Higher-speed rail was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 26, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
higher-speed rail is actually a lower train speed category than
high-speed rail? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What of existing operations or projects in Asia or Europe? In Germany and Italy there are several lines that are too slow for categorization as high-speed, but are certainly of the speeds referenced in this article. Dogru144 ( talk) 18:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
The reason you haven't heard the term used in places like Germany is that despite its prominence on Wikipedia it's actually obscure American governmental jargon (and even then, not even political jargon), not a term in widespread use. Amtrak, for example, rarely if ever uses the term publicly, describing its recent wave of 110mph upgrades as High Speed Rail. I have NEVER seen the term in the mass media.
I'm inclined to think this page and the pages related to it need to be deleted as it's an extreme case of WP:UNDUE, that not only pushes a particular agenda, but does so across a network of interconnected wikipages. The content needs to be merged with High Speed Rail and portrayed, correctly, as a classification used by American government agencies to determine funding, not as a distinct classification of railway speed (where it wouldn't make any sense anyway - a line where trains can consistently travel at 110mph is going to result in faster travel times than, say, a line where trains can reach 160mph, but usually travel at 60 or below, such as the Acela Express route.) -- 98.254.202.225 ( talk) 14:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
To address the concern mentioned in the "Continental bias" section on this talk page, I added more contents for higher-speed rail in other parts of the world. The contents are still light but it already provides a framework to expand to cover the higher-speed rail information worldwide. There is only one section now that is still US-centric. I moved the Globalize template down from the article level to that section. The strategies for rail improvements in that section are applicable worldwide, but they just lack examples from countries other than the US. When I have time, I will try to find reliable sources to diversify the examples.
Also I added "Similar categories" section. If anyone knows of train categories in some countries that fit the higher-speed rail but they are not called as such, please help expanding that section with reliable sources. Z22 ( talk) 20:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: MusikAnimal ( talk · contribs) 23:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
I'll be taking on this review. This may take a while as I'm generally very thorough with my reviews, and this article is somewhat sizable. Thanks for your patience! —
MusikAnimal
talk
23:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
These are some countries that have some definitions on higher-speed railI'd personally reword this to flow nicer, how about "Some countries with an established definition of higher-speed rail include:"
In Europe …Is there a source to support these claims?
In areas that there is frequent interference …is probably better worded "In areas where there is…" (where instead of there)
There are also a series of dead links, and I have tagged each as such. If you're not already aware of it, there is a handy tool called the
WayBack Machine to get archived versions of now nonexistant web content. Once a suitable archive is identified you can use the archiveurl
and archivedate
parameters of the citation templates.
This concludes my initial review. I still need to go through and do some fact checking, but feel free to go ahead and address the above concerns. I'm going to put the article on hold while we improve it. I'm confident we can meet all the GA criteria in a reasonable amount of time. — MusikAnimal talk 01:18, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Looks excellent! This nomination has passed. Congratulations! — MusikAnimal talk 06:29, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Most of the line from Montreal to Toronto is good for 100 mph. Since Transport Canada considers that "higher speed rail" (a term I abhor, but whatever) then the Montreal-Toronto corridor needs to be listed. -- plaws ( talk) 16:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Higher-speed rail. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:36, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
160 km/h is 100 mph, not 99 mph. (160/8 = 20; 20 x 5 = 100). How do we change the automatic conversions to get the accurate values? 137.205.171.154 ( talk) 14:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 17 external links on Higher-speed rail. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.uic.org/IMG/pdf/20140901_high_speed_lines_in_the_world.pdf{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.fwdailynews.com/news/latest/support-for-passenger-rail-study-gains-steam/article_0dd859a0-4533-5e60-a737-577a91d3e04a.htmlWhen 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Various other trains in Australia exceed the mentioned definitions for HrSR. I am specifically referring to the Xplorer, Endeavour and the strangely-named New Generation Rollingstock, the latter of which is yet to be put in revenue service. I haven't done the research, but would expect others to exist. Should these be included? Thanks, trainsandtech ( talk) 02:39, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians! Just thought I'd notify people of the discussion occurring about whether Amtrak's Northeast Regional qualifies as high-speed or higher-speed. Please feel free to chime in. – Daybeers ( talk) 22:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
There was a new section called "Advantages to HSR" added entirely without any sources. Although the content looks interesting but I don't think it is a good idea just added this. I tried to find the source(s) for this on the net, but couldn't come up with a good one that have those details mentioned in the section. What should we do with this section? Z22 ( talk) 15:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
UIC has classes of high-speed rail, but I haven't seen them define "higher"-speed rail explicitly. The last bullet point in the Definitions section should have the reference to higher-speed rail taken out if that cannot be supported by a reference. Z22 ( talk) 17:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Aren't British InterCity trains basically this? I think they should be mentioned, at least. The main lines in Great Britain have a top speed of 125 mph. The WCML in the past had average speeds from London to Warrington of 104 mph (non-stop; this is slower now with COVID and with an extra stop at Crewe). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncriticalsimon ( talk • contribs) 22:02, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
The specific service mentioned has reverted to basically the old timetable, and so it is again timetabled at (for some services) 104 minutes for London to Warrington, which actually comes to an average of 105 mph. Uncriticalsimon ( talk) 16:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Large portions of this page are uncited. There are also parts that are poorly written. Steelkamp ( talk) 07:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Specific problems are as follows:
alternatives to larger efforts to create or expand the high-speed rail networks.
Though the definition of higher-speed rail varies from country to country, most countries refer to rail services operating at speeds up to 200 km/h (125 mph).Should not be in its own paragraph
but usually falling short on the intended speeds.Why the "usually". Surely if it fulfilled intended speeds, then it would become true high speed rail.
the speed range for India's higher-speed rail will be between 160 and 200 km/h (100 and 125 mph).What's with the "will be"?
In Canada, the assumption about grade crossing is that operating higher-speed rail services between 160 and 200 km/h (99 and 124 mph) would require "improved levels of protection in acceptable areas".This is a nebulous statement.
In developing higher-speed rail services, one of those safety systems must be used.This seems to be original research.
which regulates the speed limits of trains with Class 5, Class 6, Class 7 and Class 8Is this grammatically correct?
In the United States, railroad tracks are largely used for freight with at-grade crossings.Is that meant to link to level crossing rather than At-grade intersection?
Steelkamp ( talk) 07:55, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
There has been no improvement to this article in the last month. I suggest to any uninvolved users passing by that you close this GAR as delist. Steelkamp ( talk) 05:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Higher-speed rail was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 26, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
higher-speed rail is actually a lower train speed category than
high-speed rail? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What of existing operations or projects in Asia or Europe? In Germany and Italy there are several lines that are too slow for categorization as high-speed, but are certainly of the speeds referenced in this article. Dogru144 ( talk) 18:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
The reason you haven't heard the term used in places like Germany is that despite its prominence on Wikipedia it's actually obscure American governmental jargon (and even then, not even political jargon), not a term in widespread use. Amtrak, for example, rarely if ever uses the term publicly, describing its recent wave of 110mph upgrades as High Speed Rail. I have NEVER seen the term in the mass media.
I'm inclined to think this page and the pages related to it need to be deleted as it's an extreme case of WP:UNDUE, that not only pushes a particular agenda, but does so across a network of interconnected wikipages. The content needs to be merged with High Speed Rail and portrayed, correctly, as a classification used by American government agencies to determine funding, not as a distinct classification of railway speed (where it wouldn't make any sense anyway - a line where trains can consistently travel at 110mph is going to result in faster travel times than, say, a line where trains can reach 160mph, but usually travel at 60 or below, such as the Acela Express route.) -- 98.254.202.225 ( talk) 14:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
To address the concern mentioned in the "Continental bias" section on this talk page, I added more contents for higher-speed rail in other parts of the world. The contents are still light but it already provides a framework to expand to cover the higher-speed rail information worldwide. There is only one section now that is still US-centric. I moved the Globalize template down from the article level to that section. The strategies for rail improvements in that section are applicable worldwide, but they just lack examples from countries other than the US. When I have time, I will try to find reliable sources to diversify the examples.
Also I added "Similar categories" section. If anyone knows of train categories in some countries that fit the higher-speed rail but they are not called as such, please help expanding that section with reliable sources. Z22 ( talk) 20:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: MusikAnimal ( talk · contribs) 23:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
I'll be taking on this review. This may take a while as I'm generally very thorough with my reviews, and this article is somewhat sizable. Thanks for your patience! —
MusikAnimal
talk
23:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
These are some countries that have some definitions on higher-speed railI'd personally reword this to flow nicer, how about "Some countries with an established definition of higher-speed rail include:"
In Europe …Is there a source to support these claims?
In areas that there is frequent interference …is probably better worded "In areas where there is…" (where instead of there)
There are also a series of dead links, and I have tagged each as such. If you're not already aware of it, there is a handy tool called the
WayBack Machine to get archived versions of now nonexistant web content. Once a suitable archive is identified you can use the archiveurl
and archivedate
parameters of the citation templates.
This concludes my initial review. I still need to go through and do some fact checking, but feel free to go ahead and address the above concerns. I'm going to put the article on hold while we improve it. I'm confident we can meet all the GA criteria in a reasonable amount of time. — MusikAnimal talk 01:18, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Looks excellent! This nomination has passed. Congratulations! — MusikAnimal talk 06:29, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Most of the line from Montreal to Toronto is good for 100 mph. Since Transport Canada considers that "higher speed rail" (a term I abhor, but whatever) then the Montreal-Toronto corridor needs to be listed. -- plaws ( talk) 16:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Higher-speed rail. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:36, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
160 km/h is 100 mph, not 99 mph. (160/8 = 20; 20 x 5 = 100). How do we change the automatic conversions to get the accurate values? 137.205.171.154 ( talk) 14:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 17 external links on Higher-speed rail. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.uic.org/IMG/pdf/20140901_high_speed_lines_in_the_world.pdf{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.fwdailynews.com/news/latest/support-for-passenger-rail-study-gains-steam/article_0dd859a0-4533-5e60-a737-577a91d3e04a.htmlWhen 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Various other trains in Australia exceed the mentioned definitions for HrSR. I am specifically referring to the Xplorer, Endeavour and the strangely-named New Generation Rollingstock, the latter of which is yet to be put in revenue service. I haven't done the research, but would expect others to exist. Should these be included? Thanks, trainsandtech ( talk) 02:39, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians! Just thought I'd notify people of the discussion occurring about whether Amtrak's Northeast Regional qualifies as high-speed or higher-speed. Please feel free to chime in. – Daybeers ( talk) 22:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
There was a new section called "Advantages to HSR" added entirely without any sources. Although the content looks interesting but I don't think it is a good idea just added this. I tried to find the source(s) for this on the net, but couldn't come up with a good one that have those details mentioned in the section. What should we do with this section? Z22 ( talk) 15:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
UIC has classes of high-speed rail, but I haven't seen them define "higher"-speed rail explicitly. The last bullet point in the Definitions section should have the reference to higher-speed rail taken out if that cannot be supported by a reference. Z22 ( talk) 17:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Aren't British InterCity trains basically this? I think they should be mentioned, at least. The main lines in Great Britain have a top speed of 125 mph. The WCML in the past had average speeds from London to Warrington of 104 mph (non-stop; this is slower now with COVID and with an extra stop at Crewe). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncriticalsimon ( talk • contribs) 22:02, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
The specific service mentioned has reverted to basically the old timetable, and so it is again timetabled at (for some services) 104 minutes for London to Warrington, which actually comes to an average of 105 mph. Uncriticalsimon ( talk) 16:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Large portions of this page are uncited. There are also parts that are poorly written. Steelkamp ( talk) 07:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Specific problems are as follows:
alternatives to larger efforts to create or expand the high-speed rail networks.
Though the definition of higher-speed rail varies from country to country, most countries refer to rail services operating at speeds up to 200 km/h (125 mph).Should not be in its own paragraph
but usually falling short on the intended speeds.Why the "usually". Surely if it fulfilled intended speeds, then it would become true high speed rail.
the speed range for India's higher-speed rail will be between 160 and 200 km/h (100 and 125 mph).What's with the "will be"?
In Canada, the assumption about grade crossing is that operating higher-speed rail services between 160 and 200 km/h (99 and 124 mph) would require "improved levels of protection in acceptable areas".This is a nebulous statement.
In developing higher-speed rail services, one of those safety systems must be used.This seems to be original research.
which regulates the speed limits of trains with Class 5, Class 6, Class 7 and Class 8Is this grammatically correct?
In the United States, railroad tracks are largely used for freight with at-grade crossings.Is that meant to link to level crossing rather than At-grade intersection?
Steelkamp ( talk) 07:55, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
There has been no improvement to this article in the last month. I suggest to any uninvolved users passing by that you close this GAR as delist. Steelkamp ( talk) 05:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)