I suggest 'Audley End' be renamed 'Walden Parkway' given how it serves the town of Saffron Walden (used to live there for 7 years so it was my local station when I started getting into trains) and doesn't really have much to do with Audley End House & Gardens, the village its next to isn't even called Audley End (it's name is Wendens Ambo and the station was initially called 'Wenden' for a few years before it got renamed to what we have now); even though since 2012 (ironically the year I moved away) it has 'Audley End for Saffron Walden' on its signage (in a similar way to 'Ashchurch for Tewksbury' but more of a mouthful), I think 'Walden Parkway' would make a lot more sense, given it's a parkway station on Saffron Walden's periphery and has barely anything to do with Audley End in reality anyway.
Also, 'Mills Hill' in Greater Manchester should be renamed 'Chadderton & Middleton' given its equidistance between the two places, neither of which have their own stations but have this one in their proximity, and it would clear confusion between a similarly named 'Mill Hill' in Blackburn. What's more, the 59 bus route runs directly between Chadderton and Middleton and serves this very station in between, so it's a great connection opportunity.
There are a few stations scattered quite far apart across the country with 'Preston' in their name (Prestonpans near Edinburgh and Preston Park in Brighton) as well as 'Preston' itself referring to the city in Lancashire, so I think it would be helpful if it (the name of the city as well as the station) gained a suffix based on its river like we have 'Newcastle-upon-Tyne', so in this case 'Preston-on-Ribble'.
Sheffield should bring back 'Sheffield Midland' or call itself 'Sheffield City' so Meadowhall can gain the 'Sheffield' prefix.
I agree that the Cambridge "problem" is only going to get worse when South is constructed and that keeping the main station without any suffix in perpetuity likely won't work. But given the geography of Cambridge, adding "Central" would give rise to laughter rather than clarification, since (for the usual historical reasons) its location is anything other than "central". I take the point that its position between the North and South stations renders it, de facto, Central. But I doubt that's how any residents or visitors view it!
Didn't know there were plans for a 'Cambridge South' to be a thing? Nice to see a little metro system forming there
I quite like the ideas of 'Cambridge General' or 'Cambridge City' to be fair, but we could be fancy and call it 'Cambridge Victoria' or 'Cambridge Piccadilly' cos why not?
Colchester would be another. It's sometimes referred to as Colchester North to distinguish it from Colchester Town, formerly St. Botolph's.
Or Colchester Junction?
The term city has meaning outside of the current government inconsistent terminology.
There's a Welwyn North and a Welwyn Garden City station, no issues with that town using a city title.
Reading should call itself a city, it would add to the case for getting it officially.
Would be great but the Queen would be pissed
That doesn't make sense as Pembroke Dock is also a town in its own right, they're two separate places
Quite similar to how Llandudno Junction is its own town compared to Llandudno itself, but the latter could become 'Llandudno Town' or 'Llandudno Central' given that the towns are pretty much joined together like a mini-conurbation anyway.