This page is for the discussions over the naming of the article. It may also include discussions over service usage.
The result of the debate was don't move. — Nightst a llion (?) 08:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
St Pancras railway station → St. Pancras railway station : Syntax.
Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~"
The result of the move request was keep as St Pancras railway station. Sladen ( talk) 08:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
In all the literature from the owners, the station is now referred to as "St Pancras International", and the photo of the sign submitted by Edvid ( talk • contribs) confirms this.
Should this page (now or eventually) move to St Pancras International railway station?
As an aside, I don't see why it was necessary for them to include "International" in the name: in most countries, international railway stations are nothing unusual. But at least they didn't call it "Grand Central Station" or any of the other awful American-sounding alternatives they were considering. A section on the renaming would be a worthy addition to the article – I'll find some references. JRawle ( Talk) 13:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
With respect to your question, I think the article name should stay as it is for now (at least until Eurostar arrive), but I don't know if it is necessary in the future. Unlike Waterloo International, which is essentially separate from Waterloo, St Pancras International is St Pancras, although that's my subjective view given the design of the station. Edvid 04:26, 31st October 2006 (UTC)
Leave as St. Pancras, any use of International is just LCR branding in the case of STP; similar to the use of HS1 as branding for the CTRL. For ticketing reasons, tickets are often from London International but that again is another issue in itself! Sladen 22:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I had thought that the station for Capital Connect services to be opened in the Thameslink Box was to be called St Pancras Midland Road and not just Midland Road. As it is to be integrated with the main station, surely any detailed description should be in this article and not in a new article on Midland Road? -- Lang rabbie 22:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Alot of the contents of the article, St Pancras International, is already in this article. I don't see why the title, St Pancras International is necessary at this point as the Eurostar terminus has not opened yet. Tbo 157 20:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
St Pancras Thameslink is underneath the main station and according to the first capital connect website [1], the station is in fact named St Pancras International. Tbo 157 18:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
From reading the future section, does this mean the whole station, ex-thameslink, is going to be renamed "St Pancras International"? Simply south 16:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I think National rail, on their website, are trying to distinguish between international and domestic services. However the name of the entire station does seem to be St Pancras International. Refer to [3] and [4]. Tbo 157 (talk) 17:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Ive noticed that a user has bolded "St Pancras domestic" and "St Pancras (Low level)" as shown
here. I did originally remove these boldings as these are not actually the names of the station but just how the platforms are distingushed between domestic and international services by National rail but the user has put the boldings back in. The entire station will be named "St Pancras international" as shown
here and in various other sources including Modern railways magazine. Should the bolding be removed as per
Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Boldface? I don't want to cause any unnecessary conflicts so Ill leave it for now. Thanks.
Tbo 157
(talk) 15:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Seems an overly enthusiastic Wikipedia contributor has (just) moved this article to include "International" in the title, without realising that the station has been around for 150 years... *sigh*. — Sladen ( talk) 18:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Well ask the St Pancras site, even that the branding of the site has International just beacuse its small don't mean its not part of the name. Just Look on the EMT route map also on the outside of the station it reads ST PANCRAS INTERNATIONAL not St Pancras. Likelife ( talk) 15:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes you have a point but the branding is confusing at London Bridge or Wellingborough it has St Pancras Int. FCC and EMT on the route maps has St Pancras International. National rail do call it domestic for EMT & FCC services but they call it diffrent it seems like the whole station is call International, on the St Pancras Website, FCC, EMT, Even the Tube. Likelife ( talk) 16:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Iv emaild the ST Pancras wesite for the the real name just a minute ago. Likelife ( talk) 18:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
OK here are some more images showing St Pancras International (exhibit A being the Thameslink picture above):
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 21:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
This is what the St Pancras site had to say....
The name of our Station is 'St Pancras International Station' so now could somone now move the page to St Pancras International Likelife ( talk) 17:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
From: St. Paul's
for legitimate use in departing that location?
1 If not, I'd be tempted to suggest such an article move would be unwise. However, if you would like to perform such an article move, I recommend raising it on
Talk:St. Paul's tube station to gauge any reaction. —
Sladen (
talk) 11:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)So now you reckon the St Pancras site is wrong with EMT & FCC??? Its ST PANCRAS INTERNATIONAL. Likelife ( talk) 12:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
St Pancras International
. —
Sladen (
talk) 11:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
More occurrences of "International" in everyday usage at the station:
Incidentally the "St. Pancras Station" gate lettering on Pancras Road is probably an equivalent of the "historic tiling" on some tube stations platforms, left for decorative purposes? best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 09:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Also on
More pictorial evidence in favour of International:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 11:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Let's review the evidence in favour of the whole station being regarded as St Pancras International, Your Honour. You have:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
And Stewart, this is what the station website tells us:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
While I've become quite agnostic as to whether it should have "International" in the name or not, isn't the convention for UK railway stations to have to suffix ...railway station? Therefore, shouldn't this page be at St Pancras International railway station? JRawle ( Talk) 11:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I assume you are posting the above as part of the "International" debate, rather than the "London" debate. The fact that it has "London King's Cross" and "London Blackfriars" but doesn't include "London" for any others just goes to show that railway companies' literature is inconsistent. Do you really think train operating company employees all sit around and discuss at length the exact names of stations as we are doing? Of course not.
I think it's time to accept that many variations on the name of the station are all valid. We, as Wikipedians, need to determine our own naming policy, never mind what any of the railway companies do. I think it's time to stop posting "evidence" and continuing fruitless discussions, and have a simple vote on the name. If the "London" part of the prefix is to be part of this, any vote probably needs to be advertised elsewhere too. JRawle ( Talk) 01:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR ( talk) 22:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I think it's time to kick this off officially. I've summarised the various options below, with sources for each option; I'm sure that it would help to add any additional sources that anyone has to hand.
*'''Support XYZ'''
or *'''Oppose XYZ'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.I hope we can at least agree on what evidence is acceptable. Tevildo ( talk) 19:33, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
ISTM that almost all references to "St Pancras" exist in cyberspace or the bureaucracy, whereas on the ground, virtually all references at or around the station say "St Pancras International". As for history, stations get renamed or their names modified. See Whittlesford Parkway railway station for a recent pertinent example. best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 18:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
I think we can take "railway station" as given - all other UK stations have it, even the most unambiguous ( Bristol Parkway railway station, as an example). Sorry for not making that clear in the nomination. Tevildo ( talk) 21:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh I have no problem with "railway station" either. For History buffs, remember that all the major station articles have a "History" section. That is where it should be pointed out that the station was originally opened as St Pancras. best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 09:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder how many people still clinging onto the old name have actually been to the new station since re-opening at the end of last year. "St. Pancras" is not in common usage on the ground. best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 09:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Just for the dissenters, here are four new shots, with three of them suggesting unambiguously that the domestic station, managed by Network Rail, is also International.
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 00:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Why not just to end the whole thing we have with the intro St Pancras railway station is a major railway station..... In 2007 it was rebranded as St Pancras International? Simply south ( talk) 20:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
What is "common usage"? Network Rail themselves refer to the domestic station as International (see exhibits P to R above). The station has been renamed and an encyclopaedia should reflect that (cf. Whittlesford Parkway). best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Three more images in favour of International as the accepted variant:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
moved down to prevent breaking-up list of factual/evidence above
I looked at this page for a purpose completely unrelated to this discussion, one which I have now forgotten. Having started to read this, I've felt compelled to read through to the end. My impression is that a lot of people have spent a lot of time and effort gathering evidence for 'their side' - completely wasted time if you ask me, as it is clear that due to a mix of current common and official usage, both St Pancras railway station and St Pancras International railway station are correct. This is now reflected in the two bolded phrases in the lead and several redirects. Maybe a few years down the line, nobody will be calling it plain old "St Pancras", but for now all that can be actually achieved by this is to swap the first and second paragraphs. Because the discussion is going nowhere, the page has already been moved several times and the fact that this is really boring me, this is clearly Lame. -- Peeky44 ( talk) 20:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
“ | The remarkable re-birth of this great and gleaming station means that people across the whole of Britain, not just the south-east, are suddenly quite a bit closer to Europe. From now on, Sheffield is closer to Paris, Nottingham closer to Brussels. And as we look forward to the London Olympics in 2012, it is good to know that a journey from here to the new High Speed 1 station at Stratford will take spectators a mere seven minutes. All these things will bring real differences to people's lives.
My warmest congratulations go to everyone involved in this project, which is a wonderful illustration of what can be achieved through working in partnership, and it says a good deal about how we can take a twenty-first century approach whilst at the same time having due consideration of our heritage. Looking around me I am filled with hope that people of all backgrounds and ages, some of whom are not yet born, and most of whom we will never meet, will greatly benefit from the quality and the attention to detail which is at the heart of this significant undertaking; and will come to regard St. Pancras not just as a station but as a destination. It gives me great pleasure to officially launch High Speed 1, Britain's first High Speed Railway and to re-open this magnificent station, St. Pancras International. [21] |
” |
Does anyone object if i move all of the naming discussions, including the current Queen's statement one, to a separate page? Simply south ( talk) 15:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, the anniversary of the re-naming is fast approaching! best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I made some freedom of information requests about the name of the station:
So far the Department for Transport and London Borough of Camden have responded. They both say it is St Pancras International. I'm still waiting for a response from Transport for London. Edward ( talk) 10:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Once again I politely remind you that our article is just about the only UK rail station WP article not to match the station's present name (cf. Whittlesford Parkway, Ashford International, etc). best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 23:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so."
HM The Queen's speech, 6th November 2007:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 11:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, from WP:Quote:Keep on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal.
I have deleted the contents of this entire section. FYI: this consisted of the content of this page (for which the link provided was out of date by now). -- Peeky44 ( talk) 21:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited.
Can I suggest that this article is split. 1 article for the old station (St Pancras railway station) and 1 for the rebuilt new station (St Pancras International railway station). They are completely different. It would simplify the article for readers as at the moment it is long and hard to follow and it might also solve the naming debate. Clover345 ( talk) 20:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
An international station is not always named -international, example Gare de Calais-Fréthun which is domestic local station, a TGV high-speed TGV station and a halt for Eurostar services. Its name is neither Calais International nor Calais TGV. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Because Ebbsfeet is a new international station, Stratford is a separate station and Ashford's article is simply named that way, it doesn't show or prove that it is its name. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
They are not two separate stations Simply south ( talk) 18:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Have no opinion on the naming issue, but I have been there many times over the years, and it is definitely the same station in the same location. It has a continuous history which should be refelcted in a single article. -- FormerIP ( talk) 22:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I've read the archived discussion and don't want to reopen it all if there is still a lot of opposition, but I was wondering if the opponents to using the stations formal name have now gotten used to several years of it being "St. Pancras International" and are prepared to rename the article as such? Reading the discussion there seems to be heaps and heaps of evidence backing the change of name and rather empty arguments from those who seem to have something against the word international. It all seems a bit silly to be honest but am not here to revisit those arguments. I know how irritating it is when someone comes and reopens a drawn out argument such as this; I just want to see if the opponents have change their position at all.- J.Logan` t: 13:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
The correct name for this page is St Pancras international railway station, Why do you not use the correct name? 88.109.12.205 ( talk) 22:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
That (Alarics) may well be correct, and I would be happy to see the debate reopened or perhaps taken straight to page move requests for a discussion. The point I'd like to get over though is that there is a right and wrong way of doing it - both of discussing it and of actually performing the move - and these do need to be observed. In effect this thread now has two topics, which is never great ... :( Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 07:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
If this is not called "international" (im for it being called International btw) then why are Ebbsfleet International railway station and Ashford International railway station?-- Gimelthedog ( talk) 02:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved: no consensus (but majority for oppose) after 46 days. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 12:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
St Pancras railway station →
St Pancras International railway station —
The station's official name changed some time ago to St Pancras International. This article should have its title changed accordingly. The last time this was discussed, over two years ago, consensus was not reached, largely because some felt it was not then clear that the new name would be permanent. It is now clear that it is. The new name is used in all timetables and literature by all the operators at the station. --
Alarics (
talk) 08:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Viewing the above, it looks like a fairly even split. - mattbuck ( Talk) 22:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Title of the page should be St Pancras International as this is the actual and common name for the station? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkeys121 ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The reviewer would like to request the editor with a COI attempt to discuss with editors engaged in the subject-area first. |
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
The official and proper name of this station is St Pancras International, and therefore it should be referred to as such from the start. A compromise would be to call it 'St Pancras International Railway Station' incorporating the current name and its 'International' name. The first line can then read:
"St Pancras International railway station (/seɪnt ˈpæŋkrəs/ or /sənt ˈpæŋkrəs/), also known as London St Pancras,[7][8][9] is a central London railway terminus located on Euston Road in the London Borough of Camden."
Whilst the article does currently say 'since 2007 known as St Pancras International', shouldn't the primary name be its current name? It would be similar to someone getting married and the article reading 'Jane Doe, and since 2007 known as Jane Smith' which is not the way Wikipedia articles are usually written.
Arkeys ( talk) 08:42, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
{{
Request edit}}
matter, but something for
WP:RM. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 10:35, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus that defaults to the page staying at its stable title. Editors cannot come to a consensus as to whether the official name that is commonly used amongst railways should be used or whether the common name that is used among lay sources should be used. A full discussion has taken place so there is no need to relist at this time. ( non-admin closure) TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
St Pancras railway station → St Pancras International railway station – St Pancras International is the train stations official name, and is the name used on station platforms and signs and therefore Wikipedia should refer to it as such Arkeys ( talk) 13:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
This page is for the discussions over the naming of the article. It may also include discussions over service usage.
The result of the debate was don't move. — Nightst a llion (?) 08:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
St Pancras railway station → St. Pancras railway station : Syntax.
Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~"
The result of the move request was keep as St Pancras railway station. Sladen ( talk) 08:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
In all the literature from the owners, the station is now referred to as "St Pancras International", and the photo of the sign submitted by Edvid ( talk • contribs) confirms this.
Should this page (now or eventually) move to St Pancras International railway station?
As an aside, I don't see why it was necessary for them to include "International" in the name: in most countries, international railway stations are nothing unusual. But at least they didn't call it "Grand Central Station" or any of the other awful American-sounding alternatives they were considering. A section on the renaming would be a worthy addition to the article – I'll find some references. JRawle ( Talk) 13:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
With respect to your question, I think the article name should stay as it is for now (at least until Eurostar arrive), but I don't know if it is necessary in the future. Unlike Waterloo International, which is essentially separate from Waterloo, St Pancras International is St Pancras, although that's my subjective view given the design of the station. Edvid 04:26, 31st October 2006 (UTC)
Leave as St. Pancras, any use of International is just LCR branding in the case of STP; similar to the use of HS1 as branding for the CTRL. For ticketing reasons, tickets are often from London International but that again is another issue in itself! Sladen 22:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I had thought that the station for Capital Connect services to be opened in the Thameslink Box was to be called St Pancras Midland Road and not just Midland Road. As it is to be integrated with the main station, surely any detailed description should be in this article and not in a new article on Midland Road? -- Lang rabbie 22:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Alot of the contents of the article, St Pancras International, is already in this article. I don't see why the title, St Pancras International is necessary at this point as the Eurostar terminus has not opened yet. Tbo 157 20:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
St Pancras Thameslink is underneath the main station and according to the first capital connect website [1], the station is in fact named St Pancras International. Tbo 157 18:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
From reading the future section, does this mean the whole station, ex-thameslink, is going to be renamed "St Pancras International"? Simply south 16:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I think National rail, on their website, are trying to distinguish between international and domestic services. However the name of the entire station does seem to be St Pancras International. Refer to [3] and [4]. Tbo 157 (talk) 17:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Ive noticed that a user has bolded "St Pancras domestic" and "St Pancras (Low level)" as shown
here. I did originally remove these boldings as these are not actually the names of the station but just how the platforms are distingushed between domestic and international services by National rail but the user has put the boldings back in. The entire station will be named "St Pancras international" as shown
here and in various other sources including Modern railways magazine. Should the bolding be removed as per
Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting)#Boldface? I don't want to cause any unnecessary conflicts so Ill leave it for now. Thanks.
Tbo 157
(talk) 15:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Seems an overly enthusiastic Wikipedia contributor has (just) moved this article to include "International" in the title, without realising that the station has been around for 150 years... *sigh*. — Sladen ( talk) 18:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Well ask the St Pancras site, even that the branding of the site has International just beacuse its small don't mean its not part of the name. Just Look on the EMT route map also on the outside of the station it reads ST PANCRAS INTERNATIONAL not St Pancras. Likelife ( talk) 15:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes you have a point but the branding is confusing at London Bridge or Wellingborough it has St Pancras Int. FCC and EMT on the route maps has St Pancras International. National rail do call it domestic for EMT & FCC services but they call it diffrent it seems like the whole station is call International, on the St Pancras Website, FCC, EMT, Even the Tube. Likelife ( talk) 16:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Iv emaild the ST Pancras wesite for the the real name just a minute ago. Likelife ( talk) 18:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
OK here are some more images showing St Pancras International (exhibit A being the Thameslink picture above):
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 21:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
This is what the St Pancras site had to say....
The name of our Station is 'St Pancras International Station' so now could somone now move the page to St Pancras International Likelife ( talk) 17:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
From: St. Paul's
for legitimate use in departing that location?
1 If not, I'd be tempted to suggest such an article move would be unwise. However, if you would like to perform such an article move, I recommend raising it on
Talk:St. Paul's tube station to gauge any reaction. —
Sladen (
talk) 11:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)So now you reckon the St Pancras site is wrong with EMT & FCC??? Its ST PANCRAS INTERNATIONAL. Likelife ( talk) 12:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
St Pancras International
. —
Sladen (
talk) 11:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
More occurrences of "International" in everyday usage at the station:
Incidentally the "St. Pancras Station" gate lettering on Pancras Road is probably an equivalent of the "historic tiling" on some tube stations platforms, left for decorative purposes? best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 09:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Also on
More pictorial evidence in favour of International:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 11:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Let's review the evidence in favour of the whole station being regarded as St Pancras International, Your Honour. You have:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
And Stewart, this is what the station website tells us:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
While I've become quite agnostic as to whether it should have "International" in the name or not, isn't the convention for UK railway stations to have to suffix ...railway station? Therefore, shouldn't this page be at St Pancras International railway station? JRawle ( Talk) 11:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I assume you are posting the above as part of the "International" debate, rather than the "London" debate. The fact that it has "London King's Cross" and "London Blackfriars" but doesn't include "London" for any others just goes to show that railway companies' literature is inconsistent. Do you really think train operating company employees all sit around and discuss at length the exact names of stations as we are doing? Of course not.
I think it's time to accept that many variations on the name of the station are all valid. We, as Wikipedians, need to determine our own naming policy, never mind what any of the railway companies do. I think it's time to stop posting "evidence" and continuing fruitless discussions, and have a simple vote on the name. If the "London" part of the prefix is to be part of this, any vote probably needs to be advertised elsewhere too. JRawle ( Talk) 01:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR ( talk) 22:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I think it's time to kick this off officially. I've summarised the various options below, with sources for each option; I'm sure that it would help to add any additional sources that anyone has to hand.
*'''Support XYZ'''
or *'''Oppose XYZ'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.I hope we can at least agree on what evidence is acceptable. Tevildo ( talk) 19:33, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
ISTM that almost all references to "St Pancras" exist in cyberspace or the bureaucracy, whereas on the ground, virtually all references at or around the station say "St Pancras International". As for history, stations get renamed or their names modified. See Whittlesford Parkway railway station for a recent pertinent example. best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 18:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
I think we can take "railway station" as given - all other UK stations have it, even the most unambiguous ( Bristol Parkway railway station, as an example). Sorry for not making that clear in the nomination. Tevildo ( talk) 21:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh I have no problem with "railway station" either. For History buffs, remember that all the major station articles have a "History" section. That is where it should be pointed out that the station was originally opened as St Pancras. best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 09:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder how many people still clinging onto the old name have actually been to the new station since re-opening at the end of last year. "St. Pancras" is not in common usage on the ground. best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 09:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Just for the dissenters, here are four new shots, with three of them suggesting unambiguously that the domestic station, managed by Network Rail, is also International.
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 00:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Why not just to end the whole thing we have with the intro St Pancras railway station is a major railway station..... In 2007 it was rebranded as St Pancras International? Simply south ( talk) 20:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
What is "common usage"? Network Rail themselves refer to the domestic station as International (see exhibits P to R above). The station has been renamed and an encyclopaedia should reflect that (cf. Whittlesford Parkway). best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Three more images in favour of International as the accepted variant:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 10:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
moved down to prevent breaking-up list of factual/evidence above
I looked at this page for a purpose completely unrelated to this discussion, one which I have now forgotten. Having started to read this, I've felt compelled to read through to the end. My impression is that a lot of people have spent a lot of time and effort gathering evidence for 'their side' - completely wasted time if you ask me, as it is clear that due to a mix of current common and official usage, both St Pancras railway station and St Pancras International railway station are correct. This is now reflected in the two bolded phrases in the lead and several redirects. Maybe a few years down the line, nobody will be calling it plain old "St Pancras", but for now all that can be actually achieved by this is to swap the first and second paragraphs. Because the discussion is going nowhere, the page has already been moved several times and the fact that this is really boring me, this is clearly Lame. -- Peeky44 ( talk) 20:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
“ | The remarkable re-birth of this great and gleaming station means that people across the whole of Britain, not just the south-east, are suddenly quite a bit closer to Europe. From now on, Sheffield is closer to Paris, Nottingham closer to Brussels. And as we look forward to the London Olympics in 2012, it is good to know that a journey from here to the new High Speed 1 station at Stratford will take spectators a mere seven minutes. All these things will bring real differences to people's lives.
My warmest congratulations go to everyone involved in this project, which is a wonderful illustration of what can be achieved through working in partnership, and it says a good deal about how we can take a twenty-first century approach whilst at the same time having due consideration of our heritage. Looking around me I am filled with hope that people of all backgrounds and ages, some of whom are not yet born, and most of whom we will never meet, will greatly benefit from the quality and the attention to detail which is at the heart of this significant undertaking; and will come to regard St. Pancras not just as a station but as a destination. It gives me great pleasure to officially launch High Speed 1, Britain's first High Speed Railway and to re-open this magnificent station, St. Pancras International. [21] |
” |
Does anyone object if i move all of the naming discussions, including the current Queen's statement one, to a separate page? Simply south ( talk) 15:44, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, the anniversary of the re-naming is fast approaching! best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 13:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I made some freedom of information requests about the name of the station:
So far the Department for Transport and London Borough of Camden have responded. They both say it is St Pancras International. I'm still waiting for a response from Transport for London. Edward ( talk) 10:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Once again I politely remind you that our article is just about the only UK rail station WP article not to match the station's present name (cf. Whittlesford Parkway, Ashford International, etc). best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 23:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so."
HM The Queen's speech, 6th November 2007:
best, Sunil060902 ( talk) 11:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, from WP:Quote:Keep on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal.
I have deleted the contents of this entire section. FYI: this consisted of the content of this page (for which the link provided was out of date by now). -- Peeky44 ( talk) 21:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited.
Can I suggest that this article is split. 1 article for the old station (St Pancras railway station) and 1 for the rebuilt new station (St Pancras International railway station). They are completely different. It would simplify the article for readers as at the moment it is long and hard to follow and it might also solve the naming debate. Clover345 ( talk) 20:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
An international station is not always named -international, example Gare de Calais-Fréthun which is domestic local station, a TGV high-speed TGV station and a halt for Eurostar services. Its name is neither Calais International nor Calais TGV. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Because Ebbsfeet is a new international station, Stratford is a separate station and Ashford's article is simply named that way, it doesn't show or prove that it is its name. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
They are not two separate stations Simply south ( talk) 18:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Have no opinion on the naming issue, but I have been there many times over the years, and it is definitely the same station in the same location. It has a continuous history which should be refelcted in a single article. -- FormerIP ( talk) 22:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I've read the archived discussion and don't want to reopen it all if there is still a lot of opposition, but I was wondering if the opponents to using the stations formal name have now gotten used to several years of it being "St. Pancras International" and are prepared to rename the article as such? Reading the discussion there seems to be heaps and heaps of evidence backing the change of name and rather empty arguments from those who seem to have something against the word international. It all seems a bit silly to be honest but am not here to revisit those arguments. I know how irritating it is when someone comes and reopens a drawn out argument such as this; I just want to see if the opponents have change their position at all.- J.Logan` t: 13:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
The correct name for this page is St Pancras international railway station, Why do you not use the correct name? 88.109.12.205 ( talk) 22:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
That (Alarics) may well be correct, and I would be happy to see the debate reopened or perhaps taken straight to page move requests for a discussion. The point I'd like to get over though is that there is a right and wrong way of doing it - both of discussing it and of actually performing the move - and these do need to be observed. In effect this thread now has two topics, which is never great ... :( Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 07:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
If this is not called "international" (im for it being called International btw) then why are Ebbsfleet International railway station and Ashford International railway station?-- Gimelthedog ( talk) 02:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page not moved: no consensus (but majority for oppose) after 46 days. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 12:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
St Pancras railway station →
St Pancras International railway station —
The station's official name changed some time ago to St Pancras International. This article should have its title changed accordingly. The last time this was discussed, over two years ago, consensus was not reached, largely because some felt it was not then clear that the new name would be permanent. It is now clear that it is. The new name is used in all timetables and literature by all the operators at the station. --
Alarics (
talk) 08:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Viewing the above, it looks like a fairly even split. - mattbuck ( Talk) 22:07, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Title of the page should be St Pancras International as this is the actual and common name for the station? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkeys121 ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The reviewer would like to request the editor with a COI attempt to discuss with editors engaged in the subject-area first. |
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
The official and proper name of this station is St Pancras International, and therefore it should be referred to as such from the start. A compromise would be to call it 'St Pancras International Railway Station' incorporating the current name and its 'International' name. The first line can then read:
"St Pancras International railway station (/seɪnt ˈpæŋkrəs/ or /sənt ˈpæŋkrəs/), also known as London St Pancras,[7][8][9] is a central London railway terminus located on Euston Road in the London Borough of Camden."
Whilst the article does currently say 'since 2007 known as St Pancras International', shouldn't the primary name be its current name? It would be similar to someone getting married and the article reading 'Jane Doe, and since 2007 known as Jane Smith' which is not the way Wikipedia articles are usually written.
Arkeys ( talk) 08:42, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
{{
Request edit}}
matter, but something for
WP:RM. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 10:35, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus that defaults to the page staying at its stable title. Editors cannot come to a consensus as to whether the official name that is commonly used amongst railways should be used or whether the common name that is used among lay sources should be used. A full discussion has taken place so there is no need to relist at this time. ( non-admin closure) TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
St Pancras railway station → St Pancras International railway station – St Pancras International is the train stations official name, and is the name used on station platforms and signs and therefore Wikipedia should refer to it as such Arkeys ( talk) 13:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)