Talk:Glasgow–Edinburgh via Carstairs line
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Glasgow to Edinburgh via Carstairs Line. |
Requested move 4 February 2017
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved to Glasgow–Edinburgh via Carstairs line. Jenks24 (talk) 14:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Glasgow to Edinburgh via Carstairs Line → Glasgow to Edinburgh via Carstairs line – Downcase per WP:NCCAPS; sources mostly do not cap it. Optionally, say if you prefer to use the symmetric dashed version (Glasgow–Edinburgh via Carstairs line) rather than "to" between place names. Dicklyon (talk) 16:56, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
- Evidence in sources
Please examine the searches, see if there is a common name, whether the dashed version is preferred, and whether caps are preferred. It is my impression that there is no proper name here and that the dashed form preferred, being more logical and more consistent with other such lines. Dicklyon (talk) 16:56, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support per WP:NCCAPS BobLaRouche (talk) 17:08, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support as nom, preferring the symmetric dashed version Glasgow–Edinburgh via Carstairs line. Dicklyon (talk) 17:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support per nom, also preferring the symmetric dashed. 121.218.59.88 (talk) 20:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Time to merge this?
editThis article doesn't add anything at all to better written articles elsewhere. The infrastructure part is a straight crib from other articles, and the enthusiasts' part about locomotives and train servcies from 2009 is unreferenced. It would be better to use the best of this article to improve others. Afterbrunel (talk) 18:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- Only place I can think to merge is West Coast Main Line... agree it needs merging though. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
It probably needs improvement, but I'm not sure merging it is an answer, there's probably a lot could be said about the history etc. A lot of other WCML branches have there own articles. G-13114 (talk) 19:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)