User talk:Suffolk24

Welcome!

Hello, Suffolk24, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Template:Infobox Bourne station, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Alakzi (talk) 09:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Infobox Bourne station

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Alakzi (talk) 09:47, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Five ways tram stop

Telling us about this subject and expecting us to know where it is based on mentioning the Midland Station is is unreasonable. I have no clue where this is and an encyclopedia should easily answer questions like this.Postcard Cathy (talk) 10:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Portishead branch line articles

Hi. I've reverted your changes to various Portishead Branch Line articles (eg https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Bedminster_railway_station&type=revision&diff=688581901&oldid=686010296) on the grounds that the FGW/GWR franchise expires before Portishead services start, albeit only by a month or two. Thought I'd let you know. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Albert Hall tube station

The article Albert Hall tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is no evidence that a station with this name was ever planned. The single reference does not mention it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ubiquity (talk) 15:28, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Crossrail service extension on WCML - please don't speculate.

It is not helpful to add speculation and possibility. Please read WP:CRYSTAL. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Leeds/Bradford Airport railway station

The article Leeds/Bradford Airport railway station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:CRYSTAL. No evidence that this station will ever be built, or at least not in this decade.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Blythwood (talk) 08:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Milton Keynes Central railway station into Harrow & Wealdstone station. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are still not adding the required attribution, as required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license. Please have a look at this edit summary as an example of how it is done. Please let me know if you still don't understand what to do or why we have to do it. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 23:28, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited High Speed 2, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Quadruple. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Staples Corner tube station

Hello, Suffolk24. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Staples Corner tube station, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Blythwood (talk) 11:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Staples Corner tube station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Staples Corner tube station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Staples Corner tube station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Redrose64 (talk) 15:37, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Please do not create, maintain or restore hoaxes on Wikipedia. Hoaxes are eligible for speedy deletion. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia — and then to correct them if possible. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia to learn more about this project and how you can contribute constructively. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Old Kent Road tube station

The article Old Kent Road tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a formal proposal, this is simply WP:CRYSTAL

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Redrose64 (talk) 20:59, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Old Kent Road tube station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Old Kent Road tube station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old Kent Road tube station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Redrose64 (talk) 15:23, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rotherham Parkgate railway station, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

In order to sign your posts properly, follow the above procedure. Nordic Dragon 10:44, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:04, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Please do not create, maintain or restore hoaxes on Wikipedia. Hoaxes are eligible for speedy deletion. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia — and then to correct them if possible. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia to learn more about this project and how you can contribute constructively. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:22, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Barking station: You've been told a number of times not to add future services to station articles. There is no consensus for this. Do it again an you will be indeffed. Mjroots (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gorsey Bank tram stop, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East Didsbury. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. Class455 (talk) 16:33, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

FYI your template for tram stops seems to have the section title "Refernces" instead of "References".SamanthaB55 (talk) 00:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cambridge South railway station

The article Cambridge South railway station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sources talk only of feasibility studies; there are no firm proposals, no money has been allotted, nothing is certain. Most importantly, no contracts for construction have been signed

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Redrose64 (talk) 09:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cambridge South railway station for deletion

Hello. A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cambridge South railway station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cambridge South railway station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, please do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Thank you. Redrose64 (talk) 22:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Suffolk24. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Grand Southern Railway

The article Grand Southern Railway has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The two sources state "Alliance Rail Holdings has started industry consultation on proposals to launch an open access passenger service" and "Alliance Rail Holdings (Alliance) has started consultation within the rail industry on starting a new ‘open access’ rail service" - so it's not even a proposal, and fails WP:CRYSTAL

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Redrose64 (talk) 21:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

Your addition to London Overground has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Nordic Nightfury. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Addiscombe railway station, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Nordic Nightfury 08:17, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Newton Longville railway station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Newton Longville railway station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newton Longville railway station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nordic Nightfury 07:29, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Harringay (St Ann's Road) tube station

The article Harringay (St Ann's Road) tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only two sources, neither reliable, notwithstanding which, neither source actually states that a station was seriously considered

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Redrose64 (talk) 23:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Harringay (St Ann's Road) tube station for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harringay (St Ann's Road) tube station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harringay (St Ann's Road) tube station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Redrose64 (talk) 23:56, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GWR franchise 2013 Possible Services

Hi there On the GWR(TOC) page you say that there was the possibility of services between Paddington and Birmingham New Street, where does it say this in the document, and secondly services used to run from Moor Street in the 1960s not New Street.86.154.164.228 (talk) 00:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

READ the document it says at the bottom of page 31 that it recommended introduction of a service between Birmingham New Street and London Paddington under the Bold heading that says Great Western. User: Suffolk24 16:19, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.^{[survey 1]} The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.^{[survey 2]} The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

^ This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
^ Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Albert Hall tube station

The article Albert Hall tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is about a station that was proposed by the Central London Railway, but the plan that this was part of was not approved by Parliament. Dozens of stations were proposed as parts of plans for various new underground lines or for extensions of existing lines and WikiProject London Transport policy is to create articles for unbuilt stations only if parliamentary permission was granted, e.g. Bushey Heath or Emlyn Road. This station does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of St James Street tube station

The article St James Street tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is about a station that was proposed by the Central London Railway, but the plan that this was part of was not approved by Parliament. Dozens of stations were proposed as parts of plans for various new underground lines or for extensions of existing lines and WikiProject London Transport policy is to create articles for unbuilt stations only if parliamentary permission was granted, e.g. Bushey Heath or Emlyn Road. This station does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of Queen Victoria Street tube station

The article Queen Victoria Street tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is about a station that was proposed by the Central London Railway, but the plan that this was part of was not approved by Parliament. Dozens of stations were proposed as parts of plans for various new underground lines or for extensions of existing lines and WikiProject London Transport policy is to create articles for unbuilt stations only if parliamentary permission was granted, e.g. Bushey Heath or Emlyn Road. This station does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of St Mary's Axe tube station

The article St Mary's Axe tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is about a station that was proposed by the Central London Railway, but the plan that this was part of was not approved by Parliament. Dozens of stations were proposed as parts of plans for various new underground lines or for extensions of existing lines and WikiProject London Transport policy is to create articles for unbuilt stations only if parliamentary permission was granted, e.g. Bushey Heath or Emlyn Road. This station does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of Norfolk Street tube station

The article Norfolk Street tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is about a station that was proposed by the Central London Railway, but the plan that this was part of was not approved by Parliament. Dozens of stations were proposed as parts of plans for various new underground lines or for extensions of existing lines and WikiProject London Transport policy is to create articles for unbuilt stations only if parliamentary permission was granted, e.g. Bushey Heath or Emlyn Road. This station does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of Sloane Street tube station

The article Sloane Street tube station has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article is about a station that was proposed by the Central London Railway, but the plan that this was part of was not approved by Parliament. Dozens of stations were proposed as parts of plans for various new underground lines or for extensions of existing lines and WikiProject London Transport policy is to create articles for unbuilt stations only if parliamentary permission was granted, e.g. Bushey Heath or Emlyn Road. This station does not meet notability requirements.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Rail line one to five

Template:Rail line one to five has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 21:41, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Suffolk24. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.

[2] Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

[survey 1]

[survey 2]