Talk:Penrith railway station

	North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Trains: Stations / 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

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 Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

This article lacks references.

Platforms in Use

There are three platforms in Penrith station, and although only two are regularly used, the third is very occasionally (special trains sometimes, and I've seen it used when there have been works on the southbound track, preventing train access to Platform 1). Is that enough to count three platforms in use? Riedquat 20:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Station name

Where does this "Penrith [The] North Lakes" come from? This link shows the station name to be plain "Penrith". What is shown on the actual station nameboards? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of the nameboards say "Penrith The North Lakes" and have since soon after the transfer from British Rail to Virgin Penrithguy (talk) 16:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a reference for the name to Visit Cumbria - there must be a better one though. --Northernhenge (talk) 16:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a tourist information site. Is that WP:RELIABLE? I have left the ref, but sort-of restored the {{citation needed}} tag; as a {{dubious}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree it's non-authoritative. I've found a better one for Penrith North Lakes -- see the map at Virgin Trains Penrith page. I'll take a photo next time I'm there. --Northernhenge (talk) 20:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've put pictures of two of the signs in userspace at User:Northernhenge/Penrith. Neither of them says "Penrith North Lakes". --Northernhenge (talk) 13:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've amended the instances of "North Lakes" to "The North Lakes", but this discussion is still open, because using such photos as reference material unfortunately counts as WP:OR. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that the map there shows "Penrith North Lakes"; but the rest of the text on that page shows plain "Penrith"; accordingly I've retained the {{dubious}}. See also discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Penrith railway station. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the text, and removed the dubious - hope that is ok. It seems clear that the name has entered minor use. (Also clear that virgin(tm) are a pain in the butt with their unnecessary rebranding exercises)Shortfatlad (talk) 15:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Virgin Megastore (which we all knew) → Zavvi. How did that help anyone? --Redrose64 (talk) 13:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You changed the name to "Penrith the north lakes" - are you sure - the references (virgin and transpennine) omit the "the".Shortfatlad (talk) 14:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also - when the official name issue is sorted out Penrith,_Cumbria#Transport may need to be changed.Shortfatlad (talk) 14:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for the issue of what is the official name - I would tend to accept what http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/ uses which is just "Penrith" (letter code PNR). (They claim to be "...the definitive source of information for all passenger rail services on the National Rail network in England, Wales and Scotland. NRE is part of the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC)..." [1] . The other choice would be network rail but they make use of both names.Shortfatlad (talk) 14:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also found

If the dates are right it looks like the station signs said "Penrith" as recently as august 2009.Shortfatlad (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So we have "Penrith North Lakes" on some documents, and "Penrith The North Lakes" on some (not all) of the current (as of this morning) station signs. Otherwise the most common name is just "Penrith". I suggest that the name of the article is correct and that it can legitimately mention both other forms (with and without "the"). I'm going to stop watching this page now before it drives me mad! --Northernhenge (talk) 16:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To Northernhenge: that is your right.

To Shortfatlad: I added the "the" based on the photos mentioned earlier, particularly this one. No photo was provided showing station nameboard reading "Penrith North Lakes".

To all: Agree that the article name should remain as "Penrith railway station". --Redrose64 (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate sign

Has anyone visited the station to see if the signs "Keep back from the platform edge or you may be sucked off' actually exist. Most people believe its an urban myth produced by a bit of clever photoshopping. See also 217.43.202.190 (talk) 13:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As as lifelong resident of penrith and user of the station I can tell you the "rude" sign does not and has never eisted unfortunatly Wikipedia doesnt consider my knwledge as evidence of the signs non-existence Penrithguy (talk) 19:17, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]