(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Template talk:Disused rail start - Wikipedia Jump to content

Template talk:Disused rail start

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Verbarson (talk | contribs) at 22:25, 5 December 2023 (→‎Disused railways: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconTrains: in UK Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template 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 and the Trains Portal.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Associated projects or task forces:
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by WikiProject UK Railways.

Convert to using S-rail-templates

Could someone please edit the template to use the {{s-rail templates? See Sandbox-version. Tholme (talk) 19:13, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I checked a dozen semi-random pages that transclude this template, and they all look fine. Ping me from here if you find a situation that is broken by this change. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disused railways

It is an unwarranted assumption that a disused railway station is on a disused railway. The header of the central section "Disused railways" is incorrect for disused stations on lines that are currently in use. I suggest that it be changed to "Original railways". Relevant examples: Clapham Common, Stewarts Lane railway stations; the companies that built them are long gone, but the lines they stood on are still in use.

(Why is "railways" in the plural? I do realise it is because of {{s-rail}}, not this template, but can anything be done to make it singular?) -- Verbarson  talkedits 22:25, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]