Talk:Alliance Rail Holdings

External links

Currently http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/ returns "Alliance Rail Holdings - Website coming soon" whilst http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/demo seems to return the company website. However, the "demo" name and the "Website coming soon" message both seem to suggest that the website hasn't been officially launched yet and as such we cannot be confident that the information at http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/demo is accurate. Therefore, we shouldn't link to the development version of the website just because we've found it and can access it, particularly since when the website is launched it will appear at http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/ and http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/demo may stop working. I would suggest that we should only link to http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/. Adambro (talk) 17:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

London-Garforth-Leeds-Shipley-Keighley-Skipton service dropped?

Well, before December 2013, Alliance had an interest of running services between Kings Cross and Skipton via Garforth and Keighley. but that has seems to be dropped for some reason. Why? I saw their intention of the service on their website before December 2013, but I'm puzzled (i live in Skipton myself for that matter) and I'm wondering why they dropped the service? --86.9.231.199 (talk) 20:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

'The proposed services were to have been' - is this really necessary?

There are two big sections giving details of the rejected proposals. Is this really notable information? Imo, it is not and should be deleted. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Suggest just giving in detail those that have been agreed or any still outstanding, and summarise briefly the proposals rejected in a sentence or two to give a rough idea of the scope. -- Alarics (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

'Planned rolling stock'

It is premature to include this section. See Wikipedia policy wp:CRYSTAL. Wait until it actually happens or at least the train leasing contracts have been sign. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Citation error

Note 18 contains: "ORR rejects Great North Western's Leeds ambitions" Rail Magazine issue 776 21 January 2015 page 21 Great North Eastern Railway Alliance Rail Holdings

Note 19 contains: "Alliance reveals London-Edinburgh plan" Rail Magazine issue 776 10 June 2015 page 18

They can't both be issue 776. Emeraude (talk) 12:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

 Fixed. Nördic Nightfury 10:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alliance Rail Holdings. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140715020743/http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/wp-content/themes/alliance/GNWR%20Application/track%20access%20contract/track%20access%20contract.pdf to http://www.alliancerail.co.uk/wp-content/themes/alliance/GNWR%20Application/track%20access%20contract/track%20access%20contract.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/8461994.Bradford_at_heart_of_huge_rail_shake_up_bid/

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Great North Western Railway merge suggestion

Now that is been announced services will not be operated by GNWR in its own right but by Grand Central, suggest that the GNWR article be redirect back here as it was up until 12 months ago when split out on the assumption GNWR would be a stand alone operator. WoodcraftM (talk) 05:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 07:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)