Talk:List of busiest railway stations in Europe

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of busiest railway stations in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150224190705/http://www.deutschebahn.com/file/de/2201914/NrI-UHqK9fKym_RWugjkm5znKvg/8136558/data/bahnhofskategorieliste_2015.pdf to http://www.deutschebahn.com/file/de/2201914/NrI-UHqK9fKym_RWugjkm5znKvg/8136558/data/bahnhofskategorieliste_2015.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Rapid transit passengers

Train stations in this list include rapid transit passengers, apart from British ones. For the sake of consistency, should London underground passengers be added to the overall passenger count?

>Of course. This article makes no sense as it is. >213.205.198.225 (talk) 13:35, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of busiest railway stations in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160201083230/http://www.observatorioferrocarril.es/archivos/Ofe2010/02Transporte_viajeros.pdf to http://www.observatorioferrocarril.es/archivos/Ofe2010/02Transporte_viajeros.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004235218/http://www.oslo-s.no/209/oslo-s---landets-storste-trafikk-knutepunkt to http://www.oslo-s.no/209/oslo-s---landets-storste-trafikk-knutepunkt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:55, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Platforms vs. tracks

@DocFergus: I know of course the meaning of platform in BE. But, please, be also aware that this is not globally ambiguity-free. Besides, the Template:Infobox_station uses both terms, eventually in oder to make a distinction between the platforms used by passengers ("Information on the type of platform(s) at the station") and the tracks ("Number of tracks at the station") used by trains. -- ZH8000 (talk)

@ZH8000:. This is non negotiable. Per WP:ENGVAR any article that has a strong national tie to a geographic region must be written in the English language variant applicable to that region. As this is an article on Europe mentioning British railway stations the applicable English variant is British English. In British English stations have 'platforms' and never 'tracks' - that is the purview of American English. Under WP:ENGVAR, the English variant must be consistent and no editor has the right to change the variant (that would be considered disruptive). Global ambiguity has nothing to do with it as the article is for English speakers only and most Americans understand the concept of platforms anyway. I have added the British English tag to the top of this talk page. The tag is incorrect on one point as the variant cannot be changed by consensus because of the regional tie.

In any case, some editor, in the past, has added 'tracks' in brackets after 'platforms', which is allowable (the reverse would not be), so I fail to see exactly what the problem is. DocFergus (talk) 17:31, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

I do not want to change the preferred language. I just want to make sure whether you count the passenger's platforms or the train's "road" aka tracks (again: see the Infobox station template!!). In the given table, it is the tracks, otherwise the number would be about the half of it. -- ZH8000 (talk) 18:11, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

@ZH8000: This would be the British English usage of 'Platform' which is the number of different places in the station where a passenger can board or leave a train. It should not include any other 'tracks' that happen to be around. None of the number of platforms in any of the listed stations is referenced so it looks like original research anyway. If the number of platforms is incorrect for any station go ahead and change it. But beware anyone reverting you with an 'unreferenced change', in which case you will have to find a supporting reference. DocFergus (talk) 15:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@DocFergus: At some point since you had this conversation, "tracks" replaced "platforms". I have edited the article to undo this. As you said; tracks is an American English term that makes no sense in a British English article. Ω ENGLISH LOCK Ω 12:56, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Problem with this article is the fact that list compares uncomparable numbers due to track/platform distinction. One example....Zurich hauptbahnhof is said to have 26 tracks/platforms but Praha hlavni nadrazi (in Prague, Czech republic) is said to have just 8. But this is simply incorrect because in case of Zurich number 26 means "tracks" (in US usage) but in case of Prague number 8 means "platforms" (in US usage) - Praha hlavni nadrazi has 16 "tracks" (in US usage) ....I think it is not important which meaning of "platform" we use (UK or US) but it is absolutely neccesary to use it uniformely and check in each station correct number.....otherwise the list will be completely meaningless because it would interchangeably use different (and uncomparable) numbers as it is now in ZUrich and Prague stations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirek1505 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

References

Belgian stations

Why are there no Belgian stations in the list? The busiest station of Belgium has 60000+ passengers getting on a train. Check the list: https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_drukste_spoorwegstations_van_België 2A02:1811:C421:9D00:B4B2:4953:93D1:5CC2 (talk) 20:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Since they use different metrics (thousands per day, while this list uses millions per year) it's hard to compare, but looks like the busiest Belgian stations have about 18 million passengers per year, far short of the 30 millions at the bottom of this list. Fisk0 (talk) 11:38, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm also a little perplexed, to be honest, and came to the talk section independent of the commenter above for the same reason: Where's Belgium?

I'm not a huge rail buff, but I'd be amazed if Brussels Midi didn't have more passengers per year than e.g., Manchester. It's a major international hub, right in the thick of one of the most densely populated regions of Europe; Midi gets the Eurostar, Thalys, TGV, trains from NS, DB, on top of all the SNCB services. This source ([1]) states 160,000 passengers per day, which puts it roughly somewhere in the center of the list.

I appreciate that it's hard to compare if the metrics aren't available, but it's not a credible list if it doesn't reflect reality. pstils (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)