Talk:Caledonian Sleeper

message: This article states that it is one of two remaining sleeper services. The Night Riviera article says that it is one of three. This is inconsistent. Can we have a definitive number and update the erroneous article? Wilmot1 21:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, the only sleeper services are the Night Riviera and the Caledonian Sleeper. However, the Caledonian Sleeper is three trains that converge at Edinburgh, and then two trains that converge at Carstairs. So technically, the Night Riviera is either one of two trains (NR and CS), three trains (NR, Lowland CS and Highland CS) or 5 trains (NR, Edinburgh Lowland CS, Glasgow Lowland CS, Inverness Highland CS, Aberdeen highland CS and Fort William Highland  CS). Draw your own conclusion as to which is the correct inception. M0RHI | Talk to me 00:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of sleeper services

message: Yeah, all travellers starting at either Glasgow or london are allowed a free cross-city journey with their ticket. Added this to the article, since it's a nice perk. Not sure, though, if it extends to the tube/SRT undeground, or just surface journeys. Anyone know for sure? Graldensblud 22:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In London the free cross-city transit is the Tube ...as it's not very fast from Euston to Waterloo by overground otherwise!  In Glasgow, I've always presumed that the cross-city transfer is the Tube (Glasgow Subway) aswell, though I've never been in possession of Scotrail sleeper-specific ticket to legitimately test this! —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Free cross-london journey

message: It would be nice to have a "traction" section covering the locomotives used to haul the Caledonian Sleeper, both past and present. Emoscopes Talk 21:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost exclusively the sleeper traction is Class 90s under the wires and Class 67s for the Diesel sections.  The MotherwellCarstairs–Edinburgh and v.v. drag of the Edinburgh portion can also be a Class 67;  and for the Fort William you might be really lucky and get the Class 37 back up for when 67004 has worn its break blocks.  The most exotic that you can get is an ECML diversion that is further diverted over non-electric sections;  though even that would probably be a skip these days. —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Haulage

message: I think that booking section is highly irrelevant. It is not the job of Wikipedia to inform whether tickets are readily available or not. Furthermore, since the changes that were made over Christmas (I think), it's made it easier to book tickets via online retailers. I always book mine at mainline train stations and have never had a single problem.
Furthermore, they don't appear expensive, they appear at the right price for this service. It's not the job of Wikipedia to define what's expensive, although I agree with the Bargain Berths being referred to in some context.
Please reply within 3 days or I will adapt this to a more factual and NPOV.
:Did this get done? (The comment above wasn't/isn't signed). —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  That Booking Section.. 

message: Can anyone add the locomotives used for the LOWLAND sleeper? I can not find that on the page.
:I think it specifies Class 90s, but it's not too clear, I'll try to clarify it. M0RHI 22:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks 82.40.75.55 17:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Class 90 from Euston to Glasgow and v.v., dropping half of the train, where a Class 90 or Class 67 collects it to Edinburgh. —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lowland locos

message: Travelled on the sleeper last month, no showers available at Euston to standard class passengers (whether paying a surplus or not). Ammended accordingly Graldensblud 12:14, 05 August 2006 (GMT+1)
:IIRC, showers at Euston only available to First class passengers (single berth holders) and in which case, the showers (inside the Virgin lounge) are free.  As you note, use cannot be "purchased", except by holding a First class ticket. —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Have recently corresponded with FirstScotrail about this, planning a trip to London on the sleeper.  They informed me that standard class passengers can obtain use of the showers in the Virgin Lounge by holding a First Class ticket for travel on a Virgin service from London Euston that day.  A first class ticket to Watford Junction costs £11.50 - so you could gain access to the showers for that amount.  £3.50 less than a shower in terminal one at Heathrow, but hardly cheap.  Anyone want to amend? Echo park00 (talk) 14:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Showers

message: Iv'e removed Watford Junction as a highland sleeper stop. If there are any other alterations, please direct them to me as I can alter the original vector file rather than the *.png. Emoscopes Talk 16:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Emoscopes, would it be possible to upload this SVG/vector original to wiki-commons along with the PNG.  Not having the vector is what lead me to finally start on doing a WP:TRAIL Template:Caledonian Sleeper diagram—the PNG route map on its own isn't quite so easy to maintain. —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Hello "unsigned comment"!  According to the timetable at , The Highlander does stop at Dunblane;  and checking the output from the DB/German Railways timetable passengers for Dunblane may both leave the train in the morning and join a northbound sleeper at Dunblane.  However if your are a local and have a differing experience, this could definitely do with checking out. —Sladen 00:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Route diagram

message: Is it really correct that passengers joining at Crewe, i.e. from anywhere north of London and south of Preson, cannot travel to either Glasgow or Edinburgh?2.29.224.203 (talk) 23:31, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Crewe

message: An unregistered user keeps adding huge aouts of material related to curret and future timetables.  Please don't.  And don't include associated trivial items (e.g. mentioning that engineering works may change train tims).  
Such enrtries are not encyclopaedic and are not really what Wikipedia is about.  
see WP:NOT#DIR and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY
DrFrench 12:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to step back from this edit war.  I've tried to make my positiion clear on the anon users talk page User talk:81.109.234.187 as he's done the same thing to the Highland Chieftain page, and blanked talk pages to remove my concerns.
I don't believe this sort of information belongs in Wikipedia - a link to the Fisrt website is enough to obtain timetable information
DrFrench 13:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly does not belong on Wikipedia, and the user is going about his business in entirely the wrong way. Emoscopes Talk 14:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, per Emoscopes above. We have a routemap and a link to the First Scotrail website. This is sufficient, and the edits break WP:NOT. M0RHI | Talk to me 15:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Diasagree useful information --Prof Jolly 16:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, per Emoscopes above. Fraslet 16:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also agree that this information isn't suitable and that the links provide this info. Adambro 16:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry to be argumentative but in which category would it fit into? Because I can't seem to see on that fits --Prof Jolly 17:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would say that it easily fits into WP:NOT#IINFO, also, I have never seen an encyclopedia giving timetable information, this is why the links on the page point at the First ScotRail website so that a reader can access that information if they so desire. It is not the function of an encyclopedia to give timetable information. Fraslet 17:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  just looked and i cannot see which it falls into
1.8 Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
   1. Lists of Frequently Asked Questions. - not an faq
   2. Travel guides. - not a travel guide but i could see where this could get close
   3. Memorials. - not a memorial
   4. Instruction manuals. - not an instruction manual
   5. Internet guides. - not a guide
   6. Textbooks and annotated texts. - not a text book
   7. Plot summaries.  - not a plot summary
   8. Lyrics databases. - not a lyric
its got other information than whats on the firsts website --Prof Jolly 17:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Comment The article has more than is at the First ScotRail website, however I cannot see any information that is not related to the timetable that is not produced at the First website, or is ephemeral. See the previous clashes, and above / history to see. This has been quite a stable article, those that try to disturb this by going against concensus are simply disturbing what could be a good article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by M0RHI (talk • contribs) 00:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Timetables

message: I'm not really sure what the relevance of linking to North Briton is; the "North Britain" fad was largely an 18th and 19th century trend amongst the Scottish elite to identify themselves as British unionists. It really has little, if anything, to do with the Caledonian Sleeper, which is named after a far more ancient term for Scotland - Caledonia! Also, the Caledonian Sleeper to Aberdeen may run over some ex-NBR metals for a small portion of its journey, but equally so it runs over Caledonian Railway and Highland Railway territory in Scotland (and LNER and LMS if you look at a different era), that is not justification of the relevance of the link. We might as well list every single rail company that the CS runs over, it isn't an entirely Scottish affair. Emoscopes Talk 11:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We're talking about a portion of a sentence and a couple of internal links. I honestly don't see any harm in helping the reader find a bit of background information where it happens to come up in the course of the text. – Kieran T (talk) 11:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, and you've reverted again. Didn't feel like waiting for the discussion you started? That's one way to try to close the point. – Kieran T (talk) 11:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was merely reverting the article back to how it was, and pointing out what I see are more than reasonable grounds for doing so. Articles can very rapidly snowball into an entirely diffuse collection of random information. I really do not understand what the "useful background aspect" of the link is. This article explains the relevance of Caledonia and Caledonian, which is entirely reasonable seeing as that is the name of the service. Were it the North British Sleeper then explaining what North Britain is all about would to be useful. The fact is, North Britain and northern Britain are different; one is a political and social movement, the other a geographical descriptor. The latter is relevant, the former is not. Emoscopes Talk 11:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're quite right about the snowball effect. However, what I particularly objected to was that despite now agreeing that one of the links is relevant, you reverted rather than constructively editing. To the point about relevance; the section refers to the name of the service. We don't know what was in the minds of the people who chose the name, so by the logic above we would perhaps also be required to remove the link to Latin too? Hardly relevant to the train service by strict criteria. – Kieran T (talk) 12:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted the article because, as explained - and I believe justified - in depth above, I did not see the relevance of linking to either North Briton or North British Railway, how else this could have been constructively edited in the context of the name "Caledonian" I could not see. Considering that Caledonia is a Latin term, I think that is fully justified in being included. I would suggest that if you wish to link to the NBR, a more appropriate way to do so would be to describe the Aberdeen portion of the Highland Sleeper as running across the old-NBR mainline from Edinburgh to Aberdeen. Emoscopes Talk 12:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: North British relevance

message: Does anyone have enough of a knowledge of the Caledonian Sleeper over the years to write a brief history section? The Guardian quotes the Sleeper first ran in 1873, but I can't find any more sources for the history of the Sleeper. I'd be interested to learn though, if anyone has any sources. M0RHI | Talk to me 21:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was formed from the Intercity West Coast sector, which ran the 5 sleepers to Scotland. I believe, from googling, it was incorporated into the ScotRail franchise to protect it within the domain of the Scottish Office (later, Scottish Executive), as British Rail threatened to withdraw the highland sleepers in 1994. There's a couple of things you can find from Hansard and *.gov.uk websites using google. Emoscopes Talk 21:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I travelled on the Caledonian Sleeper last Friday night (1st Feb) and was quite surprised to note that after calling at Stirling, the portion from Inverness did not veer left at Larbert and head for Edinburgh, but went on the Glasgow branch, took the Cumbernauld-Coatbridge line and then joined up with the other portions of the train at Carstairs, not Edinburgh Waverley. Is this a permanent change, and, if so, should we be changing this page to reflect it, or was it, perhaps, just a temporary measure during engineering works or something? I'm just confused about what they did with passengers who might normally have boarded at Falkirk Grahamston.
Fraserboyd (talk) 00:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For the Highlander, this is most likely just an engineering diversion.  To answer about the Falkirk passengers, IIRC, the portion from Aberdeen also does a diversion at Falkirk and (coming in from the east), collects any passengers there, instead.  Do you remember anything about the order that the sections linked up at Carstairs?  Or what happened to the seats off the Fort Williams portion (if you were able to see it at any point).  —Sladen (talk) 01:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Highlander diversionary routes

message: There are some major rail fare changes being brought into affect across the network next month which will include the abolition of 'apex' fares and include the introduction of railcard discounts on advance fares. Does anyone know how this will effect the sleeper service as this will require a major change to the section regarding tickets on this article?Grizzlyqi (talk) 11:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rail Fare Changes 

message: Do we really need to list what all the facilities are and even what is available for breakfast?  It seems to read like an advert to me. ZoeL (talk) 08:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Facilities 

message: I would say around 75% of the section Amenities should be removed as there is one reference and I think it was written in good faith however it has become too long and things such as rules on taking pets and the full menu offered at breakfast as well as where the showers are and the cost of them can all be taken as if they are advertising also the Booking section is in a similar way and doesn't contain a single reference.C. 22468   Talk to me 21:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adverts in Amenities 

message: I would a large amount of this article needs re-writing specifically the Amenities and Booking, I think that the amenities most of it needs re-writing as it is beginning to look like a travel guide with information such as the full menu for breakfast in first class is completely irreverent and it does include brand names which are irreverent. Telling passengers that dogs and bicycles can be carried for a fee is irreverent. The booking section says a list of places that tickets can be bought and the lowest fare possible on certain trains. I am not disputing that the information isn't true but I don't feel it should be included in the article. Please leave comments below.C. 22468   Talk to me 01:55, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-write 

message: There is no junction with the north London line north of Wembley, and short of a bizarre manoeuvre at willeseden, or a run around in Wembley yard, I can't see how this is possible?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.220.27 (talk) 12:24, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: , see diagram on :Template:Caledonian_Sleeper_RDTs#ECML diversion route: leaves Euston northwards to Wembley, then reverses southwards and turning left (east) to NNL the right-then-left (north) to ECML.  The reversing manoveur has the coincidental result that everything is the correct way around at Edinburgh.  (And the other split at Carstairs is replaced by a split at Edinburgh).  Would there be a good way to word this in the article?  —Sladen (talk) 09:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  ECML diversions via Wembley?? 

message: Please would somebody with a fast computer review the "Hotel on Wheels" section added today by . It needs a fast computer because virtually all of the external links that have been included are for newspaper websites that are heavy on advertising and javascript. It takes my machine something like ten to twenty minutes to load each one, and even longer to return. After viewing two or three, it's virtually seized solid because the javascript soaks up memory and CPU cycles, some of the processes won't terminate even if I leave the web page concerned. I then need to close my browser and reboot my machine just to release all the memory and get it back to a satisfactory operating speed. This takes another ten minutes, so we can say that checking all of those links will take me four to five hours, time that I simply don't have. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Had a go at tidying the content and have converted the links to citations.  Nthep (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hotel on Wheels