Jump to content

Talk:East Coast Main Line

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MrBoyt (talk | contribs) at 21:12, 10 October 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeEast Coast Main Line was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 30, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed

Dolphingstone and Wallyford diversions

I have added mention of these, which were due to mining subsidence around 1999-2002. However I only have one reference, to the New Civil Engineer. If anyone can find better references, e.g issues of some of the railway magazines of that era, please feel free to add them.

I am not sure how to add a picture such as a map, but again, if someone is willing and knows how, you can go to somewhere like https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=15&lat=55.9504&lon=-2.9843&layers=10&b=7 and put the slider in the middle to overlay the old OS map transparently on the new OpenStreetMap background, which shows the diversion nicely.

Tiger99 (talk) 03:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of passenger volume

This section hasn't been updated in a long time. Unless someone can write a bot that can update these usage figures, we ought to remove this section as the information only covers a very short period of time. NemesisAT (talk) 15:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

East Coast Main Line and HS2

High Speed 2 will see big changes to services on the ECML as most fast trains from London to York, Newcastle, and Edinburgh will be diverted to HS2 and, in the case of Edinburgh, the WCML. I think this is important to mention given the section is about capacity problems. I don't want to fall foul of WP:WAR so would be good to hear others' thoughts on how to improve this section of the article. I think other parts (like platform additions) are unnecessary and have removed some of this info as it's already well documented on the individual station pages. NemesisAT (talk) 17:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to add, this is the "Planned or proposed developments" so I don't think uncertainty over the eastern leg of HS2, as mentioned by the other editor, is an issue here.NemesisAT (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it's certainly important to note it in the planned or proposed developments section. Bellowhead678 (talk) 21:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'm also thinking the much of the bullets at the end would be better incorporated into the article. I'm working on it right now, personally I think it will work better to put everything which has happened already into the History section and keep the final section exclusively for future proposals that haven't happened yet. NemesisAT (talk) 22:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 February 2021

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. It seems that no one wants this page moved. 053pvr (talk) 19:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

East Coast Main Line → East Coast main line – WP:CAPITALISATION. 053pvr (talk) 02:01, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). 053pvr (talk) 06:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

See also section added

I have added a "see also" section. This adds consistency with WCML, MML, GWml, GCML etc GRALISTAIR (talk) 12:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting infrastructure tables off into their own article

I propose splitting off the two infrastructure tables - they are worth retaining, but far more detailed than the rest of this article and probably better in their own article, say Infrastructure of the East Coast Main Line. Bellowhead678 (talk) 10:41, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a bad idea. I am all for it GRALISTAIR (talk) 11:10, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image in infobox

  • 91101 passes 66778 and 66721 by Doncaster Decoy Down Yard.jpg In use until 6 October 2021
    91101 passes 66778 and 66721 by Doncaster Decoy Down Yard.jpg
    In use until 6 October 2021
  • 200 Miles to Edinburgh - geograph.org.uk - 186665.jpg Leaky caldron's preference
    200 Miles to Edinburgh - geograph.org.uk - 186665.jpg
    Leaky caldron's preference
  • 800106 heading north at Wellfield, near Northallerton.jpg G-13114's preference
    800106 heading north at Wellfield, near Northallerton.jpg
    G-13114's preference

Surely there is a more suitable image for a prestigious main line than an obscure siding, off the actual mainline alignment? Leaky caldron (talk) 10:48, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have substituted a more suitable image which is the half way point of the line. Leaky caldron (talk) 12:22, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that the previous image was a poor choice, it was added by an anonymous editor and was inferior to File:Azuma_at_Northallerton.jpg which was used before. The halfway point feels like a good choice (it is also quadruple track, which I like). However I think it is too low-resolution, and if a more recent image at the same location can be found then that would be preferable. If an image with an LNER Azuma can be found that would be good as they are the main operator of long-distance services on the ECML. NemesisAT (talk) 12:33, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While the latest image of an Azuma set travelling on a nondescript section of N. Yorkshire track is better than the one I replaced which was Donny Decoy sidings, by for the most apt. image is the half-way picture I obtained from Commons. See the West Coast Main Line article, that image is iconic. This article is about the line, not about the trains that use it. Per WP:BOLD, I've changed it. Leaky caldron (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would have to disagree, that image is low resolution (you can barely see the sign) badly lit and poorly composed, and also badly out of date, showing rolling stock and an operator livery which are both now defunct. I think we should take heed of MOS:IMAGEQUALITY, which states "Use the best quality images available. Poor-quality images—dark or blurry; showing the subject too small, hidden in clutter, or ambiguous; and so on—should not be used unless absolutely necessary." Whilst the Azuma image is not perfect, it's high resolution, and accurately depicts the appearance of the line in 2021. That said if anyone can find a better image then I would have no objections to it being replaced, but that one is not it. G-13114 (talk) 21:28, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we settle on the half-way point as the best choice for the infobox photograph, File:East_Coast_Main_Line,_200_miles_to_Edinburgh_(geograph_4097069).jpg is a better photo of that IMO. However personally I still prefer G-13114's choice. NemesisAT (talk) 21:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your preference is absolutely nondescript. It doesn't represent the article - it represents your preferred train set - operating somewhere in the UK. It's nonsense to suggest that that image depicts the ECML - it's a picture of a train. The Berwick Border bridge is more iconic that a fancy new train in the middle of Yorkshire. The line has existed 180 years. Leaky caldron (talk) 21:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it necessarily needs to have a train in the image. I think the most important thing is that the image is of good quality. The image you suggested is of low resolution and the 200 miles to Edinburgh sign is difficult to see anyway. If the image does contain a train, I do think it should be a train currently operating on the line and in a reasonably up-to-date livery. NemesisAT (talk) 21:50, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I agree that the infobox doesn't necessarily need to contain a train. You would need to have some structure to show which is so well known it would easily be recognisable to the public as representing the line, (an example would be the Cornish Main Line with a picture of the Royal Albert Bridge) I'm not convinced that any structure on the ECML is distinctive enough for that, yes it has some impressive viaducts like at Berwick. But from a distance they just look like any other stone and brick arch viaduct built in the 19th century. So failing that, we usually go with a picture of trains. I've taken a look on geograph, and I've seen some high quality images which I could upload, I especially like this but also [2][3][4][5][6] and [7] are also possibilities. Actually I'll probably upload all of them, but if anyone spots any they particularly like... G-13114 (talk) 22:23, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If it's an iconic bridge you want, but don't want the Royal Border Bridge, there are several other candidates. The High Level Bridge is unique, and one of the oldest, but it hasn't carried regular ECML traffic since the King Edward Bridge ("Britain's last great railway bridge") opened. Then there's Welwyn Viaduct, or even Durham viaduct. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:33, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just uploaded these from geograph. I wondered if any of them took people's fancy. I like the first and second ones personally, as they show the actual East Coast:

  • 1
    1
  • 2
    2
  • 3
    3
  • 4
    4
  • 5
    5

Any thoughts? G-13114 (talk) 00:11, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not at all keen on tight close ups of trains. The article needs to be represented in the infobox by an image that says something about the East Coast Main Line. For that reason, aside from the apparently deprecated "halfway" image, I prefer No. 2 above. Leaky caldron (talk) 08:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also happy to go with number two. It's still a little small, but it's a fantastic shot in my opinion. NemesisAT (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of those choices I'd also agree that no.2 is best, and a fitting image for the article MrBoyt (talk) 21:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:East_Coast_Main_Line&oldid=1049266737"