Talk:List of bus routes in London

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of bus routes in London article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 30 days

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

London Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Buses Top‑importance

	Buses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Buses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of buses 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.BusesWikipedia:WikiProject BusesTemplate:WikiProject Busesbus transport
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Transport Top‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London 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.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 August 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 December 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Spurious bus routes

Dear @2A0A:EF40:9AB:8301:756B:DA37:4F1B:3440: Please refrain from editing the page with bus routes that will supposedly be introduced years into the future without verification. There has been no consultation from TfL to introduce these routes, nor do bus routes get proposed so far in advance to my knowledge. If you are able to demonstrate the existence of proposals for these routes with reliable sources, I am happy to be proven wrong. However, please understand that even if you were a time traveller from the future where these bus routes existed, they would still be inadmissible at this time due to this information being impossible to verify independently. supchppt (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bus operator names

Good morning. I would like to seek a consensus as to how operator names should be listed on this article and the associated individual route articles. There doesn't currently seem to be a consensus as to whether operators should be listed under their trading names (Go-Ahead London, Stagecoach London etc.) or as the tendered operator (London General, Blue Triangle, Selkent, ELBG etc.). There seems to be a lot of editing on route articles switching between the two and whilst trading names are used on this article, the tendered operator is used on the Superloop article creating inconsistency. It would therefore be great if we can agree a consensus to apply to this and associated articles to ensure consistency. Apologies if this has been discussed and agreed previously. Thanks, looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts. Aaroncrudge (talk) 08:12, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can we not reach a middle ground?

I would prefer something like "Go-Ahead London (through Blue Triangle)", "Go-Ahead London (Blue Triangle)" or something else like that. Landpin (talk) 01:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Landpin. I like this idea as it gives a balance between trading names and tendered operator so both ends are covered. I'll keep this discussion open so we can see if others agree and once a consensus is reached, it can be implemented. Aaroncrudge (talk) 10:01, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support this idea as well, though I think it is more favourable to put it in prose form like how I did it previously on London Buses route SL4 (e.g. for SL4 Blue Triangle, a subsidary of Go-Ahead London, for route 75 Selkent, a subsidary of Stagecoach London) instead of introducing a bracket mid-prose. I think there was a policy/essay advising against that (couldn't find it though, and I might've remembered wrongly). Within the infobox I'd like to borrow the idea from North–South MRT line, where the subsidary is listed at the top with the parent listed in brackets, so Blue Triangle (Go-Ahead London) / Selkent (Stagecoach London). On the overall List of bus routes in London page we can just put the parent company (so for example SL4 can just put Go-Ahead London, route 75 can put Stagecoach London).

I think the inconsistency arouse when a (currently inactive) editor decided to put the trading names into the list (I believe unilaterally, though I don't think there has been any major objection after that) and then did the same for the individual bus pages by linking to the subsidary but displaying it as the parent (this example from route 1 displays the text Go-Ahead London while linking to London Central), but on the Superloop pages they got a bit of pushback from another (also currently inactive) editor who argued that it was original research to do so, then I offered the compromise of having both the parent and subsidary (by then both editors had gone inactive), and then we came to this stage after SL4 got launched. For the record, I disagree with the second editor that this is WP:OR since the subsidary fact is verifiable through a fair amount of sources, but I also disagree with putting the parent company text in place of the subsidary (like the route 1 example above), and I think that both can be there without a need to remove either. S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 14:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For me, I agree putting both, like 'London Transit (First Bus London)' will work as it shows both trading name and operator name, this can make it clear, avoid unnecessary confusion TL9027 (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone! Really glad a consensus has been reached on this and good to see it implemented across the route articles. Aaroncrudge (talk) 15:55, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]