Template talk:Great Western Main Line diagram

message: While reviewing today's TfD entries, I noticed Template:Great Western Main Line was nominated for deletion with the comment that it had been "effectively superceded by Template:Great Western Main Line diagram". However, upon checking them both, I see useful information in the former with a more complete list of stations starting from London, which is not fully duplicated in the latter. The former's textual layout seems clearer for me compared to the latter's graphical one. I have therefore copied it here in case the TfD proceeds. - Neparis (talk) 03:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Great Western Main Line diagram template

message: The four-platform stations in the Thames Valley which only usually see local trains (Ealing Broadway, etc.) were displayed with "xp" icons as WP:RDT/C states they are for "Express service; doesn't stop here", but  has reverted them to ordianry icons with the coment: "Changed icons: 'xp-' icons should only be used on route maps of express train routes".  I think the previous version better represented the service on this line and propose that it is reverted. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Express stations in Thames Valley

message: Would someone please supplement, which kind of information those numbers ahead of each station name, are supposed to indicate: hours, miles, kilometers?? In the example in Wikipedia:Route diagram template hours are displayed, but with colon in the middle. The division of full units in quarters didn't help me either. KaPe (talk) 16:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The standard agreed for British railway routes is miles (except for modern lines built to metric dimensions) as this is how offical railway documents record the distances.  The template mentioned does not show hours but kilometers in the european style as it is copied from German Wikipedia. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers 

message: I notice that the WT is shown as diverting to the west of  station; an inspection of relevant maps shows that the junction was east of Wantage Road station. Accordingly, I have exchanged their positions.
*, fig.X
*, figs.1,27
--Redrose64 (talk) 12:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wantage Tramway says that the line led to Wantage Road Sta. and displays that, but the map in this article would require a reversal. Was the "exchange" above done without inverting the connecting icon?--SilasW (talk) 16:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The diagram at Wantage Tramway is wrong. I wanted to replace it with something more accurate (because effectively there were two stations at Wantage Road, either side of the A338, linked by a pedestrian walkway), see my sandbox experiments. Still not sure which is best. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wantage Tramway 

message: Didcot East Junction consisted of two junctions on the four-track GW main line:
*where Didcot East Curve diverges (present tense: it's still there) from the relief lines on the northern side
*where the Didcot, Newbury & Southampton line merged in to the main line on the southern side
The OS 1-inch map (1:63360 '1" 6th Edition Oxford & Newbury, Sheet 158, First Published 1940, Full Revision 1935 Roads 1947 with later corrections') shows parallel tracks as a single line, dotted black-and-white. There is a clear quarter inch between the divergence points, with the DN&S to the east (top) of the East Curve, which implies the upper layout shown at right. The actual junction points are not shown.
The large-scale maps (15 in:1 mile, reprinted in Mitchell & Smith, see below, and dated 1932) show individual tracks separately, and although the divergence points were indeed as described above, the actual junction points were much closer to each other: they were almost adjacent, with the DN&S junction being slightly closer to the station than the east curve junction. It was not possible for a train to run between the DN&S and the East curve without a double reversal (this was not an operational problem because trains between Oxford and Newbury could run via the station, West Junction and West Curve Junction with no reversal required), which implies the lower layout shown at right.
*
My question is: do we show route diagrams to reflect divergence points (go with a map that generalises because it cannot show fine detail), or junction points (go with the detailed map in the interests of accuracy)? My main objection to the former course is that it implies the existence of a direct route which was in reality impossible. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest that it would be better to not show through routes that did not exist. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  --Redrose64 (talk) 18:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Didcot East Junction 

message: Should the small branch to Heathrow airport be included on this diagram or should it have its own separate page and diagram? Nathan A RF (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This diagram is used in the Great Western Main Line article so the details of the branch aren't relevant. It has its own article and diagram at Heathrow express. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That is of the Heathrow Connect/Express rail services though, and if (I might in future) mileages are added, it would be useful to have the Heathrow stations on there. It would only be a couple more icons... Nathan A RF (talk) 19:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Already asked and answered and it’s still “No”, Useddenim (talk) 21:39, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually the word "yes" or "no" was not used in that reply. Nathan A RF (talk) 23:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  “details of the branch aren't relevant”. Did you actually read Geof Sheppard’s reply? Useddenim (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, all I was saying was that the words "yes" or "no" were not used in that reply. Nathan A RF (talk) 10:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO it shoud be treated as it is now,with a junction and a link to the relevant article. This is the way that, for example, the branch to Windsor is treated. Britmax (talk) 11:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heathrow?