Talk:London and North Eastern Railway

message: This article doesn't mention which London termini the LNER used. Someone here must know this? Colin4C (talk) 14:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say Liverpool Street (Great Eastern services), Kings Cross (East Coast mainline) and Marylebone (Grear Central services), I cannot recall any other LNER  mainline termini.  XTOV (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's the lot as far as long-distance services were concerned - but it's often forgotten that the LNER also owned Fenchurch Street, which had more LMS trains than LNER. I've added info to London and North Eastern Railway#Geographic area. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  London Termini 

message: The article says nothing of the ships operated by the LNER. Mjroots (talk) 09:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ships

message: Please note that there is an ongoing discussion on this article and articles on the other "Big Four" pre-nationalisation companies here. Contributions to the discussion are welcomed. ColourSarge (talk) 19:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: NOTE: The Discussion has been archived here.-- EdJogg (talk) 13:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on format and push for GA status 

message: On 16th May 2018 it was announced that pursuant to Governement Policies set out in UK Parliament by Tannsport Minister Chris Grayling, the East Coast Main Line will be renationalised in June this year. Both The BBC and The Guardian reported that the new name for this nationalised railway will be the London & North Eastern Railway.  I added a paragraph to this article referencing the said changes under the heading of "Re_Emergence Of Name" including references to the speech and policy changes and references to the articles concerned. The added paragraph made it clear that no direct business connection existed between the two companies and this was indeed one of the reasons for making the situation clear. My paragraph was swiftly removed with no reason given. I hereby submit that the creation of the new railway under this name needs to be present in this article whether the other editor likes it or not - The UK Government have done this, not me. I would ask whether the editor who removed my addition did so because he or she feels as though they are personally caretakers to this article and don't like other people getting involved... or just jealous of the name LNER and don't like the idea of the new company. There is quite clearly an explanation needed in this article - even if only to differentiate from the original company. otherwise there's going to have to be a disambiguation page.  THIS HAPPENED. It happened on May 16 2018. The article is now factually out of date as a result of an edit.86.170.157.134 (talk) 13:02, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Use Of Name 

message: It was a for-profit company listed on the stock market. 
What was its financial performance like? Did it make profits, or lose money? Did its shares outperform the stock market or lag? How did its shares perform relative to other railway companies in the UK? Dividends? Return on capital?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.160.165.186 (talk) 09:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did it make any profit? 

message: The opinion of rail historian Simon A.C. Martin is used to describe Thompson's tenure, but it's uncited. Presumably it's from Edward Thompson Wartime CME, ISBN 9781913390280, but I don't have access. Tagged .--AntientNestor (talk) 08:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  CME Edward Thompson