Talk:Tramlink

message: I will be creating the three pages focusing on these routes in the same way as these articles have been done. Anyone wishing to check the progress can check my userpage for the link to the subpage.--sonicKAI 17:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good, but for article naming, I should point out that the name of the system now seems to be simply ‘Tramlink’, not ‘Croydon Tramlink’, presumably in expectation of future lines which do not travel through Croydon. David Arthur 21:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are the officially referred to as "routes" or "lines"? If there is an official use of one or the other then imho the naming should reflect that. Thryduulf 22:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official map says ‘route’, which makes sense given the amount of track-sharing between them. David Arthur 18:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please bear in mind that there are long overdue plans to link the Wimbledon and New Addington route and provide a 7½ minute headway on this line but these seem to get postponed as often as the Centrale stop opening was.  So I would strongly recommend not doing this until the reorganised routes finally get introduced. Last rumour for the change was Easter but that has obviously come and gone.--Pedantic of Purley 10:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Stephen Parascandolo's  usually reliable Unofficial Tramlink website, this change will now come in on June 23rd. Tramlink will go from having three routes to two; I've described the new routes in the routes section of the article. So it looks like the new split-out articles are toast already :-( -- Chris j wood 11:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont think that website is as reliable nowadays, as the author died some time agoBreakfast100 07:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croydon Tramlink routes 1, 2, and 3 

message: In response to Thryduulf, Transport for London's website  says thay are "lines", not "routes", so thank you for that. 
In response to Pedantic of Purley, London Bus Routes website  says that the new timetable has been moved to May 2006. 
I will still create these pages on my userpage, but wait before putting them on the main Wikipedia. --sonicKAI 11:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I'm still going to do it

message: I have never heard of this term.  Is it american ?  The usual terminology is interlaced track.  By the way there is also interlaced track just after Church Street to avoid the need to put the points in the middle of a public road junction.  I am tempted to rename the link to Interlaced Track and expand it a little (in the linked item not the main Tramlink item).--Pedantic of Purley 10:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've heard it called both and also "Gantlet track" (I suspect this is either a misspelling of "Gauntlet track" or vice versa). Whichever term you use make sure "track" has a lowercase t, and set up redirects. We have a few photos that I've spotted on commons that show this - :Image:028140 tramlink mitcham.jpg, :Image:Gb-tramlink-croydoncentre-09.jpg, :Image:Gb-tramlink-croydoncentre-10.jpg, :Image:Praha ms dual gauge.jpg (badly named, it isn't dual gauge) and :Image:Sechsschienengleis.JPG (I've never seen this layout anywhere else). They aren't categorised together yet, but when you choose a term I suggest making a category by that name on commons as a subcategory of :Commons:Category:Rail track. Thryduulf 10:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it seems we have an article on Gantlet track, which it says is an American English term - the British and Australian equivalent being "Gauntlet track" with "Interlaced track" a Britishism. Thryduulf 10:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now created :Commons:Category:Gauntlet track (as that gets the most google hits (~700 vs ~300 for Interlaced and ~400 for Gantlet)). Thryduulf 19:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: To the best of my knowledge, the correct British term is interlaced track.  This may have changed in recent years, however, as such things are wont to do under the pressure of the contagious beast that is American English. ;) --Veratien 01:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gauntlet Track 

message: Shouldn't articles on Tram stops be called ### Tram stop instead of ### Tram station, as Transport for London officially recognises them as stops, which, in turn, would explain why the use the London buses ticketing system.  --sonicKAI 15:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Station article names (sorry to bring this up again) 

message: I have deleted this section as the section in not appropriate for an encyclopedia. --ExULstudent 15:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power Failures 26th and 27th September 2006 

message: I've changed the name of the Ampere Way stop to its new official name of IKEA Ampere Way  photo.
D-Notice 21:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ampere Way now known as IKEA Ampere Way 

message: The section on "Other Ideas" seems very out of date.  I thought Biggin Hill was looked at a few years ago and thought to be an absolute non-starter.  They couldn't even make a case for a good quality shuttle bus from Addington Village interchange.
I think the reference to Purley Way means the proposed loop around Valley park which "they" got excited about a few years ago but has subsequently gone very quiet.
I think this section may have served a purpose once upon a time but I think it should now be updated or eliminated.--Pedantic of Purley 19:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Ideas 

message: I think we could really do with a section to describe the relationship between TfL and the operating company.  The unofficial site www.tramlink.co.uk covers this well but stresses the views are the personal ones of the author. This is becoming a major issue but it is difficult to write about it objectively.  There must be someone brave enough to give it a try.  Without facing issues like this the Tramlink entry is "fluffy".--Pedantic of Purley 17:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not so sure about that. It looks like one editor clearly mixed up TCL and FirstGroup in updating the lede for this takeover (see #Takeover by TfL below), and in case it is still interesting from a historical perspective. I think I've now covered the relationship in the lede, and in two new history sub-sections. -- Chris j wood (talk) 14:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship between TfL and TCL  

message: A heard that a project during the redevelopment of White City and Shepherd's Bush, a new tramlink has been planned. It will go from Shepherd's Bush to Uxbridge. I'm happy, because it stops at Loftus Road! --Soopa hoops77 17:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Tramlink 

message: I notice that there is little information about the Tramlink ticketing system. Should some be added, or is it too similar to London Buses? Ajn91 19:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fares / Ticketing 

message: The tramlink logo in the top left hand corner hasn't formatted very well on my screen, it overlaps with the references tag and pushes the lead text in a bit. Might I suggest it might be better going straight into the header of the infobox? (i.e. replace "Line=Tramlink|" with "Line=|")? It looked okay when I tried it in preview. - Zeibura (Talk) 08:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo 

message: 
This image is; a) huge, b) dubious copyright status, c) appropriate for this page - Thus can these issue be resolved and maybe it be incorporated into the article in a way that it doesn't bugger up the page layout... ??? Pickle 02:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image:Mk2 Croydon Tramlink Destination Blinds.jpg 

message: The Wimbledon branch is a former British Rail route, not mentioned in the "history" section. 194.80.106.135 11:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So WP:BOLD:Be bold! and change it. Pickle 00:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: The article says:
:The service is currently operated by FirstGroup on behalf of Transport for London (TfL) but it has been agreed that TfL will purchase the system and take control of it later in 2008.
and quotes http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/7741.aspx as a source. Unfortunately that link is now broken, but it seems http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/7741.aspx is a replacement url that works (I will edit).
But I'm not so sure that the editor who wrote the sentence above based on that cite hasn't read more into it than (s)he should have. TfL's press release tells us that they are buying Tramtrack Croydon Ltd (TCL), the concessionaire that built Tramlink and subcontracts the operation to FirstGroup. There is nothing in the press release to imply that this will result in FirstGroup losing its contract to operate Tramlink. In the normal way of things the TfL takeover of TCL would simply result in FirstGroup answering to a different contractee. Can anybody cite a source that explicitly says FirstGroup's involvement is going to end with the TfL takeover?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 13:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added more to article to clarify all this, and also merged in the (almost orphaned) Tramtrack Croydon article. But it is still not clear if TfL are intending to give First the order of the boot, so any citable input on this would be valuable. -- Chris j wood (talk) 14:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well First is clearly still operating Tramlink, despite the fact that the TfL takeover has now happened. Clarified further in article, although a cite would still be great. -- Starbois (talk) 12:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Takeover by TfL 

message: Just thought I'd say that I've created a route diagram for Tramlink, at Template:Tramlink RDT. --Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Route diagram template 

message: The link was created by anon 213.249.207.190 on 12.Apr 2006, and the source seems to be as I indicated. This however "http://www.tramlink.co.uk/extensions/index.shtml" is an 
unofficial site as stated by its creator. So if someone wants to check this out, please do so. I wonder whether "separation" is meant rather than "segregation". Seems genuine enough, I think they are referring to the Amsterdam "Trambaan", nothing more sinister than that. Dieter Simon (talk) 00:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't really doubting the accuracy of the article; I added  as "what?" is the first thing that came to mind when I read the phrase! I googled it (albeit quickly) and found nothing immediately defining it... Scrxisi (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trambaan type segregation source 

message: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7712002.stm - BBC News is reporting that the Tramlink extension (amongst other London transport plans) have been dropped.  Maybe this should be reflected in the article once we have more sources? Smoothy (talk) 12:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just like to add another source - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/10231.aspx Smoothy (talk) 12:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tramlink extension plans dropped? 

message: I have found a source that states Nick Owen is the male voice for announcements but can find nothing to verify the claim that Judi Dench is the female voice (the source I found said it was a local) so have removed it as it had been  since September 2008. I will also edit it on Judi Dench's page. --Bigger digger (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: The infobox now says TfL is the operator while the article says it is First London (for TfL).
I'm sure Tramlink fans can explain the apparent discrepancy but an innocent, who might read the article to try to find who might be to blame for a third-party accident to his grandmother, would be perplexed. An encyclopedic article should be free of such quasi-ambiguities from the start--SilasW (talk) 11:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: First still physically operate the trams, on behalf of TfL who bought out TCL. best, Sunil060902 (talk) 10:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operator 

message: Looking at the Tramlink user guide it says Tramlinks is owned and operated by TFL see:  and go to introduction and go to .Likelife (talk) 15:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I made some changes, hope it makes sense! best, Sunil060902 (talk) 10:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are you right about the operator? 

message: The new route map  shows two routes. New Addington - Wimbledon and Elmers End - Beckenham Jun. So should route one & two be merged and also no routes are red or yellow any more. Likelife (talk) 12:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh. I've looked at the new map (which I must say is far better than the old one), but I've never noticed that before. Do we need separate articles for each route?; does Metrolink or elsewhat have them? Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 13:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Im not shore but the trams still show as 3 routes on their displays even though the new map as been on them for about a year.Likelife (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theres only two routes 

message: Why was the pages so out of date?
I've updated all route pages and this page, as routes were still shown as red, yellow and green. There is now no new publication of this as the routes are now green and lime see the route map. Also I have changed all infobox images with the new livery and changed the opertor to TFL (as it has been of a year), explaned the new route colours plus cleaned up some history.
* But all route 1 and 2 s-boxs need changing to the new lime colour. Likelife (talk) 15:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: HANG ON A SECOND: before you do anything else, these colours: please use the colours from the PDF, and don't just make up garish and 'orrible colours that melt your eyeballs. Cheers. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 15:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Im changing the colours I'll hope these are better but they are not perfect. Likelife (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  update 

message: The s-line boxs need changing there 'colors' to ADFF2F for routes 1&2 and 9ACD32 for route 3 but I have no idea on how to change them, could someone help!Likelife (talk) 16:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  template:s-line (new colors) 

message: Is there any stops which arent? if not can remove the wheelchair logo clutter and add a simple note that all stations are accessible. WatcherZero (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact its already in the stop description so gonna go ahead and remove. WatcherZero (talk) 01:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wheelchair acessible 

message: Please note that this page is for discussing TRAMLINK. It is not a place to post images NOT about Tramlink Likelife (talk) 17:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  They have been doing it on other pages too, I must admit to being flummoxed as to motive, I wondered if they were trying to increase the profile of his/her own images? WatcherZero (talk) 17:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Stop posting Piccadilly line images

message: Suggest changing the relevant line to the form 'The Announcer system is of the following format...' (as it will differ for all stops).
And I would be grateful if 'the proverbial someones' would help develop the relevant tramlink articles on the London wiki [www.london.wikia.org]. Jackiespeel (talk) 22:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion and request

message: The Harrington Road link on the route map should point to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrington_Road_tram_stop. At present there is no link or a wrong one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.2.75 (talk) 21:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion 2

message: Is it true that Mitcham to Mitcham Junction is being doubled? best, Sunil060902 (talk) 21:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Wheeltapper (talk) 18:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doubling Mitcham to Mitcham Jnc 

message: # What is the source for this change?
# The colour "bottle green" is actually closer to District line green. Useddenim (talk) 11:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it perhaps the darkest of the three greens seen here? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why not simply call it "dark green"? Useddenim (talk) 14:18, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea. It seems to be associated with these six edits. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bottle green 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/croydon/
*:Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Tramlink. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090713203635/http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/pdf/final_ch04d.pdf to http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/strategies/transport/pdf/final_ch04d.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150620133639/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/2055.aspx to http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/2055.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ::Also, who has removed information about the derailment in 2012 involving 2538 at East Croydon? This was a notable incident because there was a big article about it in several newspapers/magazines and made the major newspapers and the BBC, it caused major disruption at East Croydon and the RAIB wrote a big report on this. I will be re-adding it. WP:NOTNEWS is only for breaking news stories as far as i know, and newsgroups can be used as sources. Also, if you think about it, the accidents are encyclopaedic, because people can find out how they happened. Class455fan1 (talk) 18:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not add unencyclopaedic and non-notable information to Wikipedia without first establishing why it is notable. Simply saying "it caused delays" isn't cause for inclusion. I was delayed on the M6 earlier, I didn't include that in the M6 article. Jeni (talk) 22:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If you re-add the information again, you are in violation of WP:3RR.  Jeni (talk) 22:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If it makes you happy, I can add some information from the RAIB's investigation on to it? How does that sound? Class455fan1 (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What information are you proposing? What information do you have that shows this is notable beyond "it caused delays"? Jeni (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Information from this source (https://www.gov.uk/raib-reports/derailment-of-a-tram-at-east-croydon). I can add information about the main cause of the accident perhaps? Class455fan1 (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO the content concerning the 2012 event as last included had no justification for inclusion as no encyclopedic notability had been demonstrated. It is possible that if the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) had made recommendations or requirements of lasting significance in their report there might be such justification. The content would need to be carefully re-written and sourced.SovalValtos (talk) 23:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: They did indeed make recommendations to Tramlink. If its not mentioned on this source, i can dig through my Today's Railways archive to find some info. That was what i was proposing, to re-write it. Class455fan1 (talk) 07:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

text: This may help its case! I've found a big report (I think this is the full report) here . It includes not one but three recommendations from the RAIB. Class455fan1 (talk) 07:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

text: Care to share these recommendations with the class? Are they actually noteworthy recommendations? Jeni (talk) 20:31, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If you scroll to p.30 of the document, you can find out what they are. I would have copy and pasted them, but i would fall foul of WP:COPYVIO. Number 3 is not notable. Number 1 is notable and Number 2 may be. Number 1 is recommending Tramlink to review its signalling and operational arrangements at East Croydon and to consider whether undue reliance is being placed on the correct operation of track circuits. and Number 2 recommends Tramlink should identify areas of paved track where silt collects and carry out an improved inspection and cleaning regime where such silt may affect the safe operation of the system. If you want to see them in full, see page 30 of the document. Hope this helps. Class455fan1 (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 derailment 

message: Should the sentence be changed to 'then Mayor of London Boris Johnson' - thus alerting non-London/British readers that there is now a different Mayor? 193.132.104.10 (talk) 17:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension A 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tramlink. 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/20110927222352/http://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/news482.htm to http://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/news482.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927223311/http://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/news363.htm to http://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/news363.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071111080806/http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/19 to http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/19
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) 23:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:19, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hi everyone,
I am aware this has likely come up before, but is there any possible objections to merging the separate Tramlink "Route" pages into this Tramlink article? The route numbers on destination blinds have not been used for a considerable number of years now and the separate articles serve little purpose.
Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 04:08, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a great idea and I support if fully. Given the lack of any feedback at all since your post (albeit over a holiday period) why don't you just boldly do it and see what happens. At the worst someone will revert you and the discussion will then get started properly. It's OK to do this. See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.  If you copy any material from those into this article then be sure to read Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia to understand the need to attribute the transfer of material.  10mmsocket (talk) 11:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

text: There are pros and cons. A strong argument can be made to keep them as 'historical' routes. On the other hand, as noted, the descriptors are no longer relevant. I would caution, however, that if Tramlink route 1 and Tramlink route 2 are redirected to Tramlink then relevant information be moved as well (unlike  and  which were simply changed to redirects without updating the main article). Useddenim (talk) 16:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

text: I would have thought that it was more sensible to move all the Tramlink articles into London Trams, as the "Tramlink" name has not been use for a while. Usual redirecting would be required, of course. Bazza (talk) 17:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Tramlink remains the WP:COMMONNAME. London Trams is the corporate name. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:46, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Proposal 

message: @User:Trainsandotherthings Tramlink#Former lines reused Gauntlet track is inderectly mentioned as Interlaced track in the caption of the file. Peter Horn User talk 21:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That hardly counts as a significant mention. See also is not a laundry list of things that have only the tiniest relation. The gauntlet track examples article (which I'm not convinced is even encyclopedic per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, but I won't die on that hill) is a relevant link, for instance, on the gauntlet track article (duh) and the article on switches, along with Dual gauge. It shouldn't just be dropped anywhere there's a minor mention. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gauntlet track 

message: It is no longer called Tramlink so why don't we name it London Trams? 2001:8003:E83D:3D00:4C29:118F:2A14:B812 (talk) 11:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: See #Merger Proposal follow up - if there's anything new to add to the case you can put it here. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 11:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we change title to London Trams? 

message: Hello, there is an RfC here about the notability of Tramlink stops. Feel free to join if interested. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 19:39, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  About an RfC