This is a
WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
Welcome to the New Zealand Railways (NZR) WikiProject!
This project was established to facilitate co-operation with regards to Wikipedia's coverage of New Zealand's national railway network. Recognising the unique facets of this isolated rail system, this project seeks to enhance and expand coverage wherever possible while fostering closer communication between participants.
Please note that we have an NZR Manual of Style for articles related to New Zealand's railways; it seeks to provide guidance on matters of notability and style for all editors of articles on related topics.
This project's scope encompasses all articles related to rail transport in New Zealand. Although its name is "WikiProject NZR", it also covers the Wellington and Manawatu Railway, other NZR-era private operators, and NZR's provincial predecessors and privately owned successors.
Please add your name below if you are interested in joining our group.
Also, some station's articles still use 2009, when the 2010 is available. Videomaniac29 ( talk) 03:46, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
This issue has been taken care of with the separate articles for Wellington and Manawatu Railway Company and Wellington - Manawatu Line.
Agreed, the Auckland lines could certainly be split like Wellington, with Hutt Valley Line which is part of the Wairarapa Line and Paraparaumu Line which is part of the NIMT
The main lines articles would be mainly historic, while the suburban articles would be largely cover proposed improvements and upgrades. It would also reduce the lengths of some of the articles! PS: Need to add to the Rail Line Navigation Box Eastern Line, Auckland, Western Line, Auckland (currently a redirect) and Southern Line, Auckland?
For Lyttelton, how about turning the present Lyttelton rail tunnel article into an article on the Lyttelton Line also (i.e. Redirect), as there is hardly enough for two articles, apart from the difficulty of separating it out! PS: Is the Lyttelton Line regarded as part of the Main South Line as stated; it seems more like a branch line to me?
I wasw not proposing that the Lyttelton Tunnel article be removed but that the Lyttelton Line redlink be redirected to it! The early history of the line - whether, when and how it should be built - is the history of the tunnel. The operation as a suburban line could be separated out later. Hugo999 ( talk) 13:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I've raised this issue on both the Paraparaumu Line and Johnsonville Branch articles - the project needs to standardise the templates we use. In my view the project should stick to the standard rail templates. -- Lholden ( talk) 19:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
The article Rail privatisation in New Zealand is an unreferenced and orphaned stub at the moment. This is a pretty big topic, especially with the recent acquisition by the government of Toll's operations, and there is plenty of material that belongs in the article.
There are numerous existing articles that make reference to Toll as the operator of the service/line/etc. These need to be updated to KiwiRail where appropriate. The easiest way to accomplish this is to go to Toll NZ/What links here and go through the list of articles to verify or update the references. – Matthew25187 ( talk) 19:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi all, the class register from New Zealand DX class locomotives has been removed as the registers are now considered to be not notable. I propose we remove these from all the locomotive articles. Thoughts? LJ Holden 22:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Acknowledging the ping (ty) but I'm way out of my depth here. I have no specialist knowledge and as a frequent train rider in Auckland my interest is mainly in its lines and stations and the AM class units. Akld guy ( talk) 00:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it appears that there's going to be an edit war on the basis that the removal wasn't discussed, I've messaged the user and let them know it was discussed, here -- LJ Holden 07:36, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
@ 2406:E006:AC8:9101:68CF:3BED:1AF7:7E08: @ 2406:E006:AC8:9101:5125:A453:A39F:B9E0: Please discuss here before restoring class registers. Your edits are going against community consensus. pcuser42 ( talk) 20:12, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I object strongly to removing this information without a more detailed explanation and discussion. -- NearEMPTiness ( talk) 12:43, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
@ 2406:E006:AC8:9101:F5DC:4FD2:5274:A264: - please discuss your revisions/restorations of the class registers here, yes you can refer the removal of class registers to Wikiadmins if you prefer. -- LJ Holden 00:06, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, to be completely honest, I see the removal locomotive registers a rather pointless thing to do. I'm assuming there is somewhere else (New Zealand Rolling Stock Lists?) where I can find locomotive registers. TomMort1 10:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Well the problem is on New Zealand Rolling Stock Lists on Weebly they hardly update or do anything keep us more upto date which is dumb! Trooper201 ( talk) 07:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
But then how do we know the information on the locomotives fate scrap or preservation now or withdrawal. they're has to be another way.
Trooper201 (
talk) 02:05, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've expanded the lede greatly and tidied up a lot of the citations. -- LJ Holden 01:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, as many of you know there are a lot of references which are in common across Wiki NZR articles. I've started to template all of these so that they are uniform across all articles, and it's much easier to reference specific pages, the first I've created is:
Which you can access by using the template: *{{Palmer & Stewart}} Cheers -- LJ Holden 02:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
I've nominated Rail transport in New Zealand for Good article status. Hopefully the last round of edits / tidy ups has improved the quality -- LJ Holden 09:09, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
There's an article on Rails magazine which needs expanding, given its usefulness as a reference it really shouldn't be a stub :) -- LJ Holden 07:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Recent edits to the Glenbrook Vintage Railway page has highlighted the fact that on that page and many other pages, TMS numbers are displayed inconsistently. Rather than get into an edit war with a rather obtuse editor who keeps undoing an edit, I will follow his suggestion and raise the issue here first.
In NZ Railway vernacular, it is commonly accepted that Pre-TMS numbers are styled correctly with a Capital Letter, then a space, then the number (e.g. K 911). Where a secondarly letter is involved with the Class, styled correctly this should be shown as a superscripted letter (e.g. KA 942) but informally styling the second letter as a lower-case letter is also considered acceptable (e.g. Ka 942). Generally in most articles that I can see, it seems the correct style using the superscripted second letter is generally applied but I cannot see anywhere on this page that denotes a standard to follow.
Similarly, it is commonly accepted that TMS numbers are styled correctly with All Capitals for the letters, then the number with no space (e.g. DCP4818) - due to the original TMS computer system being unable to handle case sensitivity so it was always displaying capitals, and equally for the calculation the system needed to provide on the letters and numbers there was no space. The use of a space with TMS numbers is not only a styling error, but it also can introduce confusion. However again, there is nothing to denote a standard to follow and on many pages TMS numbers are styled both correctly and incorrectly on the same page - for instance my edits of removing the space from some TMS numbers were rejected because "spaces are consistent with the rest of the article" yet on the very same page, all the carriages that are listed by TMS number do not have spaces.
Sticking to proper styling is the difference from being able to tell carriage A 2001 (b.1941) apart from carriage A2001 (b.1938 as A 1861). It is a small change but can have big implications, and I feel that we should make an effort to get it right and portray information as accurately as possible.
Can we set an agreed standard where Pre-TMS numbers use the superscripted style with a space, and TMS numbers are All Capitals with no space? Gosteamnz ( talk) 23:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Is there a reason why stations from Homai to Pukekohe use coordinates which don't show on the Wikimap? Johnragla ( talk) 09:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
I've started a deletion discussion for the Template:NZR locomotive list, mainly as a consequence of removing rolling stock lists. -- LJ Holden 06:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed that many stations don't have the correct links. E.g. when you type e.g. "Grafton" into to the preceding station for Mount Eden's infobox, it will show up as a dead red link because the thing (I don't know what it's called) thinks that you're trying to type
Grafton railway station, Lower Hutt, when it should be
Grafton railway station, Auckland.
Same for Kingsland, Newmarket, Avondale, Morningside, Penrose, and Panmure's adjacent/next to stations. Some of them use 'Wellington Region' as well as 'Lower Hutt'. I have a suggestion to fix this, could we make a page redirect for each station's dead links, so could we make for example
Grafton railway station, Lower Hutt redirect you to
Grafton railway station, Auckland? I know that this is not the best solution, however this is my first time working on NZ articles, and I have no knowledge on how the infobox template thing was set up. It will still help get rid of all of the dead links. Please suggest any ideas and/or support/oppose any suggested ideas.
Fork99 (
talk) 08:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
:
List of Auckland railway stations also has a similar problem under the
Western Line section.
Fork99 (
talk) 10:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::@
LJ Holden: Yeah, good idea, one problem is that it doesn’t really agree with the official name? I think moving the current article Metlink to Metlink (Melbourne) actually makes sense because that branding in Australia hasn’t been in use for almost 10 years (so I don’t think it would break too much over in Melbourne’s articles and also most people wouldn’t use the old term for it, and even if they did, I think putting a “for the Metlink in Melbourne” template on this article makes sense), which I would assume makes this Metlink more notable and significant than the other one?
Fork99 (
talk) 22:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::@
LJ Holden: Also, do you happen to know why the article is called
Public transport in the Wellington Region instead of Metlink (Wellington) or something? Is it because it’s not noteworthy enough to split into two articles?
Fork99 (
talk) 22:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@ LJ Holden: After some discussion over on the Australian Metlink article, it was actually agreed to change Metlink in every single Wellington station in the adjacent stations template to Transdev Wellington instead of changing it to either of our ideas suggested in the above section. This would also be consistent with how it works in Auckland, where all of them use Transdev Auckland instead of AT Metro. Thoughts? Fork99 ( talk) 02:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Bringing attention here to the original research issue I brought up at Talk:Te Huia pcuser42 ( talk) 19:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I have just noticed that the rolling stock tables on 3 pages have been removed - those on the Mainline Steam page, Steam Incorporated page, and Dunedin Railways page. There are possibly others that I haven't noticed yet. I have undone the edit for the MLS and Steam Inc pages, but left the Dunedin Railways one for now. I do not see any reasonable justification why these lists were removed, and in fact without them the page does not make sense as it was left. While the reasons for why the lists were taken off the Locomotive pages are well established (though clearly not adhered to worldwide on Wikipedia), I don't believe the same arguments can be applied to the Rail Group pages as the information is always able to be sourced officially from the groups in question, and websites like NZRSR. It should, at least, be discussed first? Gosteamnz ( talk) 04:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
@ The railway modeler: and @ Gosteamnz: -- LJ Holden 01:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Added a new page with details of the NZR FM class; still to add infobox, and picture of new units obtained from GWRC.
Also have put Wairarapa Connection into Category:Named passenger trains of New Zealand as a (standard) subcategory of Category:Named passenger trains. This could supersede Category:Long-distance passenger trains in New Zealand Hugo999 ( talk) 04:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, according to the Official Information Request 2008/083 of 4 August 2008 “The new Matangi trains official class is F. The motor car will (be) FM and the trailer car will be FT.” I presume they will be Bo-Bo classification. The GWRC also supplied a file of the illustration of the EMUs for this article; so I think it will be fair use (OK on English Wikipedia); not free use, so cannot be on Wilkpedia Commons. Uploaded and added to the Infobox which Lcmortensen had added (thank you). This is the picture used in their public handouts. Hugo999 ( talk) 10:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The Metlink News Issue 5 of April 2008 [1] refers to “two-car units joined by a large gangway so people can move easily between them”; i.e. presumably unlike the links on the existing units and at the front of the FM in the picture, which are intended for use by guards only. Hence I assume that in the middle each car has its own bogie and the two cars can be uncoupled; unlike the Fiat railcars or the EW locos with a single common bogie, a Jacobs bogie. Hugo999 ( talk) 23:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Note that the date by the references from the GWRC or Metlink website (i.e. an official source, not a news source) on the FD page is the date of the press release/newsletter, not the date that it was retrieved, so should be shown as date of press delease or similar Hugo999 ( talk) 00:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Re the illustration of the NZR FM class EMUs, this was provided by the Greater Wellington Regional Council for this article so I think counts as Fair Use (not Free Use). But it was tagged as requiring a tag. Reading the Wiki articles on Copyright and Image Copyright Tags which go on at great length about how they are a GOOD IDEA etc., I have attached a FAIR USE tag to the illustration but it seem this may not be enough Hugo999 ( talk) 21:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Isn't this new Category:Named passenger trains of New Zealand category in effect duplicating the work already done on Named trains: New Zealand? – Matthew25187 ( talk) 00:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes - Palmeriain ( talk) 07:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
No: Named trains: New Zealand is a List not a Category, and is part of a series of National/Regional lists. The NZ trains are in Category:Named passenger trains - but most trains in this category are in subcategories by country which is what Category:Named passenger trains of New Zealand is. Alternatively Category:Long-distance passenger trains in New Zealand could be made a subcategory of Category:Named passenger trains instead, as it would then be accessible via the general categories on Rail Passenger Transport etc. Long-distance passenger trains etc. is a unique NZ category Hugo999 ( talk) 13:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Have redirected New Zealand Rail Ltd to Tranz Rail, to avoid Red Link in every NZ Rail Operating Companies box! Hugo999 ( talk) 00:47, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I have written Otaki Railway Station, Levin Railway Station, Shannon Railway Station and Palmerston North Railway Station, which are stops for the Capital Connection and (Levin, Palmerston North) the Overlander. Photos (except Shannon) would be useful, also Coordinates and Platform type details. Redirects were required from xxx Train Station on infoboxes to xxx Railway Station. And could someone please fix the infoboxes for the Capital Connection and Overlander (train), which are displaying some formatting commands on the route map (problem is beyond me). Hugo999 ( talk) 10:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
The only redlink template on the information box (see via Silver Fern) for named trains is for the Kiwi Lager Express. I can't recall this train; where and when did it run? And was there a steam train passenger service between Auckland and Hamilton before the Waikato Connection? Hugo999 ( talk) 11:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I posted to it's talk page but I doubt it will get noticed. The page Ohai State Coal Mines is actually a list of Ohai Railway Board locomotives and has nothing of what the title suggests. Do we write an article about the mines themselves and split the loco list and merge into the Ohai Railway Board Heritage Trust page or what? Yak52fan ( talk) 22:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Page has been moved to Locomotives of the Ohai Railway Board. Yak52fan ( talk) 03:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I propose to make Otaihunga railway station a redirect to Otaihanga railway station and have put it on the WikiProject NZR list of tasks. Current spelling and also the spelling in WMR advertisements and in Douglas Hoy’s 1972 book on the WMR (p52,120). I do not have access to Ken Cassell’s “Uncommon Carrier” at present. NB: duplication only apparent when district categories etc. added to both pages. Hugo999 ( talk) 23:55, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
I have added A & G Price and Scott Brothers (locomotive manufacturers) i.e. the two private manufacturers of steam locos for the NZR. However the Scott Bros article has been tagged for speedy deletion and I would appreciate some support on its talk page, as leaving out one manufacturer will leave a hole, even if they were less notable than some! ## OK now but more info on firm needed ##
Scott Brothers (locomotive manufacturers) just needs additional sources now! A & G Price has the totals for each class (5) of locos made there, which comes to 122, not the 123 total that Lloyd gives on page 139 of his Register. And the Price article needs something on Price Diesel locos? ## Price built 50 NZR A Class not 49 (+ 8 by NZR at Addington Workshops ##
The new steam locos total (81) for those built at Hutt Workshops (inc Petone) seem to add up to the 81 given in Lloyd (see table in New Zealand Railways Department, but the totals for Addington Workshops & Hillside Workshops need articles with numbers built for the remaining NZR steam locomotives to complete the numbers.
Re station articles, have just noticed that for Auckland it is Avondale Train Station while for Wellington it is Raroa Railway Station! Train Station or Railway Station? PS: have completed the last major Workshops with new article Hutt Workshops. Hugo999 ( talk) 06:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The Auckland City Library has some good 'Heritage' photos to add as external links - the link works, though a very long search string??
The Rail transport in New Zealand article doesn't really cover bush tramways, which is a pretty major oversight. Thoughts? -- LJ Holden 04:40, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
I've created an article for these locos under New Zealand 10000 class locomotives - I'm guessing we'll get an idea of the actual KiwiRail classification later. -- LJ Holden 20:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Attempted to resolve this once before, but still remains. The Te Huia article contains material in violation of WP:SYNTH - seeking consensus on removing this to avoid edit warring. pcuser42 ( talk) 23:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm proposing moving The Great Journeys of New Zealand to Long distance passenger trains of New Zealand. -- LJ Holden 22:25, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi from over the ditch (Australia),
I have been working on an update to the proposed
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian and New Zealand stations), which has never been officially accepted. I have also been looking into expanding it to cover lines, routes & services (something that has been suggested on
WP:TRAINS) and also what to include on the associated BSicon diagrams for both our countries. See
User:ThylacineHunter/sandbox3
The majority of this work is now finished, but I have run into some NZ related issues:
I hope to have this sorted out by the end of this month, so I can submit this updated naming convention. -- ThylacineHunter ( talk) 08:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
there is a dedicated WikiProject for New Zealand Railways; unfortunately that doesn’t mean anything if most of its members are inactive. Fork99 ( talk) 08:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi from Sydney again, just wondering, is this WikiProject quite inactive? I think it can make it confusing for any newcomers who may come here for help, and don’t get any response. Any active members who do remain here aren’t going to be around forever, unfortunately, and it’s hard to recruit/enlist new participants. There’s a way to convert inactive WikiProjects into task forces, outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Task forces which I think probably should be done. Fork99 ( talk) 08:10, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject NZR}} superseded by ;
{{ TrainsWikiProject}}
Below is a list of references that are commonly cited for New Zealand rail transport articles and other topics. To simplify citations, I've created templates to be added to the "References" section of each article. To cite a particular page, use the sfn template, e.g. {{sfn|author's name|publication year|p=page number}}, so "When Steam Was King" is cited in the article as {{sfn|Stewart|1974|p=1}}. Where there's two authors, it's the author's surnames alphabetically sorted, e.g. A.N. Palmer and W.W. Stewart becomes "Palmer & Stewart":
Additional useful books:
New Zealand Railways articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
GA | 1 | 1 | |||||
B | 1 | 6 | 10 | 76 | 8 | 101 | |
C | 4 | 9 | 36 | 51 | 100 | ||
Start | 7 | 10 | 134 | 86 | 237 | ||
Stub | 28 | 81 | 109 | ||||
List | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 | |||
Category | 82 | 82 | |||||
Disambig | 9 | 9 | |||||
File | 243 | 243 | |||||
Project | 2 | 2 | |||||
Redirect | 16 | 16 | |||||
Template | 25 | 25 | |||||
Assessed | 2 | 17 | 31 | 276 | 377 | 229 | 932 |
Total | 2 | 17 | 31 | 276 | 377 | 229 | 932 |
WikiWork factors ( ?) | ω = 2,544 | Ω = 4.64 |
This is a
WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
Welcome to the New Zealand Railways (NZR) WikiProject!
This project was established to facilitate co-operation with regards to Wikipedia's coverage of New Zealand's national railway network. Recognising the unique facets of this isolated rail system, this project seeks to enhance and expand coverage wherever possible while fostering closer communication between participants.
Please note that we have an NZR Manual of Style for articles related to New Zealand's railways; it seeks to provide guidance on matters of notability and style for all editors of articles on related topics.
This project's scope encompasses all articles related to rail transport in New Zealand. Although its name is "WikiProject NZR", it also covers the Wellington and Manawatu Railway, other NZR-era private operators, and NZR's provincial predecessors and privately owned successors.
Please add your name below if you are interested in joining our group.
Also, some station's articles still use 2009, when the 2010 is available. Videomaniac29 ( talk) 03:46, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
This issue has been taken care of with the separate articles for Wellington and Manawatu Railway Company and Wellington - Manawatu Line.
Agreed, the Auckland lines could certainly be split like Wellington, with Hutt Valley Line which is part of the Wairarapa Line and Paraparaumu Line which is part of the NIMT
The main lines articles would be mainly historic, while the suburban articles would be largely cover proposed improvements and upgrades. It would also reduce the lengths of some of the articles! PS: Need to add to the Rail Line Navigation Box Eastern Line, Auckland, Western Line, Auckland (currently a redirect) and Southern Line, Auckland?
For Lyttelton, how about turning the present Lyttelton rail tunnel article into an article on the Lyttelton Line also (i.e. Redirect), as there is hardly enough for two articles, apart from the difficulty of separating it out! PS: Is the Lyttelton Line regarded as part of the Main South Line as stated; it seems more like a branch line to me?
I wasw not proposing that the Lyttelton Tunnel article be removed but that the Lyttelton Line redlink be redirected to it! The early history of the line - whether, when and how it should be built - is the history of the tunnel. The operation as a suburban line could be separated out later. Hugo999 ( talk) 13:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I've raised this issue on both the Paraparaumu Line and Johnsonville Branch articles - the project needs to standardise the templates we use. In my view the project should stick to the standard rail templates. -- Lholden ( talk) 19:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
The article Rail privatisation in New Zealand is an unreferenced and orphaned stub at the moment. This is a pretty big topic, especially with the recent acquisition by the government of Toll's operations, and there is plenty of material that belongs in the article.
There are numerous existing articles that make reference to Toll as the operator of the service/line/etc. These need to be updated to KiwiRail where appropriate. The easiest way to accomplish this is to go to Toll NZ/What links here and go through the list of articles to verify or update the references. – Matthew25187 ( talk) 19:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi all, the class register from New Zealand DX class locomotives has been removed as the registers are now considered to be not notable. I propose we remove these from all the locomotive articles. Thoughts? LJ Holden 22:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Acknowledging the ping (ty) but I'm way out of my depth here. I have no specialist knowledge and as a frequent train rider in Auckland my interest is mainly in its lines and stations and the AM class units. Akld guy ( talk) 00:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it appears that there's going to be an edit war on the basis that the removal wasn't discussed, I've messaged the user and let them know it was discussed, here -- LJ Holden 07:36, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
@ 2406:E006:AC8:9101:68CF:3BED:1AF7:7E08: @ 2406:E006:AC8:9101:5125:A453:A39F:B9E0: Please discuss here before restoring class registers. Your edits are going against community consensus. pcuser42 ( talk) 20:12, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I object strongly to removing this information without a more detailed explanation and discussion. -- NearEMPTiness ( talk) 12:43, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
@ 2406:E006:AC8:9101:F5DC:4FD2:5274:A264: - please discuss your revisions/restorations of the class registers here, yes you can refer the removal of class registers to Wikiadmins if you prefer. -- LJ Holden 00:06, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, to be completely honest, I see the removal locomotive registers a rather pointless thing to do. I'm assuming there is somewhere else (New Zealand Rolling Stock Lists?) where I can find locomotive registers. TomMort1 10:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Well the problem is on New Zealand Rolling Stock Lists on Weebly they hardly update or do anything keep us more upto date which is dumb! Trooper201 ( talk) 07:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
But then how do we know the information on the locomotives fate scrap or preservation now or withdrawal. they're has to be another way.
Trooper201 (
talk) 02:05, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've expanded the lede greatly and tidied up a lot of the citations. -- LJ Holden 01:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, as many of you know there are a lot of references which are in common across Wiki NZR articles. I've started to template all of these so that they are uniform across all articles, and it's much easier to reference specific pages, the first I've created is:
Which you can access by using the template: *{{Palmer & Stewart}} Cheers -- LJ Holden 02:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
I've nominated Rail transport in New Zealand for Good article status. Hopefully the last round of edits / tidy ups has improved the quality -- LJ Holden 09:09, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
There's an article on Rails magazine which needs expanding, given its usefulness as a reference it really shouldn't be a stub :) -- LJ Holden 07:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Recent edits to the Glenbrook Vintage Railway page has highlighted the fact that on that page and many other pages, TMS numbers are displayed inconsistently. Rather than get into an edit war with a rather obtuse editor who keeps undoing an edit, I will follow his suggestion and raise the issue here first.
In NZ Railway vernacular, it is commonly accepted that Pre-TMS numbers are styled correctly with a Capital Letter, then a space, then the number (e.g. K 911). Where a secondarly letter is involved with the Class, styled correctly this should be shown as a superscripted letter (e.g. KA 942) but informally styling the second letter as a lower-case letter is also considered acceptable (e.g. Ka 942). Generally in most articles that I can see, it seems the correct style using the superscripted second letter is generally applied but I cannot see anywhere on this page that denotes a standard to follow.
Similarly, it is commonly accepted that TMS numbers are styled correctly with All Capitals for the letters, then the number with no space (e.g. DCP4818) - due to the original TMS computer system being unable to handle case sensitivity so it was always displaying capitals, and equally for the calculation the system needed to provide on the letters and numbers there was no space. The use of a space with TMS numbers is not only a styling error, but it also can introduce confusion. However again, there is nothing to denote a standard to follow and on many pages TMS numbers are styled both correctly and incorrectly on the same page - for instance my edits of removing the space from some TMS numbers were rejected because "spaces are consistent with the rest of the article" yet on the very same page, all the carriages that are listed by TMS number do not have spaces.
Sticking to proper styling is the difference from being able to tell carriage A 2001 (b.1941) apart from carriage A2001 (b.1938 as A 1861). It is a small change but can have big implications, and I feel that we should make an effort to get it right and portray information as accurately as possible.
Can we set an agreed standard where Pre-TMS numbers use the superscripted style with a space, and TMS numbers are All Capitals with no space? Gosteamnz ( talk) 23:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Is there a reason why stations from Homai to Pukekohe use coordinates which don't show on the Wikimap? Johnragla ( talk) 09:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
I've started a deletion discussion for the Template:NZR locomotive list, mainly as a consequence of removing rolling stock lists. -- LJ Holden 06:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed that many stations don't have the correct links. E.g. when you type e.g. "Grafton" into to the preceding station for Mount Eden's infobox, it will show up as a dead red link because the thing (I don't know what it's called) thinks that you're trying to type
Grafton railway station, Lower Hutt, when it should be
Grafton railway station, Auckland.
Same for Kingsland, Newmarket, Avondale, Morningside, Penrose, and Panmure's adjacent/next to stations. Some of them use 'Wellington Region' as well as 'Lower Hutt'. I have a suggestion to fix this, could we make a page redirect for each station's dead links, so could we make for example
Grafton railway station, Lower Hutt redirect you to
Grafton railway station, Auckland? I know that this is not the best solution, however this is my first time working on NZ articles, and I have no knowledge on how the infobox template thing was set up. It will still help get rid of all of the dead links. Please suggest any ideas and/or support/oppose any suggested ideas.
Fork99 (
talk) 08:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
:
List of Auckland railway stations also has a similar problem under the
Western Line section.
Fork99 (
talk) 10:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::@
LJ Holden: Yeah, good idea, one problem is that it doesn’t really agree with the official name? I think moving the current article Metlink to Metlink (Melbourne) actually makes sense because that branding in Australia hasn’t been in use for almost 10 years (so I don’t think it would break too much over in Melbourne’s articles and also most people wouldn’t use the old term for it, and even if they did, I think putting a “for the Metlink in Melbourne” template on this article makes sense), which I would assume makes this Metlink more notable and significant than the other one?
Fork99 (
talk) 22:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::@
LJ Holden: Also, do you happen to know why the article is called
Public transport in the Wellington Region instead of Metlink (Wellington) or something? Is it because it’s not noteworthy enough to split into two articles?
Fork99 (
talk) 22:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@ LJ Holden: After some discussion over on the Australian Metlink article, it was actually agreed to change Metlink in every single Wellington station in the adjacent stations template to Transdev Wellington instead of changing it to either of our ideas suggested in the above section. This would also be consistent with how it works in Auckland, where all of them use Transdev Auckland instead of AT Metro. Thoughts? Fork99 ( talk) 02:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Bringing attention here to the original research issue I brought up at Talk:Te Huia pcuser42 ( talk) 19:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I have just noticed that the rolling stock tables on 3 pages have been removed - those on the Mainline Steam page, Steam Incorporated page, and Dunedin Railways page. There are possibly others that I haven't noticed yet. I have undone the edit for the MLS and Steam Inc pages, but left the Dunedin Railways one for now. I do not see any reasonable justification why these lists were removed, and in fact without them the page does not make sense as it was left. While the reasons for why the lists were taken off the Locomotive pages are well established (though clearly not adhered to worldwide on Wikipedia), I don't believe the same arguments can be applied to the Rail Group pages as the information is always able to be sourced officially from the groups in question, and websites like NZRSR. It should, at least, be discussed first? Gosteamnz ( talk) 04:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
@ The railway modeler: and @ Gosteamnz: -- LJ Holden 01:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Added a new page with details of the NZR FM class; still to add infobox, and picture of new units obtained from GWRC.
Also have put Wairarapa Connection into Category:Named passenger trains of New Zealand as a (standard) subcategory of Category:Named passenger trains. This could supersede Category:Long-distance passenger trains in New Zealand Hugo999 ( talk) 04:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, according to the Official Information Request 2008/083 of 4 August 2008 “The new Matangi trains official class is F. The motor car will (be) FM and the trailer car will be FT.” I presume they will be Bo-Bo classification. The GWRC also supplied a file of the illustration of the EMUs for this article; so I think it will be fair use (OK on English Wikipedia); not free use, so cannot be on Wilkpedia Commons. Uploaded and added to the Infobox which Lcmortensen had added (thank you). This is the picture used in their public handouts. Hugo999 ( talk) 10:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The Metlink News Issue 5 of April 2008 [1] refers to “two-car units joined by a large gangway so people can move easily between them”; i.e. presumably unlike the links on the existing units and at the front of the FM in the picture, which are intended for use by guards only. Hence I assume that in the middle each car has its own bogie and the two cars can be uncoupled; unlike the Fiat railcars or the EW locos with a single common bogie, a Jacobs bogie. Hugo999 ( talk) 23:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Note that the date by the references from the GWRC or Metlink website (i.e. an official source, not a news source) on the FD page is the date of the press release/newsletter, not the date that it was retrieved, so should be shown as date of press delease or similar Hugo999 ( talk) 00:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Re the illustration of the NZR FM class EMUs, this was provided by the Greater Wellington Regional Council for this article so I think counts as Fair Use (not Free Use). But it was tagged as requiring a tag. Reading the Wiki articles on Copyright and Image Copyright Tags which go on at great length about how they are a GOOD IDEA etc., I have attached a FAIR USE tag to the illustration but it seem this may not be enough Hugo999 ( talk) 21:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Isn't this new Category:Named passenger trains of New Zealand category in effect duplicating the work already done on Named trains: New Zealand? – Matthew25187 ( talk) 00:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes - Palmeriain ( talk) 07:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
No: Named trains: New Zealand is a List not a Category, and is part of a series of National/Regional lists. The NZ trains are in Category:Named passenger trains - but most trains in this category are in subcategories by country which is what Category:Named passenger trains of New Zealand is. Alternatively Category:Long-distance passenger trains in New Zealand could be made a subcategory of Category:Named passenger trains instead, as it would then be accessible via the general categories on Rail Passenger Transport etc. Long-distance passenger trains etc. is a unique NZ category Hugo999 ( talk) 13:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Have redirected New Zealand Rail Ltd to Tranz Rail, to avoid Red Link in every NZ Rail Operating Companies box! Hugo999 ( talk) 00:47, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I have written Otaki Railway Station, Levin Railway Station, Shannon Railway Station and Palmerston North Railway Station, which are stops for the Capital Connection and (Levin, Palmerston North) the Overlander. Photos (except Shannon) would be useful, also Coordinates and Platform type details. Redirects were required from xxx Train Station on infoboxes to xxx Railway Station. And could someone please fix the infoboxes for the Capital Connection and Overlander (train), which are displaying some formatting commands on the route map (problem is beyond me). Hugo999 ( talk) 10:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
The only redlink template on the information box (see via Silver Fern) for named trains is for the Kiwi Lager Express. I can't recall this train; where and when did it run? And was there a steam train passenger service between Auckland and Hamilton before the Waikato Connection? Hugo999 ( talk) 11:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I posted to it's talk page but I doubt it will get noticed. The page Ohai State Coal Mines is actually a list of Ohai Railway Board locomotives and has nothing of what the title suggests. Do we write an article about the mines themselves and split the loco list and merge into the Ohai Railway Board Heritage Trust page or what? Yak52fan ( talk) 22:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Page has been moved to Locomotives of the Ohai Railway Board. Yak52fan ( talk) 03:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I propose to make Otaihunga railway station a redirect to Otaihanga railway station and have put it on the WikiProject NZR list of tasks. Current spelling and also the spelling in WMR advertisements and in Douglas Hoy’s 1972 book on the WMR (p52,120). I do not have access to Ken Cassell’s “Uncommon Carrier” at present. NB: duplication only apparent when district categories etc. added to both pages. Hugo999 ( talk) 23:55, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
I have added A & G Price and Scott Brothers (locomotive manufacturers) i.e. the two private manufacturers of steam locos for the NZR. However the Scott Bros article has been tagged for speedy deletion and I would appreciate some support on its talk page, as leaving out one manufacturer will leave a hole, even if they were less notable than some! ## OK now but more info on firm needed ##
Scott Brothers (locomotive manufacturers) just needs additional sources now! A & G Price has the totals for each class (5) of locos made there, which comes to 122, not the 123 total that Lloyd gives on page 139 of his Register. And the Price article needs something on Price Diesel locos? ## Price built 50 NZR A Class not 49 (+ 8 by NZR at Addington Workshops ##
The new steam locos total (81) for those built at Hutt Workshops (inc Petone) seem to add up to the 81 given in Lloyd (see table in New Zealand Railways Department, but the totals for Addington Workshops & Hillside Workshops need articles with numbers built for the remaining NZR steam locomotives to complete the numbers.
Re station articles, have just noticed that for Auckland it is Avondale Train Station while for Wellington it is Raroa Railway Station! Train Station or Railway Station? PS: have completed the last major Workshops with new article Hutt Workshops. Hugo999 ( talk) 06:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The Auckland City Library has some good 'Heritage' photos to add as external links - the link works, though a very long search string??
The Rail transport in New Zealand article doesn't really cover bush tramways, which is a pretty major oversight. Thoughts? -- LJ Holden 04:40, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
I've created an article for these locos under New Zealand 10000 class locomotives - I'm guessing we'll get an idea of the actual KiwiRail classification later. -- LJ Holden 20:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Attempted to resolve this once before, but still remains. The Te Huia article contains material in violation of WP:SYNTH - seeking consensus on removing this to avoid edit warring. pcuser42 ( talk) 23:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm proposing moving The Great Journeys of New Zealand to Long distance passenger trains of New Zealand. -- LJ Holden 22:25, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi from over the ditch (Australia),
I have been working on an update to the proposed
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Australian and New Zealand stations), which has never been officially accepted. I have also been looking into expanding it to cover lines, routes & services (something that has been suggested on
WP:TRAINS) and also what to include on the associated BSicon diagrams for both our countries. See
User:ThylacineHunter/sandbox3
The majority of this work is now finished, but I have run into some NZ related issues:
I hope to have this sorted out by the end of this month, so I can submit this updated naming convention. -- ThylacineHunter ( talk) 08:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
there is a dedicated WikiProject for New Zealand Railways; unfortunately that doesn’t mean anything if most of its members are inactive. Fork99 ( talk) 08:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi from Sydney again, just wondering, is this WikiProject quite inactive? I think it can make it confusing for any newcomers who may come here for help, and don’t get any response. Any active members who do remain here aren’t going to be around forever, unfortunately, and it’s hard to recruit/enlist new participants. There’s a way to convert inactive WikiProjects into task forces, outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Task forces which I think probably should be done. Fork99 ( talk) 08:10, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject NZR}} superseded by ;
{{ TrainsWikiProject}}
Below is a list of references that are commonly cited for New Zealand rail transport articles and other topics. To simplify citations, I've created templates to be added to the "References" section of each article. To cite a particular page, use the sfn template, e.g. {{sfn|author's name|publication year|p=page number}}, so "When Steam Was King" is cited in the article as {{sfn|Stewart|1974|p=1}}. Where there's two authors, it's the author's surnames alphabetically sorted, e.g. A.N. Palmer and W.W. Stewart becomes "Palmer & Stewart":
Additional useful books:
New Zealand Railways articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
GA | 1 | 1 | |||||
B | 1 | 6 | 10 | 76 | 8 | 101 | |
C | 4 | 9 | 36 | 51 | 100 | ||
Start | 7 | 10 | 134 | 86 | 237 | ||
Stub | 28 | 81 | 109 | ||||
List | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 | |||
Category | 82 | 82 | |||||
Disambig | 9 | 9 | |||||
File | 243 | 243 | |||||
Project | 2 | 2 | |||||
Redirect | 16 | 16 | |||||
Template | 25 | 25 | |||||
Assessed | 2 | 17 | 31 | 276 | 377 | 229 | 932 |
Total | 2 | 17 | 31 | 276 | 377 | 229 | 932 |
WikiWork factors ( ?) | ω = 2,544 | Ω = 4.64 |