Talk:Jordanhill railway station/Archive 1

message: For the date of the creation of this article, dont forget that 23:09 on 1 March 2006 is GMT time. For Paris time for example, it was created at 00:09 on 2 March 2006 (the spanish welcome page should be changed or be more precise for example, same time as in Paris)
Vberger 11:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah one million articles is a lot, but the problem is this article is probably quite difficult to expand compared to the half a million article. -- Snailwalker | talk 23:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I guess we'd better try! Melchoir 23:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think Nach0king is a worthy winner as I've been checking Special:Recentchanges today and he's added quite a lot of articles on Scottish railway stations, not just tried to hit the million mark as quite a lot of people did. David | Talk 23:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  See Wikipedia talk:1m-PR-en for a quick summary of the peopel going for the number. - SimonLyall 23:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The half-millionth article was Involuntary settlements in the Soviet Union. Now if only some of those people had been involuntarily settled at Jordanhill...! Lee M 02:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, it's a pity it wasn't Welsh. You know... Welsh... Wales...! still at least there's a Celtic connection, sorta.
Congratulations! Jordanhill railway station - how fantastically mundane! Adambisset 18:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Millionth Article

message: C'mon!!
Lotsofissues 23:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unexpandable, you say?  Just look at it now - and just wait until next week, when the press release has been circulated and printed! Warofdreams talk 00:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: No way. There are lots of articles like this. --Banana04131 00:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afd? 

message: # yes to afd. Gtabary 23:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No way. There are lots of articles like this. --Banana04131 00:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So let's have some vote, just to see. AFD ? 

message: With the imminent publicity, perhaps Jordanhill will become a 'celebrity station.'
Life imitating facts? :-)
asnatu 23:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good excuse for a flash mob. We could all go to the station, dance around singing "yeah one million!" then disperse :) --Durin 23:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe we could convince Scotrail to rename it 'Wikipedia railway station'. Or maybe we shouldn't even ask and someone should go there and replace all the signs :)  Husky (talk page) 23:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The train for the gathering leaves from Platform 2¾ --Jumbo 02:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikimeca A333A 01:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visit this railway station 

message: I bet, that if someone translates the article for the German Wikipedia, it will not take longer than 5 minutes until some of the busy, fast deleting "that's not worth beeing a German 
Wikipedia article"-activists there will kick it out. Could be a reason for them to think about their politics in that field--84.56.115.190 23:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, let's see about the 5 minutes. I just translated the article to German. --Splette  00:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  ok, it's still there, could maybe have something to do with the hint on the millionth article ;-)--84.56.115.190 00:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Put a notice on the talk page of the German article, explaining it's the millionth on the English version. That may justify it somewhat (I'd do it, but my German is hopeless) -- Gurch 00:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't be so negative about german wikipedia - the rules are strict, but not ignorant... --Trickstar 01:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, my god this is so sad. I have to admit you were right. It took more than 5 min but the German article is now candidate for deletion . So far there is a majority to keep it... --Splette  09:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's now that I realise how woefully crummy Babelfish is. Among the translations of the AfD vote it has come with is "Something which this station does not make enzyklopaedisch is able I to discover delete -- Finanzer 10:17, 2. Maer 2006 (CET) P.S. the size of the M... on EN is me banana. " and "I was times courageous and have the totally irrelevant muck rausgeschmissen. The info. von Toolittle should stand after possibility in the article. For the time being to delete neutrally with tendency. -- Gardini somewhat to look up leave?" smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. I imagine most non-English wikipedians speak enough English to be able to go to en.wik... for more niche Britain/America related topics. Very arrogant. The wider issue aside though, this article definitely *does* need to be kept. The topic is now a small part of history, and there is a high probability of people searching for it, not just on the english version. On this topic, I'm surprised I can't find this article in pt.wikipedia.org or es.wikipedia.org yet.
We keep your cute little station. @Gurch: Your German works (somehow). Greetings from Germany. --80.132.55.67 21:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd vote for deletion, too, if my IP wasn't blocked in the German wikipedia (not my fault). To the next one million articles on railway stations.129.13.186.1 23:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations for other Wikipedias 

message: I didn't think I'd have to actually say this, but: don't. Melchoir 23:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, indeed. No self-references. Until we do get permission to have the "Wikipedia's Millionth Article" Plaque fixed in the wall of the station, in which case it would be worth mentioning! David | Talk 23:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that would be awesome. Melchoir 00:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Is it less notable than the number of parking spaces? Haukur 00:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If it gets picked up by the media, which it hasn't yet, then a mention might be appropriate. Otherwise, saying in the article that it's the millionth on Wikipedia is original research, I kid you not. Melchoir 00:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can cite the Wikipedia press release, that's a publication by a reasonably respected website and should meet WP:V. Haukur 00:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had that thought, but I'm squeamish about citing... us. There was talk at the press release draft about "choosing" a good representative millionth article, and an early draft indicated a different article. At least one Slashdot comment accuses us of covering up that the true millionth article was something embarassing. Now, I trust the result announced at [Wikipedia:Village pump (news)#The millionth article], but I think it could invite trouble to cite ourselves on this one. Let some media outlet regurgitate the press release, and we can cite that. Melchoir 02:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it's about to hit slashdot - my "Wikipedia reaches 1,000,000 articles" story submission shows as having been accepted and there's something about to hit the front page.  Ohh, I'm getting all tingly :-) </geek> -- AJR | Talk 01:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The queue from acceptance to front page is usually about 12 hours. Raul654 01:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: NEvermind, it's up. Raul654 01:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: and a link! Jillium 01:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text:  It's now on google news with ten articles, check the link you posted :) -- Dandelions 19:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mentioning one million 

message: No article? Can someone with knowledge of the area create one, please -- Gurch 23:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Created as stub =). — TheKMantalk 00:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Glasgow, Yoker and Clydebank Railway]] 

message: Bottle thug hit pensioner, 81.
156 words
30 January 2001
Evening Times
7
English
(c) 2001 SMG Newspapers Ltd
A THUG struck an 81-year-old man with a bottle because he thought the OAP was "being cheeky", a court heard.
James McGill (22) hit James McGinn on the head at the platform of Jordanhill Station in Glasgow.
Glasgow Sheriff Court heard McGill told police: "I don't know why I hit him. I thought he was being cheeky to me."
Cath Harper, prosecuting, said Mr McGill had turned to Mr McGinn and asked him the time before hitting him with the bottle.
"Mr McGinn said he had been drinking with friends and had quite a hazy recollection of events. McGill told officers that he was sorry for assaulting Mr McGinn and said he thought Mr McGinn was being cheeky to him."
McGill, whose address was given as being a prisoner of Barlinnie, admitted the assault.
Deferring sentence, Sheriff John Baird said: "You going to jail is a distinct possibility." 
Lotsofissues 23:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What happened next? Did he go to jail? (I don't think it's notable, personally. Look at this article compared to the other stations on the line. It's big enough). -- Gurch 00:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I also don't think so. Melchoir 00:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: "You going to jail is a distinct possibility."?! His address was already given as Barlinnie Prison! -- Arwel (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this crime worthy of inclusion? 

message: The Diary.
By Ken Smith & David Belcher.
771 words
4 February 2004
The Herald
14
English
(c) 2004 SMG Newspapers Ltd.
Burning issue
A BURGER van at Jordanhill station in Glasgow's west end is surrounded by a crowd of lads from no-nonsense St Thomas Aquinas Secondary when a uniformed girl from the rather more upmarket Jordanhill School arrives and asks for a roll and potato scone, also requesting could she have "the scone fried crisp at the edges and soft in the middle". The burger-flipper ponders briefly, wondering whether his al fresco mobile establishment has been mistaken for the conservatory of the neighbouring Three Sisters restaurant. He then replies: "Look, hen, you can have it burnt like everybody else's."
How is it possible that this could be published?--Isn't the Herald a newspaper of record?  You Scottish people love class warfare.  Lotsofissues 00:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Burger van youths (was "Laughing")

message: The article uses a template (:Template:Stn_art_lrnk) for railway stations which is rather unfortunate: it claims to link to an aerial photo, but doesn't. The template should be fixed and point directly to our map and aerial photo source. AxelBoldt 00:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, multimap doesn't have an aerial photo source for that yet. Someone has already added one to Google Local, and Glaswegian Wikipedians will contribute ground-level photos soon. Nach0king 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I've removed the link from the template. Superm401 - Talk 00:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template is unfortunate 

message: There need to be sources for which lines this is on. Superm401 - Talk 00:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Seriously, this article is going to be so polished within the next....fifteen minutes, lol...Deckiller 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We should have featured stubs 

message: I have emailed First Scotrail asking about usage statistics for this station. Nach0king 00:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's after midnight in Scotland right now; I'll call them in the morning. Nach0king 01:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just off the phone with a very helpful woman at Scotrail. I asked her for usage statistics on Jordanhill and its two surrounding stations, as well as info on when staffed services ended etc. She said she will do her best to find out and email me the results. Here's hoping. Nach0king 09:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The most recent figures for these are available online from the Strategic Rail Authority (although responsibility for this has been transferred to the Department for Transport, who may be releasing a new set of figures soon). Based on ticket sales on 2002/03, there were 85,861 journeys started at that station, and 94,613 completed there, over a period of 1 year, and not taking into account SPT ZoneCards. . I don't know if someone would like to incorporate that into the article, or wait to hear back from First ScotRail? Teflon 12:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: That's an excellent starting point. Add that in and I'll add to that whatever Scotrail send to me. Nach0king 13:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage statistics 

message: Someone please nominate this article for DYK, I would do it myself, but I can't seem to figure out anything interesting about it. ("Did you know that Jordanhill railway station features 10 Bicycle racks and a ticket machine?") Obli (Talk)? 00:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, it's already linked a tad prominently from the main page already. Let's not go about asking for redundancies. Raul654 00:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, sorry, didn't see the new 1M notice Obli (Talk)? 00:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DYK 

message: Is there a way to find out the number of passengers which use the station on a daily basis? --HappyCamper 01:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have emailed them and will call them in the morning. Nach0king 01:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the section "Usage statistics"- basically, the woman on the phone said she'd email me the info I asked for. Nach0king 09:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various other tidbits 

message: Since the millionth article was about this place, do you think he'll come by and promote this station in a way pertinent to its fame here? Jimbo seems to travel the world often, so I wonder if he'll come to the Jordanhill railway station and put up a plaque or something similarly commemorative? --Shultz III 00:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like we both had the same idea! I suggested that on his talk page about 20 minutes ago. BillyH 00:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Will [[Jimbo]] visit the station on vacation? 

message: I know they are copyrighted, but maybe a link.  Is this what it is? --Rayc 00:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How can Google maps be copyrighted? The images are in the public domain. That's how Google gets to use them. --Jumbo 02:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh no no. Read the page, this particular one is (C) The GeoInformation Group. Google pays for anything anywhere near to being closeup.  --  user:zanimum
I don't think we should any images unless they're highly relevant and free.  People have attempted to add the ScotRail logo and a home-made image (which doesn't provide the original source and hence may be an illeagal derivative work).  We should be able to get a good free image tomorrow; until then, I think we should hold off. Superm401 - Talk 03:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The two images are different cases.  I can only speak to the logo. I added the ScotRail logo image to this article.  It's use clearly falls under fair use to represent a station of their railway system.  It certaily is not as good as a picture of the station, but I maintain it is better than having nothing while we wait for the picture. Johntex\talk 03:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but why take away an image that relates to the article while we wait for something even better?  Why not give our readers a little splash of color and educate them about the logo for the rail line at the same time? Johntex\talk 03:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone has now removed the logo, claiming it is not fair use.  Can someone please expalin how the logo of a railway company is not fair-use on an article about a railway station they manage?  The station can be considered part of the company, and the logo is fair use to represent the company.  By extension, the logo is fair use to represent a portion of the company, or a portion of the company's operations. Johntex\talk 03:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google maps 

message: *Support - The logo represents the company that runs the station.  The station can be considered part of the company's operations, and the logo is fair use to represent the company.  By extension, the logo is fair use to represent a portion of the company, or a portion of the company's operations. Johntex\talk 03:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for reminding us of the policy. I agree policy is also important, but this is not against policy.  The policy you cite says "...or specifically illustrate relevant points..."  The management of the station is mentioned in the article, and it is relevant. Johntex\talk 04:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo [[:Image:ScotRaillogo.jpg]]

message: *Oppose This siteThe source site specifically disclaims the right to put their content on "websites" Johntex\talk 03:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tagged it  and User:Johntex removed it from the article.  He is incorrect in thinking the website's copyright policy is relevant.  Fair use is for when the copyright holder doesn't want you to use the image.  However, he was right to remove it because it doesn't fit Wikipedia:Fair use (a free alternative will almost certainly be here tomorrow) and there probably isn't sufficient need/purpose for it.  Superm401 - Talk 03:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Comment:Try reading their copywrite page before tagging and deleting.  The image will work for now until we have a better one.  thanks!   Mmeinhart 04:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old, small b&w photo [[:Image:JordanhillStation.jpg]]

message: Awesome image - great for top of article. Thanks  L1AM! Johntex\talk 05:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - Wow, I saw this discussion and was about to add here but you beat me to it. Glad you like it! (Its not the best but hey, I tried) And for those who haven't seen the images summary, I made it from scratch but it was inspired by a photo seen here . Even with some soon-to-be-added photos, this might have some use. — L1AM (talk) 05:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are the old-design station signs. The new ones look very different. In the meantime, though, that's great! Nach0king 09:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops. I guess that would explain why they're being sold as collectables (I should have known better). Ah well. — L1AM (talk) 10:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Handmade station sign [[:Image:Jordanhill-station-sign.png]]

message: *This one has been removed because it is tagged non-commericial.  I don't see why that should cause it's removal.  We are a non-commercial website. Johntex\talk 06:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I have already politely mentioned to you - it is impolite of you to keep implying that people haven't read the policy - especially when I have specifically informed you I have read the policy.  The word "non-commercial" does not even appear on the page you reference.  Do you want to try again to justify your erroneous belief and bad behavior?  I notice that you have already resorted to violating Wikipedia:Three Revert Rule in an effort to enforce your control over this page. Images are speedy-deletes if they are illegal to use.  If they have a proper fair use justification, then they are fair-use, regardless of whether the copyright owner puts up some mumbo-jumbo claim that says otherwise. Johntex\talk 20:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aireal View [[:Image:Jrs.jpg]]

message: I urge all contributors not to get involved in the above vote. The discussion is only minutes old. ed g2s • talk 03:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thank you, but it is not a vote.  It is a discussion of our positions based upon our understanding of relevant law, wiki-policy, wiki-guidelines, editorial taste, etc.  It is an attempt to get consensus on each image individually, and to avoid edit warring. Johntex\talk 04:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Precisely, we don't need to fill in with un-free poor quality images just because they provide a bit of decoration. ed g2s • talk 04:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: And in the meantime, while we have hundreds or thousands of visitors coming to the page, why shouldn't they see these fair-use images?  For that matter, even after we have a photo, why shouldn't we keep a map, and possibly even a logo, if we decide as an editorial decision to do so? Johntex\talk 04:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sensing the need for someone to go there in real life and snap pics :) Raul654 04:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How silly, you guys fight over it all night.  Dont be jealous I downloaded the first legit image of the station.  My claim to fame baby!  haha  Mmeinhart 04:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Having copyright unfree images all over a front-page article hardly sends out the right message to visitors of the free encylopædia. Especially when their usage is contradictory to our own policies. If you would just please read the fair use policy page... ed g2s • talk 04:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not at all - it is consistent with our goal of expanding people's access to informaiton, including informaiton obtained under legitimate fair use protection under relevant laws. Also, I think I have made clear that I have read the policy, so please don't keep asking me to read it, it borders on being insulting. Johntex\talk 04:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, but you don't seemed to have understood the underlying principle. Wikipedia is about providing free information. Fair use does not extend to third party use, and so is not free. It is used as a last resort, when there is better alternative. There is a clear better alternative here, the text "First ScotRail". The logo of the ScotRail does not tell us much about Jordanhill station. ed g2s • talk 04:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I disagree with both your assertion of facts and your logic. You state there is a better alternative, but that assumes facts not in evidence. Firstly, no one has yet uploaded a free picture. Secondly, even with a picture, we may make the editorial decision that the logo provides a different value. As to your logic, if fair use images were not beneficial, they would not be allowed at all. The fact that a free image is better than an identical fair-use image is not relevant when only the fair use image is in existence. Johntex\talk 04:46, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General discussion, not specific to a single image

message: link. Can we use this? are ordinace maps public domain? Found on this website: --God <FONT FACE="Symbol">O</font>  War 06:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already mentioned it in a reference; it is public domain in the US because it was published before 1923.  However, I don't want to include it because of the letters. If someone edited them out, that would be cool. Superm401 - Talk 07:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we provide a legend to correspond with the letters? – Minh Nguy?n (talk, contribs) 08:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ordinace Image

message: The above site led me to The Mitchell Library. Is this related? They're 1914, thus PD. -- user:zanimum
: Images may not be reproduced without the permission of the copyright holder. What?  --  user:zanimum
:UK copyright. Something like life of the author +80 years.Geni 13:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bridge construction

message: Try not to duplicate any map links (like Google Maps) that are on the mapsource page, which is linked to from the first sentence.  Superm401 - Talk 05:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Maps

message: I don't think some of the photos are too great, no offence to the person who was kind enough to go out and photograph them, considering this page will recieve media attention in the next week or so and has a large link on the main page. I suggest maybe only having three images on the page in its current size. Also, the train arriving photo is pretty poor, the sun in the corner is very distracting. I suggested this here first, as not to offend anybody. --HamedogTalk|@ 13:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like to think that the sun in the corner represnts the dawn of a new era, the arrival of a new day, a new train and a new article. But while it's not much chop as a photograph, I think it is great that photographs were taken and uploaded at the earliest possible moment. Including one of the famous ticket machine. --Surgeonsmate 13:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I was thinking on similar lines as Hamedog, especially about the "train arriving" one. Many thanks, by the way, to Erath for coming up with these! My favourite Erath photo so far is the footbridge - Image:Jordanhill station pedestrian bridge.png. What are other people's opinions? Also, I think a photo of the front of the station would be good. --A bit iffy 13:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I do admit, the sun really bit into one or two of those, and it was only a cameraphone. I'll blame haste and give you free reign to criticise - but that's why I took 8 of them. Erath 13:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery on page? 

message: It's great to have this one little station have a huge article, but it makes no sense to do it without expanding nearby stations... surely we can find more info on them, rather than just leaving them as stubs? I'll get right on it, but since I'm not from the UK, I'd like some help. :-) SonicAD (talk) 04:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nearby Stations? 

message: How should we deal with the postcode? I don't think it should be in the intro, but I also don't think it should be in the "Services" section where it was before. I'm not even sure whether the postcode should be included as it's probably of no interest to anyone (except me, as I find postcodes interesting, but I'm sad like that). Any comments?
Also, I've changed the text again so that, as before, it doesn't say "in Glasgow postcode area G11 7DW". This is because a postcode area has a technical meaning - in this case the "postcode area" is the "G" at the beginning of the code. Hope that's OK with everyone. --A bit iffy 08:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know.  The two most notable things about a railway station are where it is and where it can get you to. There seems reason enough to include postcode. Superm401 - Talk 09:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Does anyone have a source for the current code.  The station profile has "G13 1QL" as the code. Superm401 - Talk 09:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the UK railway stations - J list on this site is usually up-to-date. Nach0king 09:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  A small percentage of postcodes do change each year. That could be the reason for the inconsistency. --A bit iffy 09:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hopefully the info that First Scotrail have pledged to send me will help on this matter. As the station doesn't contain any addressed buildings (that I know of), I wonder if they even keep records of its exact postcode, instead of just one that would locate it on a map. Nach0king 10:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Because the station info at both nationalrail.co.uk and firstgroup listed the G13 IQL code, I've changed the article to this.  Superm401 - Talk 10:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm, but the new coordinates are way off, pointing to a house west of the station. Mihai -talk 10:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I've changed the geo coordinates back.  I got the new ones from multimap, but I don't think that's where the original's from, as they have another digit. Superm401 - Talk 10:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Petty postcode point

message: There's no point in badgering Scotrail for ridership stats. They're online for all stations in the UK, here:
http://www.sra.gov.uk/pubs2/performance_statistics/stat_usage/stat_usage.exc
Also, read the notes about them:
http://www.sra.gov.uk/pubs2/performance_statistics/stat_usage/stat_usage_notes.pdf
A435(m) 14:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Detailed info, such as the most popular destinations of the tickets bought from JH, might be nice. Nach0king 00:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ridership Stats 

message: Bad idea, people don't want to download 400k for <1 MPx images... ed g2s • talk 15:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, my mistake. Thanks to whoever started JPG'ing them. Erath 17:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PNG photos 

message: The map looks suspiciously like it was copied from google maps, or a similar unfree source. OpenStreetMap explain this in more detail here. ed g2s • talk 15:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map