Template talk:Great Eastern main line RDT

message: It seems a mis-use of the template concept to make a single page like this which is specific to one Wikipedia article. I can see the benefit in removing the complex text of the route diagram from the main page, but is this the best way to do it? It makes editing of the route diagram difficult (maybe that's what was intended?). Sangwine (talk) 21:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is better raised at WT:RDT. Most route templates like this are only to one article. Simply south (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, and now I have looked there I can see that there are a huge number of templates like this one. Therefore I can accept that this is an OK way to handle these diagrams. Sangwine (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

message: 151.231.46.53 (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. --Stfg (talk) 16:55, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request, 30 November 2013 

message: Great Eastern Main Line Template
Jamesbutch (talk) 09:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 8 December 2013 

message: I am adding a stopping sign to Forest Gate on the main line.
Jamesbutch (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Forest Gate is served only by "all-stations" trains - nothing that runs beyond Shenfield. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 20 December 2013 

message: Editing Great Eastern Main Line
Abcdefghiljklo (talk) 14:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2014 

message: Please replace the code with the following:
:moved to 
Changes: as usual... "upd links + new icons, smooth curves, trim whitespace, simplify, BS-map, , ". Can be marked as minor (no change of content). YLSS (talk) 23:47, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Wikipedia:Template sandbox and test cases, please could you sandbox that? Over the last year or so, there have been a number of trivial changes to this template, many of which countermand previous trivial changes. I would like to see just how your proposal differs from the present version before altering anything. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:08, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? ;) The visual differences are these: 1) removed Olympic rings (I suppose there are not needed any more?) 2) smoothed a couple of curves. That's all. BTW, the parent article should be edited concurrently, with the  parameter of infobox changed to simply . YLSS (talk) 08:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

text:  copied to . YLSS (talk) 12:11, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: One q: why change Bishopsgate Low Level to ? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, that one was unintentional. Apparently messed something with regular expressions. YLSS (talk) 15:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: OK,  Done --Redrose64 (talk) 15:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request, 25 July 2014 

message: I have made a few small amendments here, please feel free to revert or modify if they are incorrect: (1) changed "Bishopsgate (Low Level)" to "Bishopsgate" as that was the station's name upon its closure, (2) changed "Coborn Road" to "Coborn Road for Old Ford" as that was the station's name upon its closure, (3) changed "Globe Road" to "Globe Road & Devonshire Street" as that was the station's formal name, (4) changed Romford to an interchange station as there is now interchange with LO, (5) a number of minor copyediting changes. --TBM10 (talk) 18:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  My changes 

message: Should we add to the diagram the disused sidings to the west of Ilford (underneath the A406) known as the Aldersbrook sidings? --TBM10 (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aldersbrook sidings 

message: Between Liverpool Street and Bethnal Green there are three lines, the "Suburban", "Main" and "Electric" lines, although the diagram currently only shows two. Bethnal Green is technically shown as being a stop on the Main line, when it should be on the Suburban. Could we add a third line out of Liverpool Street, diverging after Bethnal Green towards the WAML?
: Is this what you wanted? Useddenim (talk) 22:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me, thanks! Only suggestions I would make are: Bishopsgate station should be on the electric line (right); at Bethnal Green West Junction there should be a crossover from the suburban line (left) to the main line (centre) at the same point where there is a crossover from the electric line to the main line; and at the point just before Bethnal Green station there should be a crossover from the main line to the suburban line at the same point where there is a crossover from the main line to the electric line. Thanks again. --TBM10 (talk) 16:52, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: . Useddenim (talk) 17:33, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Not sure whether it's worth adding the Temple Mills line that runs alongside the mains and electrics between Bow Junction and Stratford, what do you think? --TBM10 (talk) 21:40, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: . Useddenim (talk) 23:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Suburban" lines 

message: Hi there was just one thing I wanted to mention about the template, I just looked at it and seen that the Junction on the template shows that east of Shenfield, that the fast line is meant to be straight, with the slow line joining on from the left, but the template shows it the opposite way which is not right, I was trying to edit it but I wasn't sure how to, any help in fixing it would be much appreciated thanks. -- 04:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is a schematic diagram laid out for clarity, not a map, so minor ’errors’ such as that are tolerated when it improves the overall layout. The change you are asking for would result in something like the example to the right. Useddenim (talk) 13:31, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

text: Please read what I wrote last time: The diagram is not a map. The fast and slow lines come together, and then there’s a branch. There is no need to introduce an unnecessary kink. End of discussion. Useddenim (talk) 03:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shenfield Junction 

message: Looking at the diagram at the London end, something's not quite right. Past Bethnal Green, I think the diverging line (the West Anglia Mainline) is four tracked (with the extra two coming off the Main lines), but looking at the diagram, it appears as two. Can this be remedied to better reflect reality? RÆDWALD      E|T 20:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: please see the previous two discussions about a diagram vs a map. Useddenim (talk) 13:40, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bethnal Green four tracking