Template talk:LGV Interconnexion Est

Fancy arrows

"Fancy arrows" are pretty and great, but I don't believe they should take priority over keeping a diagram accurate. That includes:

Motorway bridges
LGV Est double flying junction configuration
Offset CDG runway alignment
Differentiation between what is a different line and what is an old unused/lesser used route (old PSE route) and Vemars single-track spur.

For the moment I'm done a temporary undo; please feel free to re-add the beautification in a way that does not sacrifice factual quality. —Sladen (talk) 01:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me remind you that:

The template {{rmr}} is part of official WP:RDT use (see here and here for some nice examples)
Pink icons are used for either abandoned lines or lines other than the one in the diagram (like the LGV Nord) - no difference is made between the traffic on the tracks
Having the runways in different alignments just looks bad - either the runway crosses the track or it doesn't
I don't see the difference between the different LGV Est junctions

Therefore my edits, apart from the removing of the N2, N3 & N4 (for which I admit my mistake), do not remove factual accuracy but improve it by conforming to current WP:RDT rules.

Chris DHDR 16:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS:The track from the Coubert triangle towards Paris is in fact part of this line, even if it is used by almost all PSE trains - this will need to be changed.

Agreed, there are indeed some lovely examples on the WP:RDT page. (I wonder who the author(s) were..?)
There is a flying junction: LGV Est Eastwards—Interconnexion Southwards; because of the huge size of these triangles, this leaves/joins south of the canal and motorway crossing.
I'll cede your point about the runways. The runways at CDG are highly offset. Depending on how one measures, the north runway only crosses the LGV line by 130 m (or 200 m), or possibly doesn't cross it at all (−500 m). Phrased another way 97% of the runway tarmac is on one side of the LGV line and 3% on the other—which is why I chose to try and build upon that. If the offsetting is removed, please also rename the runways to include both approaches.
Not entirely sure what to do about the diagram at the south end; the junctions were remodelled to give line-speed to the through PSE path—I'll defer to you and any references you can find about what technically "belongs" to each of the LGVs now.

—Sladen (talk) 18:49, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]