Talk:Walsall–Wolverhampton 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 references.

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

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Walsall-Wolverhampton Line RDT.

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/walsallrail/
Triggered by \bpetition(?:online|s)?\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 18:12, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 19:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 06:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 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 Walsall–Wolverhampton line. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 18:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Walsall to Wolverhampton Line → Walsall to Wolverhampton line – Downcase per WP:NCCAPS; sources mostly do not cap it. Optionally, say if you prefer to use the symmetric dashed version (Walsall–Wolverhampton line) rather than "to" between place names. Dicklyon (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence in sources

news
books

Please examine the searches; there is no particularly common name, but rather descriptions for the line. The symmetric dashed version, corresponding to "and" in some sources, is my preference since that's what most other such articles are using. Dicklyon (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support—and yes, I do prefer the typographical version: it's much easier for readers to apprehend. Tony (talk) 10:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I concur: Walsall–Wolverhampton line like all the others. Dicklyon (talk) 02:42, 12 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.