This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography 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.
Even after I removed the dead links, there were 14 links remaining in the External Links section, many of which duplicated content found in each other (three links that fit the "list historical versions of the tube map" niche, for instance, and two for the "geographical map vs Beck map" comparison). One link was even on there twice!
I've pruned them back to the absolute basics -- two links to official London resources, one to Noad's alternative geographical map. I can see there being a strong argument for including a page that contains historical versions of the official map, but the three that were in there were all personal pages that looked a bit dodgy, and overlapped each other significantly without any one looking to be the clear candidate.
Basically, the EL section shows signs of having been a target for "let me add my Tube fansite" type links for a while, and I think it's a good candidate for very sharp pruning. --rahaeli (talk) 13:50, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! Looks much better now!
And, by way of justification, for removing all the historical version links, WP:ELMAYBE explicitly states "Long lists of links are not acceptable". And the list after the first pruning was clearly still a long list of links. If there were one or two links to collections of previous map versions, that might be worth including. Sadly I don't know of one.
And fan sites, unless written by a "recognised authority" are explicitly excluded by WP:FANSITE.
Beck did not introduce the tick marks for non-interchange stations. These had been present on rail diagrams for several decades. In fact, there is no evidence he even advocated their introduction. His presentation diagrams and prototypes show solid circles for these stations, and the tick marks were thus a late change and may even have been introduced by someone else. — Aldaron • T/C 20:10, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Garland, Ken (1994). Mr Beck's Underground Map. Harrow Weald: Capital Transport. pp. 18–19. ISBN1-85414-168-6.
the first version to use ticks was the initial print run of January 1933, Beck's previous trials having used blobs. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
That's correct. All of Beck's versions prior to that had blobs, and ticks appeared only (suddenly) in the first printed version. The inspiration for their abrupt inclusion is not known, though ticks had already been used in several maps (for example 1898 maps for the Metropolitan Railway). Note that this evidence contradicts Beck's own assertion that he was the inventor of tick marks. — Aldaron • T/C 00:40, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I've corrected the caption to focus on the map's more geographically correct locations of the lines rather than stations. By representing all stations as points, this map in fact conceals information about the true geometry and geographic extent of stations (in particular how lines and platforms relate there) which the current "Standard Tube Map" carefully — albeit schematically — represents. Examine Euston, Bank/Monument, or Paddington (despite continuing the historical struggle there by showing the Bakerloo platforms north, rather than south of the H&C platforms, a situation that was to be rectified in the "2016" map) for example. — Aldaron • T/C 12:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)