This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tramlink article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The contents of the Tramlink Route 1 page were merged into Tramlink on 8 April 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contents of the Tramlink Route 2 page were merged into Tramlink on 8 April 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Tramlink Route 5 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 24 March 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Tramlink. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Tramlink RDT. |
Wikipedia:WikiProject London recommends that Tramlink stations should be linked to in the form East Croydon Tram station. In line with their policy on combined system stations these should go in as Wimbledon station.
However off the top of my head I'm not sure which stations qualify as mixed.
I'm not sure on the rest so won't put links in yet - does anyone who knows the system better have the answers? Timrollpickering 22:47, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
Those trams are attractive. Are they low floor vehicles? How much did they cost? How low are they? How long are they? What provision, if any, do they have for wheelchair patrons? I see the car in this picture of yours has four doors. When do patrons pay their fare? Are there doors on the other side of the vehicles? How much of the service is on a dedicated right of way?
I will be creating the three pages focusing on these routes in the same way as these articles have been done. Anyone wishing to check the progress can check my userpage for the link to the subpage.-- sonicKAI 17:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
In response to Thryduulf, Transport for London's website [1] says thay are "lines", not "routes", so thank you for that. In response to Pedantic of Purley, London Bus Routes website [2] says that the new timetable has been moved to May 2006. I will still create these pages on my userpage, but wait before putting them on the main Wikipedia. -- sonicKAI 11:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC) TfL often get things wrong on their website, though. All the official Tramlink literature - flyers, maps, station posters, etc - have Route 1/2/3 on them, not Line 1/2/3. This also makes more sense, since it's one set of track that has several sets of points and operates in a similar way to busses. -- Veratien 00:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
I have never heard of this term. Is it american ? The usual terminology is interlaced track. By the way there is also interlaced track just after Church Street to avoid the need to put the points in the middle of a public road junction. I am tempted to rename the link to Interlaced Track and expand it a little (in the linked item not the main Tramlink item).-- Pedantic of Purley 10:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't articles on Tram stops be called [[### Tram stop]] instead of [[### Tram station]], as Transport for London officially recognises them as stops, which, in turn, would explain why the use the London buses ticketing system. -- sonicKAI 15:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more. This got discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London. As mentioned there it now seems that everyone has gone so far down the line of calling them stops that this is the de facto standard. I have therefore taken the liberty of changing Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London to specify that they should be called stops. Hopefully that should sort it out once and for all.-- Pedantic of Purley 22:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I have deleted this section as the section in not appropriate for an encyclopedia. -- ExULstudent 15:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I've changed the name of the Ampere Way stop to its new official name of IKEA Ampere Way photo. D-Notice 21:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
The section on "Other Ideas" seems very out of date. I thought Biggin Hill was looked at a few years ago and thought to be an absolute non-starter. They couldn't even make a case for a good quality shuttle bus from Addington Village interchange.
I think the reference to Purley Way means the proposed loop around Valley park which "they" got excited about a few years ago but has subsequently gone very quiet.
I think this section may have served a purpose once upon a time but I think it should now be updated or eliminated.-- Pedantic of Purley 19:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
I think we could really do with a section to describe the relationship between TfL and the operating company. The unofficial site www.tramlink.co.uk covers this well but stresses the views are the personal ones of the author. This is becoming a major issue but it is difficult to write about it objectively. There must be someone brave enough to give it a try. Without facing issues like this the Tramlink entry is "fluffy".-- Pedantic of Purley 17:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
As TfL will be taking over this is now water under the bridge.-- Pedantic of Purley ( talk) 09:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
A heard that a project during the redevelopment of White City and Shepherd's Bush, a new tramlink has been planned. It will go from Shepherd's Bush to Uxbridge. I'm happy, because it stops at Loftus Road! -- Soopa hoops77 17:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
# That's the West London Tram D-Notice 19:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I understant that there is to be this tram line to be built, but it wont be called Tramlink. There are also plans for a tram line to go from brixton to the west end over waterloo bridge. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/networkandservices/2043.aspx Breakfast100 19;25, 17 April 2007
I notice that there is little information about the Tramlink ticketing system. Should some be added, or is it too similar to London Buses? Ajn91 19:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The tramlink logo in the top left hand corner hasn't formatted very well on my screen, it overlaps with the references tag and pushes the lead text in a bit. Might I suggest it might be better going straight into the header of the infobox? (i.e. replace "Line=Tramlink|" with "Line=[[Image:Tramlink.jpg]]|")? It looked okay when I tried it in preview. - Zeibura ( Talk) 08:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
[[Image:Mk2 Croydon Tramlink Destination Blinds.jpg|thumb|left|The second version of the destination blinds that were used on the tramlink. These have now been replced with Dot-Matrix Panels.]]
This image is; a) huge, b) dubious copyright status, c) appropriate for this page - Thus can these issue be resolved and maybe it be incorporated into the article in a way that it doesn't bugger up the page layout... ??? Pickle 02:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Low, mid or high, one would like consistency. One importance rating stays, the other go. Five importance ratings is taking the michael and an exageration at best. I can only presume Pickle UK is having a laugh and will rectify this state of affairs after having had his laugh. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 08:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The Wimbledon branch is a former British Rail route, not mentioned in the "history" section. 194.80.106.135 11:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
The article says:
and quotes http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/7741.aspx as a source. Unfortunately that link is now broken, but it seems http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/7741.aspx is a replacement url that works (I will edit).
But I'm not so sure that the editor who wrote the sentence above based on that cite hasn't read more into it than (s)he should have. TfL's press release tells us that they are buying Tramtrack Croydon Ltd (TCL), the concessionaire that built Tramlink and subcontracts the operation to FirstGroup. There is nothing in the press release to imply that this will result in FirstGroup losing its contract to operate Tramlink. In the normal way of things the TfL takeover of TCL would simply result in FirstGroup answering to a different contractee. Can anybody cite a source that explicitly says FirstGroup's involvement is going to end with the TfL takeover?. -- Chris j wood ( talk) 13:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Just thought I'd say that I've created a route diagram for Tramlink, at Template:Tramlink RDT. -- Kevin Steinhardt ( talk) 20:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The link was created by anon 213.249.207.190 on 12.Apr 2006, and the source seems to be as I indicated. This however " http://www.tramlink.co.uk/extensions/index.shtml" is an unofficial site as stated by its creator. So if someone wants to check this out, please do so. I wonder whether "separation" is meant rather than "segregation". Seems genuine enough, I think they are referring to the Amsterdam "Trambaan", nothing more sinister than that. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
One worrying aspect now however is that the previous section above: "Trambaan type segregation source" referring to the section "North and South from Croydon" in the article seems an exact copy of either the above cited link or vice versa. At no point does the webmaster of the above-shown website, S. J. Parascandolo, state that his site is mirrored on our article or cites Wikipedia but links it to the "Transport for London" website. He seems no longer available when you try to find his feedback and privacy sites. So I don't know whether we should rewrite the items concerned or remove any copyright material. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7712002.stm - BBC News is reporting that the Tramlink extension (amongst other London transport plans) have been dropped. Maybe this should be reflected in the article once we have more sources? Smoothy ( talk) 12:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I have found a source that states Nick Owen is the male voice for announcements but can find nothing to verify the claim that Judi Dench is the female voice (the source I found said it was a local) so have removed it as it had been citation needed since September 2008. I will also edit it on Judi Dench's page. -- Bigger digger ( talk) 11:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
This article says "initially known as Croydon Tramlink" but gives no date for dropping "Croydon". Was it when TfL took over in 2008? (If so ""initially known as" might seem rather dismissive of several years' existence.) A reason for asking is that in other WP articles which mention the system there is almost a fanaticism to change every "Croydon Tramlink" to "Tramlink" even when a past happening involved the then as yet unrenamed Croydon Tramlink.-- SilasW ( talk) 19:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the thing is although in Stephen Parascandolo's website, photos, etc. show "Tramlink" all along, I don't think it was necessarily its official name. On the whole it was "Croydon Tramlink". Actually, to add insult to injury, it is now called "London Tramlink", as you can see in the "thisiscroydontoday" website cited above.
One rather tragic aspect is also that Stephen Parascandolo, the original webmaster of his unofficial site, died in a road accident in 2007. In recognition for his publicising the tramlink he had a tram named after him (Tram 2535, Stephen Parascandola 1980-2007) [4]. So I do think, after all, "London Tramlink" seems the present name. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
"Dear [SilasW],
Thank you for your email which was passed to us to respond.
The existing tram system has never officially been called "Croydon Tramlink". While it has often been referred to as "Croydon Tramlink", due to it being centred on Croydon, the system has always officially been called Tramlink and continues to be called Tramlink, not London Tramlink.
The TfL team which is responsible for Tramlink is called London Tramlink bringing it into line with London Buses, London Underground, etc.
Yours sincerely
London Tramlink"
The infobox now says TfL is the operator while the article says it is First London (for TfL). I'm sure Tramlink fans can explain the apparent discrepancy but an innocent, who might read the article to try to find who might be to blame for a third-party accident to his grandmother, would be perplexed. An encyclopedic article should be free of such quasi-ambiguities from the start-- SilasW ( talk) 11:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC).
Looking at the Tramlink user guide it says Tramlinks is owned and operated by TFL see: [5] and go to introduction and go to [6]. Likelife ( talk) 15:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
The new route map [7] shows two routes. New Addington - Wimbledon and Elmers End - Beckenham Jun. So should route one & two be merged and also no routes are red or yellow any more. Likelife ( talk) 12:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Why was the pages so out of date? I've updated all route pages and this page, as routes were still shown as red, yellow and green. There is now no new publication of this as the routes are now green and lime see the route map. Also I have changed all infobox images with the new livery and changed the opertor to TFL (as it has been of a year), explaned the new route colours plus cleaned up some history.
The s-line boxs need changing there 'colors' to ADFF2F for routes 1&2 and 9ACD32 for route 3 but I have no idea on how to change them, could someone help! Likelife ( talk) 16:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there any stops which arent? if not can remove the wheelchair logo clutter and add a simple note that all stations are accessible. WatcherZero ( talk) 01:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Please note that this page is for discussing TRAMLINK. It is not a place to post images NOT about Tramlink Likelife ( talk) 17:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Suggest changing the relevant line to the form 'The Announcer system is of the following format...' (as it will differ for all stops).
And I would be grateful if 'the proverbial someones' would help develop the relevant tramlink articles on the London wiki [www.london.wikia.org]. Jackiespeel ( talk) 22:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
The Harrington Road link on the route map should point to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrington_Road_tram_stop. At present there is no link or a wrong one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.2.75 ( talk) 21:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Is it true that Mitcham to Mitcham Junction is being doubled? best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 21:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
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 its 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:
\brailway-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf 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 NotifyOnline 13:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Tramlink. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I do hope this is the right place to put this.
I have just tried, unsuccessfully, to add Wayback link to "South London Partnership" document from the pre-Boris // pre-Subprime blended-securities crisis era. viz: http://web.archive.org/web/20060212214152/http://www.tramlink.co.uk/extensions/SLTBrochure.pdf When the preview did not serve the correct link, I abandoned the edit.
The document is still out there, as is the aspiration and rationale behind it. Even more so given the impetus to build housing and capital projects given by super-low interest rates. People should be directed to it.
Regardless of changing political and economic conditions, the fact of the existence, from 2006 to 2008, of seriously-considered extension plans is a part of the history of transport in London and should be available, whether of historic or current interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas Jardine ( talk • contribs) 00:44, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Raising for discussion here. The accident on 7 February has been added, deleted, re-added and re deleted. So now we discuss. I was going to add the incident myself, got an edit conflict and found that I had been beaten to it. IMvHO, the accident is mentionable not because of the cause, but the fact that three people on the tram were injured. Pinging Class455fan1, SovalValtos, Jeni - your thoughts please? Mjroots ( talk) 13:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
100 passengers were detrained, the tram derailed, people were delayed, low speed (7mph), no reported injuries, 6.23am, dry conditions, only minor damage to the wheels of the tram. What part of that is notable enough that warrants inclusion? Jeni ( talk) 22:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Take a look at other tram articles if you want an idea of what is notable enough for inclusion in a section like this.
You'll see that Wikipedia really isn't the place for geeky "a tram came off the rails on xx-date but nothing happened of note" Jeni ( talk) 23:00, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Should the sentence be changed to 'then Mayor of London Boris Johnson' - thus alerting non-London/British readers that there is now a different Mayor? 193.132.104.10 ( talk) 17:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tramlink. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
The Tramlink brand doesn't seem to be in use by TfL anymore -- TfL's website, communication letters, and the vehicles themselves, now carry roundels simply branded "Trams". The London Trams article implies there is a distinction between it and the tram service in Croydon but in practice this doesn't seem to be the case. Should the two articles be merged?
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:19, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I am aware this has likely come up before, but is there any possible objections to merging the separate Tramlink "Route" pages into this Tramlink article? The route numbers on destination blinds have not been used for a considerable number of years now and the separate articles serve little purpose. Mattdaviesfsic ( talk) 04:08, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
I propose merging Tramlink into London Trams. Tramlink is the more detailed page, but London Trams is the current name, and there is no information on the shorter London Trams article that is substantially different as there are no other London Trams services. WP:COMMONNAME justification for keeping 'Tramlink' as title doesn't quite apply here, as even though it is common to use a deprecated name long after it has officially changed, it is inconsistent with existing conventions and potentially confusing given the fact the new publications, signage, sources, etc. do not use the Tramlink name anymore. Since the new name is used more frequently in new sources, there is clear evidence of its current recognizability. A redirect to London Trams and the "formerly known as Tramlink" entry line should be enough to keep everything clear to people who know it by the original name. The common name guideline also has the provision that the most "encyclopedic" name should be considered, which is why London Underground is named as such and not The Tube, despite the latter name being more commonly used colloquially and even commonly used in various sources. As a final point, the London Trams article name is less ambiguous, as 'Tramlink' resembles the generic names of several transportation services all over the world (see the disambiguation page for Citylink for example). Middle river exports ( talk) 22:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@ User:Trainsandotherthings Tramlink#Former lines reused Gauntlet track is inderectly mentioned as Interlaced track in the caption of the file. Peter Horn User talk 21:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
It is no longer called Tramlink so why don't we name it London Trams? 2001:8003:E83D:3D00:4C29:118F:2A14:B812 ( talk) 11:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, there is an RfC here about the notability of Tramlink stops. Feel free to join if interested. — MATRIX! ( a good person!) citation unneeded 19:39, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tramlink article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The contents of the Tramlink Route 1 page were merged into Tramlink on 8 April 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contents of the Tramlink Route 2 page were merged into Tramlink on 8 April 2022. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Tramlink Route 5 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 24 March 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Tramlink. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Tramlink RDT. |
Wikipedia:WikiProject London recommends that Tramlink stations should be linked to in the form East Croydon Tram station. In line with their policy on combined system stations these should go in as Wimbledon station.
However off the top of my head I'm not sure which stations qualify as mixed.
I'm not sure on the rest so won't put links in yet - does anyone who knows the system better have the answers? Timrollpickering 22:47, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
Those trams are attractive. Are they low floor vehicles? How much did they cost? How low are they? How long are they? What provision, if any, do they have for wheelchair patrons? I see the car in this picture of yours has four doors. When do patrons pay their fare? Are there doors on the other side of the vehicles? How much of the service is on a dedicated right of way?
I will be creating the three pages focusing on these routes in the same way as these articles have been done. Anyone wishing to check the progress can check my userpage for the link to the subpage.-- sonicKAI 17:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
In response to Thryduulf, Transport for London's website [1] says thay are "lines", not "routes", so thank you for that. In response to Pedantic of Purley, London Bus Routes website [2] says that the new timetable has been moved to May 2006. I will still create these pages on my userpage, but wait before putting them on the main Wikipedia. -- sonicKAI 11:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC) TfL often get things wrong on their website, though. All the official Tramlink literature - flyers, maps, station posters, etc - have Route 1/2/3 on them, not Line 1/2/3. This also makes more sense, since it's one set of track that has several sets of points and operates in a similar way to busses. -- Veratien 00:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
I have never heard of this term. Is it american ? The usual terminology is interlaced track. By the way there is also interlaced track just after Church Street to avoid the need to put the points in the middle of a public road junction. I am tempted to rename the link to Interlaced Track and expand it a little (in the linked item not the main Tramlink item).-- Pedantic of Purley 10:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't articles on Tram stops be called [[### Tram stop]] instead of [[### Tram station]], as Transport for London officially recognises them as stops, which, in turn, would explain why the use the London buses ticketing system. -- sonicKAI 15:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more. This got discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London. As mentioned there it now seems that everyone has gone so far down the line of calling them stops that this is the de facto standard. I have therefore taken the liberty of changing Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London to specify that they should be called stops. Hopefully that should sort it out once and for all.-- Pedantic of Purley 22:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I have deleted this section as the section in not appropriate for an encyclopedia. -- ExULstudent 15:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I've changed the name of the Ampere Way stop to its new official name of IKEA Ampere Way photo. D-Notice 21:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
The section on "Other Ideas" seems very out of date. I thought Biggin Hill was looked at a few years ago and thought to be an absolute non-starter. They couldn't even make a case for a good quality shuttle bus from Addington Village interchange.
I think the reference to Purley Way means the proposed loop around Valley park which "they" got excited about a few years ago but has subsequently gone very quiet.
I think this section may have served a purpose once upon a time but I think it should now be updated or eliminated.-- Pedantic of Purley 19:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
I think we could really do with a section to describe the relationship between TfL and the operating company. The unofficial site www.tramlink.co.uk covers this well but stresses the views are the personal ones of the author. This is becoming a major issue but it is difficult to write about it objectively. There must be someone brave enough to give it a try. Without facing issues like this the Tramlink entry is "fluffy".-- Pedantic of Purley 17:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
As TfL will be taking over this is now water under the bridge.-- Pedantic of Purley ( talk) 09:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
A heard that a project during the redevelopment of White City and Shepherd's Bush, a new tramlink has been planned. It will go from Shepherd's Bush to Uxbridge. I'm happy, because it stops at Loftus Road! -- Soopa hoops77 17:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
# That's the West London Tram D-Notice 19:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I understant that there is to be this tram line to be built, but it wont be called Tramlink. There are also plans for a tram line to go from brixton to the west end over waterloo bridge. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/networkandservices/2043.aspx Breakfast100 19;25, 17 April 2007
I notice that there is little information about the Tramlink ticketing system. Should some be added, or is it too similar to London Buses? Ajn91 19:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The tramlink logo in the top left hand corner hasn't formatted very well on my screen, it overlaps with the references tag and pushes the lead text in a bit. Might I suggest it might be better going straight into the header of the infobox? (i.e. replace "Line=Tramlink|" with "Line=[[Image:Tramlink.jpg]]|")? It looked okay when I tried it in preview. - Zeibura ( Talk) 08:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
[[Image:Mk2 Croydon Tramlink Destination Blinds.jpg|thumb|left|The second version of the destination blinds that were used on the tramlink. These have now been replced with Dot-Matrix Panels.]]
This image is; a) huge, b) dubious copyright status, c) appropriate for this page - Thus can these issue be resolved and maybe it be incorporated into the article in a way that it doesn't bugger up the page layout... ??? Pickle 02:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Low, mid or high, one would like consistency. One importance rating stays, the other go. Five importance ratings is taking the michael and an exageration at best. I can only presume Pickle UK is having a laugh and will rectify this state of affairs after having had his laugh. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 08:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The Wimbledon branch is a former British Rail route, not mentioned in the "history" section. 194.80.106.135 11:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
The article says:
and quotes http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/7741.aspx as a source. Unfortunately that link is now broken, but it seems http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/7741.aspx is a replacement url that works (I will edit).
But I'm not so sure that the editor who wrote the sentence above based on that cite hasn't read more into it than (s)he should have. TfL's press release tells us that they are buying Tramtrack Croydon Ltd (TCL), the concessionaire that built Tramlink and subcontracts the operation to FirstGroup. There is nothing in the press release to imply that this will result in FirstGroup losing its contract to operate Tramlink. In the normal way of things the TfL takeover of TCL would simply result in FirstGroup answering to a different contractee. Can anybody cite a source that explicitly says FirstGroup's involvement is going to end with the TfL takeover?. -- Chris j wood ( talk) 13:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Just thought I'd say that I've created a route diagram for Tramlink, at Template:Tramlink RDT. -- Kevin Steinhardt ( talk) 20:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The link was created by anon 213.249.207.190 on 12.Apr 2006, and the source seems to be as I indicated. This however " http://www.tramlink.co.uk/extensions/index.shtml" is an unofficial site as stated by its creator. So if someone wants to check this out, please do so. I wonder whether "separation" is meant rather than "segregation". Seems genuine enough, I think they are referring to the Amsterdam "Trambaan", nothing more sinister than that. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
One worrying aspect now however is that the previous section above: "Trambaan type segregation source" referring to the section "North and South from Croydon" in the article seems an exact copy of either the above cited link or vice versa. At no point does the webmaster of the above-shown website, S. J. Parascandolo, state that his site is mirrored on our article or cites Wikipedia but links it to the "Transport for London" website. He seems no longer available when you try to find his feedback and privacy sites. So I don't know whether we should rewrite the items concerned or remove any copyright material. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7712002.stm - BBC News is reporting that the Tramlink extension (amongst other London transport plans) have been dropped. Maybe this should be reflected in the article once we have more sources? Smoothy ( talk) 12:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I have found a source that states Nick Owen is the male voice for announcements but can find nothing to verify the claim that Judi Dench is the female voice (the source I found said it was a local) so have removed it as it had been citation needed since September 2008. I will also edit it on Judi Dench's page. -- Bigger digger ( talk) 11:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
This article says "initially known as Croydon Tramlink" but gives no date for dropping "Croydon". Was it when TfL took over in 2008? (If so ""initially known as" might seem rather dismissive of several years' existence.) A reason for asking is that in other WP articles which mention the system there is almost a fanaticism to change every "Croydon Tramlink" to "Tramlink" even when a past happening involved the then as yet unrenamed Croydon Tramlink.-- SilasW ( talk) 19:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the thing is although in Stephen Parascandolo's website, photos, etc. show "Tramlink" all along, I don't think it was necessarily its official name. On the whole it was "Croydon Tramlink". Actually, to add insult to injury, it is now called "London Tramlink", as you can see in the "thisiscroydontoday" website cited above.
One rather tragic aspect is also that Stephen Parascandolo, the original webmaster of his unofficial site, died in a road accident in 2007. In recognition for his publicising the tramlink he had a tram named after him (Tram 2535, Stephen Parascandola 1980-2007) [4]. So I do think, after all, "London Tramlink" seems the present name. Dieter Simon ( talk) 00:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
"Dear [SilasW],
Thank you for your email which was passed to us to respond.
The existing tram system has never officially been called "Croydon Tramlink". While it has often been referred to as "Croydon Tramlink", due to it being centred on Croydon, the system has always officially been called Tramlink and continues to be called Tramlink, not London Tramlink.
The TfL team which is responsible for Tramlink is called London Tramlink bringing it into line with London Buses, London Underground, etc.
Yours sincerely
London Tramlink"
The infobox now says TfL is the operator while the article says it is First London (for TfL). I'm sure Tramlink fans can explain the apparent discrepancy but an innocent, who might read the article to try to find who might be to blame for a third-party accident to his grandmother, would be perplexed. An encyclopedic article should be free of such quasi-ambiguities from the start-- SilasW ( talk) 11:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC).
Looking at the Tramlink user guide it says Tramlinks is owned and operated by TFL see: [5] and go to introduction and go to [6]. Likelife ( talk) 15:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
The new route map [7] shows two routes. New Addington - Wimbledon and Elmers End - Beckenham Jun. So should route one & two be merged and also no routes are red or yellow any more. Likelife ( talk) 12:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Why was the pages so out of date? I've updated all route pages and this page, as routes were still shown as red, yellow and green. There is now no new publication of this as the routes are now green and lime see the route map. Also I have changed all infobox images with the new livery and changed the opertor to TFL (as it has been of a year), explaned the new route colours plus cleaned up some history.
The s-line boxs need changing there 'colors' to ADFF2F for routes 1&2 and 9ACD32 for route 3 but I have no idea on how to change them, could someone help! Likelife ( talk) 16:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there any stops which arent? if not can remove the wheelchair logo clutter and add a simple note that all stations are accessible. WatcherZero ( talk) 01:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Please note that this page is for discussing TRAMLINK. It is not a place to post images NOT about Tramlink Likelife ( talk) 17:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Suggest changing the relevant line to the form 'The Announcer system is of the following format...' (as it will differ for all stops).
And I would be grateful if 'the proverbial someones' would help develop the relevant tramlink articles on the London wiki [www.london.wikia.org]. Jackiespeel ( talk) 22:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
The Harrington Road link on the route map should point to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrington_Road_tram_stop. At present there is no link or a wrong one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.2.75 ( talk) 21:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Is it true that Mitcham to Mitcham Junction is being doubled? best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 21:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
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 its 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:
\brailway-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf 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 NotifyOnline 13:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Tramlink. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I do hope this is the right place to put this.
I have just tried, unsuccessfully, to add Wayback link to "South London Partnership" document from the pre-Boris // pre-Subprime blended-securities crisis era. viz: http://web.archive.org/web/20060212214152/http://www.tramlink.co.uk/extensions/SLTBrochure.pdf When the preview did not serve the correct link, I abandoned the edit.
The document is still out there, as is the aspiration and rationale behind it. Even more so given the impetus to build housing and capital projects given by super-low interest rates. People should be directed to it.
Regardless of changing political and economic conditions, the fact of the existence, from 2006 to 2008, of seriously-considered extension plans is a part of the history of transport in London and should be available, whether of historic or current interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas Jardine ( talk • contribs) 00:44, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Raising for discussion here. The accident on 7 February has been added, deleted, re-added and re deleted. So now we discuss. I was going to add the incident myself, got an edit conflict and found that I had been beaten to it. IMvHO, the accident is mentionable not because of the cause, but the fact that three people on the tram were injured. Pinging Class455fan1, SovalValtos, Jeni - your thoughts please? Mjroots ( talk) 13:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
100 passengers were detrained, the tram derailed, people were delayed, low speed (7mph), no reported injuries, 6.23am, dry conditions, only minor damage to the wheels of the tram. What part of that is notable enough that warrants inclusion? Jeni ( talk) 22:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Take a look at other tram articles if you want an idea of what is notable enough for inclusion in a section like this.
You'll see that Wikipedia really isn't the place for geeky "a tram came off the rails on xx-date but nothing happened of note" Jeni ( talk) 23:00, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Should the sentence be changed to 'then Mayor of London Boris Johnson' - thus alerting non-London/British readers that there is now a different Mayor? 193.132.104.10 ( talk) 17:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tramlink. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
The Tramlink brand doesn't seem to be in use by TfL anymore -- TfL's website, communication letters, and the vehicles themselves, now carry roundels simply branded "Trams". The London Trams article implies there is a distinction between it and the tram service in Croydon but in practice this doesn't seem to be the case. Should the two articles be merged?
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:19, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I am aware this has likely come up before, but is there any possible objections to merging the separate Tramlink "Route" pages into this Tramlink article? The route numbers on destination blinds have not been used for a considerable number of years now and the separate articles serve little purpose. Mattdaviesfsic ( talk) 04:08, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
I propose merging Tramlink into London Trams. Tramlink is the more detailed page, but London Trams is the current name, and there is no information on the shorter London Trams article that is substantially different as there are no other London Trams services. WP:COMMONNAME justification for keeping 'Tramlink' as title doesn't quite apply here, as even though it is common to use a deprecated name long after it has officially changed, it is inconsistent with existing conventions and potentially confusing given the fact the new publications, signage, sources, etc. do not use the Tramlink name anymore. Since the new name is used more frequently in new sources, there is clear evidence of its current recognizability. A redirect to London Trams and the "formerly known as Tramlink" entry line should be enough to keep everything clear to people who know it by the original name. The common name guideline also has the provision that the most "encyclopedic" name should be considered, which is why London Underground is named as such and not The Tube, despite the latter name being more commonly used colloquially and even commonly used in various sources. As a final point, the London Trams article name is less ambiguous, as 'Tramlink' resembles the generic names of several transportation services all over the world (see the disambiguation page for Citylink for example). Middle river exports ( talk) 22:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@ User:Trainsandotherthings Tramlink#Former lines reused Gauntlet track is inderectly mentioned as Interlaced track in the caption of the file. Peter Horn User talk 21:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
It is no longer called Tramlink so why don't we name it London Trams? 2001:8003:E83D:3D00:4C29:118F:2A14:B812 ( talk) 11:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, there is an RfC here about the notability of Tramlink stops. Feel free to join if interested. — MATRIX! ( a good person!) citation unneeded 19:39, 7 December 2023 (UTC)