Talk:Abbey Line

message: As explained, I have rewritten this to include some history - I know it was in the Xlink, but it should be here too - and to put it into some chronological order Peter Shearan 06:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: I had to remove this nonsense.
If this were to happen the St Albans branch line could be transferred to the Bakerloo Line or Metropolitan Line once they are extended to Watford Junction.
This would require the line to cross the WCML which is simply not feasible without the construction of an expensive and un-necessary flyover.Sheepcot 22:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Transfer to TfL

message: I have removed the 'unref=yes' in the TrainsWikiProject tag as I believe that this article now has a reasonable number of inline citations and references.Sheepcot 22:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I have removed the 'mapneeded=yes' in the TrainsWikiProject tag as I believe that this article now has a reasonable map.Sheepcot 22:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: If we can get a photograph added to this page, then do people think that can we apply for "GA" status?? If not, then what more needs to be done.  Canterberry 20:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no expert on this field but it does seam awfully short for GA article (even a "B"), the self references (point 3 on city status) probably won't go down well. IMHO the history bit could be expanded quite a bit, the line website has stuff on it and there appears to be a book on the line.... Pickle 23:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: Time to start a discussion asking why Abbey Flyer cannot be bolded as an alternative name? Simply south (talk) 01:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abbey Flyer 

message: This surely isn't one because it's not in greater London.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 08:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: rail services which extended out of Greater London

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Abbey 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/20141129013520/http://www.stalbans.gov.uk/Images/Park%20Street%20%20Frogmore%20Character%20Statement.pdf to http://www.stalbans.gov.uk/Images/Park%20Street%20%20Frogmore%20Character%20Statement.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720085837/http://www.raib.gov.uk/latest_news/news_archive/news_archive_2006/060328_pn_watfordjunctionyard.cfm to http://www.raib.gov.uk/latest_news/news_archive/news_archive_2006/060328_pn_watfordjunctionyard.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems OK Dr Sludge (talk) 13:13, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I was at How Wood last night and it had a single ticket machine.  I guess the other intermediate stations do too.  So the article needs correcting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:7787:3700:519A:FDC0:195E:722B (talk) 12:48, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if you can satisfy WP:NOR and WP:V; but we don't include every little detail. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; I think the solution is to remove the current unnecessary detail, rather than include more. There's no need to go into such details for this page. (Perhaps on the individual station pages it may be relevant.) I reworded the ticket paragraph to remove excess details. --David Edgar (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ticket machines 

message: The section "The future" talks about "60,000 passengers per hour", apparently implying the current service. This seems unbelievable.
It appears to be taken from this report (Figure 4.19), as the maximum hourly capacity of heavy rail. This value is surely completely misused in this context, given the single class 319 in use. Are there more appropriate statistics to use in this section? --David Edgar (talk) 20:25, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems to have been extrapolated from a hypothetical figure for heavy rail derived from a very simple diagram. I don't see the relevance to the capacity of a short single line run by one short train either. I've ridden on that line and don't see where these people would come from, or go. Britmax (talk) 21:50, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I removed these figures and after re-reading the report (page 67), I reworded it according to what's actually said. --David Edgar (talk) 22:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  60,000 passengers per hour? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Abbey 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/20090301002607/http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/routeguide.htm to http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/routeguide.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090302010842/http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/routehistory.htm to http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/routehistory.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402194330/http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/timetable.htm to http://www.abbeyline.org.uk/timetable.htm
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) 00:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems OK Dr Sludge (talk) 13:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified