is great, but i can't see them (IE7, Windows XP, 1280x1024, etc), not sure how to rectify it really. Pickle 09:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

That any better? They show up OK on my laptop now (IE6, Win2K, 1024x768) (They were a tad unclear before, but I wanted the smaller text if possible) - EdJogg 09:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Not really. I really like the idea, are there any other icon type things (even image files) that could be used) that are bolder, while still being "normal" size or even "small size" text. Pickle 10:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Found some. Searched the image namespace for 'arrow' and found these after a couple of pages. Didn't think they would work when I viewed them 'large', but reduced down I think we'd be hard-pressed to find better. This method is crying out for a template though! EdJogg 10:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I can see the current version now ;) Pickle 23:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Template {{RoutemapRoute}} has now been created, based on this format, and is in use on this page. Will canvass opinions for enhancements at Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template before rolling-out anywhere else. EdJogg 08:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge Reading-Waterloo; Windsor-Staines and Chertsey Branch to form one Windsor Lines page

These three pages are very short and I thought it might be worth combining them to make one single Windsor Lines page. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.74.164 (talk) 12:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

An unregisterd user who does not sign his edits has little right to make such a proposal. The reason given for the merger as the "pages are very short" is not a reason and is not acceptable. Canterberry 13:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

OPPOSE merge -- I cannot see any benefit in merging the pages except to make one bigger page, which seems to be merging for the sake of it. Besides, I cannot think of a suitable title for the merged page. Certainly 'Windsor lines' is not appropriate, as two of the lines do not serve Windsor!! If it is not possible to think of a suitable name for the combined page, it suggests that the subjects should remain existing separately.

EdJogg 19:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)