Talk:Crossrail
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Crossrail article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Crossrail. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Crossrail at the Reference desk. |
The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Crossrail RDT. |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Merger of "History of the Crossrail line" into this article[edit]
On 8 May, Zsteve21 merged History of the Crossrail line into this article. I disagree with this change, as I think there is more than enough content to have a separate History article to keep this page more readable. Does anyone else agree/disagree? Bellowhead678 (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- Such a major change should have been proposed for consensus first. Revert per WP:BRD. I would do it but not practical on mobile. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC) revised --15:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Can I suggest just waiting a few days? Given that the railway line and service operating on it, i.e. Elizabeth line, is going to become (almost) fully operational on 24 May, quite a bit of information from both here and TfL Rail is going to go over to that Elizabeth line article. At that point this article will be all about the project to build the line - a key part of which is its history. I'm suggesting wait-see because I think at the point the article (including the merged in history and moved-out operational stuff) will likely be of an acceptable size.10mmsocket (talk) 15:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've reverted it back to how it was before, so that a clear consensus can be reached before we decide anything. Personally I think it should remain a separate article, with the Crossrail article's History section being a summary of the History article, with a "Main" link. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 16:16, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- And I have reverted the history section back to where it was before the content was moved across from the other article. Obviously there's work to be done on both to reduce overlap and make the summary here more succinct / focused. --10mmsocket (talk) 16:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Controversies and delays[edit]
Hi, i got to know that Crossrail was bogged down by numerous delays and other controversies between 2015 and 2019. But there is no mention of these issues in the article. Shouldnt we have a separate section dedicated these issues? Learninglawry (talk) 10:28, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Categories:
- B-Class Bridge and Tunnel articles
- Low-importance Bridge and Tunnel articles
- WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels articles
- B-Class CE articles
- Low-importance CE articles
- WikiProject Civil engineering articles
- B-Class London-related articles
- High-importance London-related articles
- B-Class rail transport articles
- High-importance rail transport articles
- B-Class Rapid transit articles
- High-importance Rapid transit articles
- WikiProject Rapid transit articles
- B-Class UK Railways articles
- High-importance UK Railways articles
- B-Class London Transport articles
- Top-importance London Transport articles
- WikiProject London Transport articles
- All WikiProject Trains pages