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 articles

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).

Hampshire

	Hampshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire 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.HampshireWikipedia:WikiProject HampshireTemplate:WikiProject HampshireHampshire articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:34, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whitchurch railway station (Hampshire) → Whitchurch (Hants) railway station — Relisted discussion. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 19:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC) National Rail calls the station Whitchurch (Hants) like the stations in Shropshire and Wales.. CrossHouses (talk) 06:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, unless it actually says "(Hants)" on the sign. Otherwise, that form is merely inherited from BR's house style. On Wikipedia, we disambiguate placenames in full. As this is a location rather than a geological feature, arguably it should be Whitchurch railway station, Hampshire with a comma. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 15:01, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, largely for the reasons the IP editor gives. (Hants) after Whitchurch is just the way National Rail (and the TOCs etc etc) use to differentiate stations and even they don't use it when it's not necessary (e.g. this map and this interactive map). As such I suggest we stick to normal wikipedia style. Personally I feel brackets is more appropriate as the article is about the structures at a site rather than an actual location but I'm not too bothered which is chosen. Dpmuk (talk) 09:59, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2

[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 21:44, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whitchurch railway station (Hampshire) → Whitchurch (Hants) railway station – This station is referred to as Whitchurch (Hants) by Network Rail as well as the train operating companies which serve it:

This is a more WP:COMMONNAME for the station than the wiki-creation of "Whitchurch railway station (Hampshire)". Lamberhurst (talk) 09:46, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The arguments in the previous requested move are closely aligned with my own thinking. We should use Wikipedia's style guidelines for naming Wikipedia articles. The name (Whitchurch) chosen by Network Rail may affect how we name the article, but the style (brackets, "Hants" instead of "Hampshire") shouldn't. See also the related move request at Talk:Reedham railway station (Norfolk). — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Per WP:NATURAL, if the WP:COMMONNAME incorporates a disambiguating term, this should be used in preference to the default parenthetical disambiguation at the end of an article name. Lamberhurst (talk) 16:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Parenthetical disambiguation should go at the end of the article name. MRSC (talk) 16:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:NATURAL and my rationale at Talk:Reedham railway station (Norfolk)#Requested move. Thryduulf (talk) 20:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Thryduulf. The objections by MRSC and Mr. Stradivarius are based on the false assumption that the parenthetical disambiguator in "Whitchurch (Hants) railway station" has been added by Wikipedia editors. In fact it is a a form of natural disambiguator, in that it is part of a widely-used name in the real world. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:NATURAL and Thryduulf's rationale at Talk:Reedham railway station (Norfolk)#Requested move. -=# Amos E Wolfe ^talk #=- 19:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.