Talk:Abellio (London & Surrey)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This article[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate from Talk:Travel London. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made below.

After saying they would keep the old name, NedRailways have decided to rebrand Travel London and Travel Surrey as "Abellio London" and "Abellio Surrey". However, the website just shows Abellio, and the URL is It also looks like the bus fleetname will be just "Abellio". I therefore suggest creating a new article called Abellio, where both the London and Surrey operations can be detailed, rather than moving. This is also because the Travel London name is very complex, with it appearing in London two times before dieing out, and only staying successfully on the third time. Moving will therefore just confuse the matters. Any other ideas? Arriva436talk/contribs 18:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I think we should move both Travel London and Travel Surrey to Abellio London and Abellio Surrey.C.bonnick (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
But that would just cause confusion. There are a number of reasons why I think a new article is more suitable:
  • The Travel London article needs more history details of the two previous attempts of running buses in London. While the first two tries are relevant to Travel London, they are not relevant to Abellio.
  • Equally, the future history of Abellio is not relevant to the old bits of Travel London.
  • The new website only carries one logo for Abellio (as opposed to thw two Travel London and Travel Surrey articles.
  • The pictures shown look like they only show the Abellio name properly (presumably the line below it will say "London" or "Surrey". This contrasts with the distinct separate brands of Travel London and Travel Surrey beforehand.
  • Therefore, a new article called Abellio will be able to have the Surrey and London operations together, rather than spreading it out, as it is all under the same legal address.
  • Also, by keeping the old article separate, we will be able to keep the defunct names focuses on National Express, (after all it is their naming scheme) as NedRailways only operated under the Travel xxxxxx name for a matter of months (and they took all the fleetnames off much earlier).
Because of this, for now, I have created a new article at Abellio (UK bus company). This will therefore detail the current operation, while the Trvale London info can be scaled down to avoid duplicating it all.
I did want to wait for further concencess, but as usual with these kind of things, some editors who have no idea what the are doing just go round making random changes, causing a mess and confusing the matter, which is what had happened by this morning (despite me trying to encourage discussion here - they ignored it). A good example of this is that someone moved Travel Dundee to National Express Dundee as soon as NatEx even hinted they were rebranding. The new Dundee name came in a year after, so the Wikipedia article was wrong for a year. This is the sort of thing I'm trying to avoid.
I hope this all makes sense...! Arriva436talk/contribs 13:49, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does make sense and I agree with you now that Abellio London does needs it's own page.C.bonnick (talk) 11:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Abellio Surrey and Abellio London[edit]

Just to make it absolutely clear. Abellio Surrey is only a trading name of "Travel London (West)". Travel London (West) is part of Abellio London, and many Abellio London services are run off the Travel London (West) license. Therefore, it seems silly having two separate articles when the difference is so small. Please do not make huge changes without first getting consensus. Arriva436talk/contribs 19:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Route 35/N35[edit]

The transfer of routes 35/N35 is relevant, both occurred under Abellio ownership.Mo7838 (talk) 20:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abellio (London & Surrey). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:49, 25 June 2017 (UTC)