![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Being discussed at Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services#Article name post 7 February 2021 Shenkdwood ( talk) 00:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Transport for Wales Rail (2021)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "WhatSE":
overhead electric, battery and diesel
overhead electric, battery and diesel
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Procedural close, converted to multi-request at Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services#Requested move 28 January 2021 ( non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs ( talk) 11:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Transport for Wales Rail (2021) → Transport for Wales Rail – See discussion at Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services#Requested move 28 January 2021. Bx16 ( talk) 03:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 11:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved, as per the revised proposal. — Amakuru ( talk) 16:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
– Transport for Wales Rail Limited is the current train operating company (ToC) for Wales. Transport for Wales Rail Services was the ToC operating from 2018 to 2021. Transport for Wales Rail redirects to the current ToC. It in turn has over 500 links from other articles, and most of them having taken a look are rightly intended to point to the current ToC.
So my first reason is the first page move would help fix around 500 double re-directs.
My second reason is that the second page move would align the name with that chosen for other former ToC's, e.g. Southeastern (train operating company 2006–2021).
My third reason is it's just a whole lot neater - disambiguation isn't currently used or needed for the first page, so the page move isn't going to cause confusion, and the second page move will make things less confusing as it will be more obvious from the name what the article is about. 10mmsocket ( talk) 09:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Amakuru ( talk) 10:12, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
NOTE I changed the proposal for the second move to KeolisAmey Wales as there is zero support (even from me now) for the original proposal. It looks like there might be consensus on the new name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 10mmsocket ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I brought this subject up on Talk:KeolisAmey Wales a few weeks ago and figured I should bring it up here too: would it be worth it that, instead of displaying the rail lines in the Routes section, that we copy and paste the service table there and adjust according to the current timetable? Obviously we need to use both the TfW timetables and eNRT as cross-referencing, but I believe it could work instead of displaying a mess of "these services continue on X line" across some of the cells. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Maurice Oly and @ DankJae: even if those three units are permanently withdrawn, I don't believe that the 175s belong in the "Past fleet" section until the whole fleet is withdrawn. It's contradictory for them to be listed simultaneously as current and past, and a bad precedent too – taken to extremes, you'd be listing the 156s at ScotRail as 'past' because they off-leased a single unit earlier this year even though they're planning to hang onto the rest for ages yet. XAM2175 (T) 15:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
While this may be pedantic, the recent disputes of the infobox image on this article may be in need of discussing. Two recent edits in good faith, seem to be of two editors trying to insert their own images to be used in the infobox. They're both great images in their own right, but this dispute is better discussed rather than changing them every few days, to prevent a slow edit war, plus seems a good time to discuss it, the image I put months ago that lasted for months is gone (with good reason) and I just prefer stability.
So what would be the best image to represent Transport for Wales Rail, and as it was stated as the reason, what is their "flagship fleet" if they have one, and should that be used as a basis of the infobox image.
The past infobox images used on this article are below, be free to also give suggestions (images post Feb 2021 preferred).
Pinging editors involved @ Vanmanyo, @ Sootysuerickie, and those on this talk page @ XAM2175, @ Maurice Oly, @ 10mmsocket, and @ JalenFolf. Dank Jae 21:42, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
All 170s are gone and this is confirmed in the following source: The Railway Magazine, March 2024 Edition. I dont know how to edit the Current Fleet table correctly to remove it. May someone else please? Sootysuerickie ( talk) 18:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Being discussed at Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services#Article name post 7 February 2021 Shenkdwood ( talk) 00:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Transport for Wales Rail (2021)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "WhatSE":
overhead electric, battery and diesel
overhead electric, battery and diesel
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Procedural close, converted to multi-request at Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services#Requested move 28 January 2021 ( non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs ( talk) 11:28, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Transport for Wales Rail (2021) → Transport for Wales Rail – See discussion at Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services#Requested move 28 January 2021. Bx16 ( talk) 03:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Services which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 11:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved, as per the revised proposal. — Amakuru ( talk) 16:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
– Transport for Wales Rail Limited is the current train operating company (ToC) for Wales. Transport for Wales Rail Services was the ToC operating from 2018 to 2021. Transport for Wales Rail redirects to the current ToC. It in turn has over 500 links from other articles, and most of them having taken a look are rightly intended to point to the current ToC.
So my first reason is the first page move would help fix around 500 double re-directs.
My second reason is that the second page move would align the name with that chosen for other former ToC's, e.g. Southeastern (train operating company 2006–2021).
My third reason is it's just a whole lot neater - disambiguation isn't currently used or needed for the first page, so the page move isn't going to cause confusion, and the second page move will make things less confusing as it will be more obvious from the name what the article is about. 10mmsocket ( talk) 09:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Amakuru ( talk) 10:12, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
NOTE I changed the proposal for the second move to KeolisAmey Wales as there is zero support (even from me now) for the original proposal. It looks like there might be consensus on the new name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 10mmsocket ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I brought this subject up on Talk:KeolisAmey Wales a few weeks ago and figured I should bring it up here too: would it be worth it that, instead of displaying the rail lines in the Routes section, that we copy and paste the service table there and adjust according to the current timetable? Obviously we need to use both the TfW timetables and eNRT as cross-referencing, but I believe it could work instead of displaying a mess of "these services continue on X line" across some of the cells. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Maurice Oly and @ DankJae: even if those three units are permanently withdrawn, I don't believe that the 175s belong in the "Past fleet" section until the whole fleet is withdrawn. It's contradictory for them to be listed simultaneously as current and past, and a bad precedent too – taken to extremes, you'd be listing the 156s at ScotRail as 'past' because they off-leased a single unit earlier this year even though they're planning to hang onto the rest for ages yet. XAM2175 (T) 15:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
While this may be pedantic, the recent disputes of the infobox image on this article may be in need of discussing. Two recent edits in good faith, seem to be of two editors trying to insert their own images to be used in the infobox. They're both great images in their own right, but this dispute is better discussed rather than changing them every few days, to prevent a slow edit war, plus seems a good time to discuss it, the image I put months ago that lasted for months is gone (with good reason) and I just prefer stability.
So what would be the best image to represent Transport for Wales Rail, and as it was stated as the reason, what is their "flagship fleet" if they have one, and should that be used as a basis of the infobox image.
The past infobox images used on this article are below, be free to also give suggestions (images post Feb 2021 preferred).
Pinging editors involved @ Vanmanyo, @ Sootysuerickie, and those on this talk page @ XAM2175, @ Maurice Oly, @ 10mmsocket, and @ JalenFolf. Dank Jae 21:42, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
All 170s are gone and this is confirmed in the following source: The Railway Magazine, March 2024 Edition. I dont know how to edit the Current Fleet table correctly to remove it. May someone else please? Sootysuerickie ( talk) 18:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)