Talk:Chatham Main Line

message: I don't understand why there are two separate articles on what is essentially one service of trains. This "Line" (which is not an official title is it?) is part of the SET service from London which divides at Faversham - one section carrying on down the coast to Ramsgate - what is called in the OTHER article the Kent Coast Line; and the other section calling at the stations in this article. Indeed the SET timetable shows just that situation. I have commented elsewhere on the fact that the other long-distance train service, - that through Tonbridge and Ashford - has no article at all. This one has two!
Surely what is needed is that this and Kent Coast articles are merged into one with the title being the latter; and a separate new article, which I am now raising, entitled London - Ashford- Dover Line. Peter Shearan 14:16, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have amended the wording here. Since Strood is not mentioned as one of the stations on the line it would complicate things; and according to the SET timetables trains for Ramsgate do not start from Charing Cross, only Cannon Street and Blackfriars. Peter Shearan 14:55, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  In light of the above i have begun a big overhaul - comment, revisions, etc welcome. As you can see I've extended the start to cover the route to Victoria and included the Catford Loop option. At the other end I've stated it as "Chatham Main Line - Ramsgate Branch" and "Chatham Main Line - Dover Branch". Where this leaves the Kent Coast Line article is an issue i haven't got my head round yet.Pickle 02:15, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Line / Route - Conflict with [[Kent Coast Line]] article

message: The "closed curve" shown on the map at Canterbury is the wrong way round. Trains coming from London could use the curve to go to Canterbury West and Ramsgate, but not towards Ashford as the map current ly indicates.  Four Ceps 23:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have amended the map to show the correct sense of the closed curve.Four Ceps 19:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cheers mate ;) I made this routemap some time ago, and the coding has improved and i need to sit down and redo this to exploit the new code ;) Pickle 19:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: No matter where trains now start to get to this line, is the modern connection to St Pancras really part of the Chatham Main Line?--SilasW (talk) 12:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely not. This is a common mistake on Wiki where someone is confusing a service with a line. The Chatham Main Line has absolutely nothing to do with Bedford or St Pancras which are on the Midland Main Line and Moorgate Line respectively. The map is (currently) showing the route correctly. The text is wrong.-- Fu Manchuchu (talk) 04:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  St Pancras 

message: Chatham Dockyard branch is now closed-Please amendSteamybrian2 (talk) 21:22, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: RDT Map

message: Should the article be moved to "Chatham Main Line" or "Chatham main line",
Sources and books use "Main Line" and "main line"  –Davey2010Talk 13:00, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinging  who reverted the move. –Davey2010Talk 13:01, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes; I agree with what Dicklyon said (we don't always agree, but in this case we do): this is a WP:RM matter, not WP:RFC. Also, if a RfC was truly warranted, the level 2 sections below should have been level 3 subsections. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC about the name 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
* Oppose – It's not a proper name.  When nom moved it with edit summary "Moved to caps so is consistent with other similar articles", the only similar article it mentioned was South Eastern main line, which is already consistent. If you look at better sources (e.g. books, news), you see that lowercase is common enough, meaning it's not generally treated as a proper name.  Per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS, we avoid caps in such cases. Dicklyon (talk) 20:47, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *Both names have equal usuage as shown above so I fail to see how it's thin at all.... –Davey2010Talk 02:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Chatham main line. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928003510/http://www.electric-railways.co.uk/L2_DC_750_CR/1_general/g3_proj/prj-0d75-sr.html to http://www.electric-railways.co.uk/L2_DC_750_CR/1_general/g3_proj/prj-0d75-sr.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:South Western main line which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 11:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress