Talk:Newcastle Airport Metro station

message: The article states that the Metro did not reach the airport initially was partly because the airport was outside the Tyne & Wear County boundary.  
"in part because the airport was outside Tyne and Wear County;"
The airport and the station lie wholly within the Newcastle City boundary - and hence within Tyne & Wear.
So I'm going to remove that part of the sentence.  If anyone knows for certain that the boundary has been re-drawn, then please reinstate it with a slight amendment (e.g. "in part because at that time, the airport was outside Tyne and Wear County;")
DrFrench 23:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The page has been moved from Airport Metro station to Newcastle Airport Metro station. I don't think this is correct.  Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations) suggests that Airport Metro station is the correct title.  If there is any potential for confusion, then a simple  directing users to Airport Station is all that is required. Renaming the article so it uses an incorrect name is not a good solution. I have made the change to add the  and will request a reversal of the move. DrFrench (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the point is that 'Airport Metro station', while technically correct, is so geographically vague that it doesn't even communicate which country the relevant metro is in. 'Newcastle Airport Metro station' is not in any way misleading, and Wikipedia's policy has never been to prioritise official names over informativeness. David Arthur (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not so much misleading as inaccurate.  In any event, precedent doesn't seem to be with you on this one. A quick glance at Airport Station shows seven other articles that don't feel the need to include a place name to qualify which airport is referred to. DrFrench (talk) 22:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The British stations NC page recommends using the official name except where this is ambiguous. It also says no standard was ever worked out for the T&W Metro. Other station articles might be ambiguous too; personally I think all of them should be changed, but anyway, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Nothing is set in stone. I am going to remove the speedy tag from Airport Metro station, as (afaik) G6 is only for deletions where nobody objects. Won't remove the redirect though until we sort it out here. — FIRE!in a crowded theatre... 23:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: DrFrench, would Airport Metro station (Newcastle) be acceptable to you? That keeps the official name but removes the ambiguity - and actually would be the same as the examples you gave. The only other one I'd still say is ambiguous is the Moscow Metro station.  — FIRE!in a crowded theatre... 23:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Almost all of the entries in Airport Station include in some form either the location of the airport or the name of the system (and I'd argue that the Moscow entry's title is likewise insufficient). The word 'Metro' is not sufficient to suggest Newcastle in the absence of any other geographical indicators. Some reference to 'Newcastle' or 'Tyne and Wear' is needed, whether as a prefix (it is at Newcastle Airport, after all) or disambiguation mark. David Arthur (talk) 15:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fire, I think you misunderstood some of what's on the naming conventions page; the ambiguity refers to situations such as there were two separate stations with the same name on the same system - such as two stations called Shepherds Bush and two stations called Edgware Road on the London Underground. The comment about the Tyne & Wear Metro is merely old - it hasn't been udpated since the standard shown was put into operation. However, I have no particular objection to a qualifier in paranthesis. My suggestion would be Airport Metro station (Tyne and Wear Metro). A bit long-winded, but accurate and hopefully meets everyone's requirements.  (BTW, I only added the speedy tag as I honestly thought that the otheruse tag would be satisfactory - apologies for that.) If there's no objection to my suggestion, I'll make the move in a day or so. DrFrench (talk) 20:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the old name was definitely ambiguous, even if not in the way the conventions page meant. Your suggestion is fine by me; though maybe leave out the second use of "metro". As for the old title, I think we should redirect it to the Airport Station disambig page. — FIRE!in a crowded theatre... 01:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just done the moves and am now fixing the backlinks. Trying to figure out the S-Rail template... — FIRE!in a crowded theatre... 15:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see how to make the S-rail template work with this title, because I need it to add its +station suffix before the bracketed text. Have left a message for its creator User:Mackensen, but I imagine he's busy & will take a while to reply. The links in that template still point to Airport Metro station, which I've redirected to the Airport Station disambig page. — FIRE!in a crowded theatre... 17:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It works using the switching template: Template:TWM stations, I've fixed the problem so that it now points to the correct page. Johnwalton 18:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title