Talk:Aylesbury–Princes Risborough line

Trains: in UK Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Buckinghamshire (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Buckinghamshire, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BuckinghamshireWikipedia:WikiProject BuckinghamshireTemplate:WikiProject BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire articles

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Princes Risborough to Aylesbury Line.

Requested move 5 February 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved to Aylesbury–Princes Risborough line. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 17:07, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Princes Risborough to Aylesbury Line → Princes Risborough to Aylesbury line – Downcase per WP:NCCAPS; sources mostly do not cap it. Optionally, say if you prefer to use the symmetric dashed version (Princes Risborough–Aylesbury line) rather than "to" between place names. Dicklyon (talk) 06:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence in sources

news
books

Please examine the searches, see if there is a common name, whether the dashed version is preferred, and whether caps are preferred. It is my impression that there is no proper name here and that the dashed form is more common (and more logical and more consistent with other such lines). Dicklyon (talk) 06:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nom, though I'd prefer to dash it and turn it around to Aylesbury–Princes Risborough line; both dashed orders are in sources, so I'm OK with any. Dicklyon (talk) 06:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support with dash. Order doesn't matter when the "to" goes. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:26, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
SUpport with dash: Brings consistency with other XXX-YYY line articles and in line with sources. TheMagikCow (talk) 18:51, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.