Talk:C2c/Archive 1

message: Can someone with the necessary power and knowledge please rename this page from "C2c" to "c2c"? (This unsigned comment was by...) 62.64.16.135 01:38, 9 December 20030 (UTC)
: can't be done. page names always start with a capital lettter (so far). -- Tarquin 15:57, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name 

message: Does "c2c" actually stand for anything, and what?
: According to their website: "The name c2c doesn’t mean anything specific. In a sense it can mean anything you want it to. It’s uniqueness reflects the young, vibrant character of the people we serve. c2c could stand for coast to capital, or capital to coast. From our point of view, one of the most important things it stands for is commitment to customers." --MRSC 09:29, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow, shameless self promotion. I think I will stick with Virgin JayKeaton 08:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Company name 

message: Please note that C2c_trains used to run under the wiki page C2c. C2c now redirects to C2C disembag where you can find C2c_trains. Any old links to C2c as in the trains will lead to the disembag so you can still find your way to C2c_trains with old links. I have changed most of the old C2c links to C2c_trains though, so please leave things as they are. If you must change anything, hunt down more train related C2c links and swap them for C2c_train. Please make it so it visually LOOKS like c2c, but so it links to C2c_trains, this is to keep the original meaning of the text intact. Thank you for your co-operation JayKeaton 09:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be C2c Rail not trains to use the correct British English, as per their name - shown on the website.--JBellis 10:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ta, wasn't too sure about that. I checked the other wiki pages such as Virgin and Arriva and they all seemed to be trains. I assumed that whoever oringally created c2c page thought that c2c was the best match to the company name, but if it is actually called c2c Rail then I guess we were both wrong (me and creator). British English, I usually travel Arriva myself, probably because they practically run the lines where I live. JayKeaton 11:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where UK train operating companies require disambig they take the form xyz (train operating company) as in Thameslink (train operating company), Southern (train operating company) and One (train operating company). MRSC 11:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aaagh! Could we get a bot to fix all the links to avoid the redirects - it took me an hour last time to do all the en.wp links, and another 10-15 minutes to do commons and the four incomming interwiki links. Thryduulf 11:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh dear. Perhaps the original move was somewhat ill conceived. MRSC 11:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of Wikipedia useage, the TOC is by far the most important. I fixed ~30 articles, most with more than one link (many had three or four). I haven't check the other disambiguated articles, but there were only about 5 other links to the disambig page when I finished. If it were moved back to c2c (with the disambig at C2C or  C2C (disambiguation) fixing the links in most cases would be as simple as reverting my change. Thryduulf 12:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes I agree. The rail company is the only lowercase use of c2c anyhow. MRSC 12:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just counted and there are 119 articles with inbound links to here on en.wp, 4 inbound interwiki links (:de:c2c, :fr:c2c, :nl:c2c and :no:c2c) and 9 links that I found on Commons. Thryduulf 12:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I should say that if it is moved back, I would not object to someone using rollback on my changes even though it isn't vandalism.Thryduulf 12:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. I don't mind reverting a few. MRSC 12:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bah, whatever JayKeaton 16:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "c2c" in Google brings up about 5,340,000 results, "c2c -rail -train" (that is every page that has "c2c" in it but no where on the page has the word "train" or "rail") brings up about about 5,000,000 results. Interesting. JayKeaton 04:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be so, but "c2c -train -rail -toc -station" takes it down to 2,350,000 and even then the sixth link is to the train company's official website. "c2c -train -rail -toc -station -c2c-online -tilbury -southend -travel -"Liverpool st" -"Liverpool street" -LTS" takes it down to 2,190,000. What is important though is the relative importance on Wikipedia, and as Mrsteviec has pointed out none of the other organisations use c2c in lowercase. Thryduulf 08:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The links and redirects are fixed so the article can be moved back to c2c now. MRSC 19:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Move it BACK to c2c after all this :S That is just nuts!JayKeaton 17:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  C2c trains 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
:Oppose on technical grounds. You may think that the article was moved to "c2c" but it's actually "C2c" - the MediWiki software insists that the first character of an article name must be capitalised. -- Arwel (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Comment - I don't see what difference that makes as c2c is the actual name of the company and the same problem occurs with the current article naming. Despite the technical problem, entering c2c as a search phrase or link would go straight here after the move. MRSC 18:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Oppose. The only choice is to put a lowercase letter template. Georgia guy 17:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Support. There is no way to avoid a lowercase letter template, so we might as well use the official name. There is a dablink at the top to avoid any potential confusion. Thryduulf 01:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what the heck you're talking about, but it's obvious to me this should be moved back. —Nightstallion (?) 07:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Is there any objection over moing C2C to C2C (disambiguation)? See talk:C2C#Requested move. Simply south 16:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: According to the press release from National Express, the c2c trains will have the same livery as the two other franchises (NX East Coast and NX East Anglia). There is nothing to suggest the c2c name will change, other than newsgroup speculation. We should not replicate that. MRSC • Talk 17:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wonder if they're starting to do something - they seem to be repainting the lights at Limehouse white with a blue stripe at the moment, while the other stations are fuchsia with a grey stripe. I don't know if this relates to Limehouse being a bit of a strange left-out station in general (it looks a little like DLR branding) or if the pink really is going. --Dandelions (talk) 22:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: rebrand/renaming

message: There has been an edit war over the inclusion of the following paragraph:
::The c2c line is unusal in the fact it only has what is basicly one line and is the only train operating company on the UK mainline other then the island Line in the isle of wight to have only one main route which terminates Shoeburyness and there is no space to expand it due to the the Shenfield to Southend Line branch and Crouch Valley Line already serves the area operated by sister company National Express East Anglia orginally called `one`
I have removed it, principally on the grounds that it is factually inaccurate: Gatwick Express, Heathrow Express and, potentially, National Express East Coast spring to mind as counterexamples.  Also, Island Line isn't a a TOC any more.  --RFBailey (talk) 23:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is one fact, there is no space to expand it due to the NXEA serving the area and the Gatwick Express is owned by National Express Group so it isnt a toc, i have edited it and put it back as its factual now,Heathrow Connect would be a better example then Heathrow Express as it actually has intermediate stations, the Heathrow Express is just a shuttle--123andy321 (talk) 13:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Gatwick Express is a train operating company: it operates trains, so that makes it one.  The comment regarding expansion suggests you don't understand how the franchising process works: it's not up to c2c to make changes to their operations.  --RFBailey (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war