![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I've started on a campaign to improve the Category:Railway signalling articles, and the terminology difference is starting to become a problem. My current strategy is this:
Right now, the problem is, on the most immediate level, that the central articles are centered on British practice. I suppose I can get past this except that the terminology conflict has reared its head again. For example, in Centralized traffic control it says that "The term CTC generally applies to a single track railway with crossing loops." In the usual perverse fashion, "crossing" and "loop" have almost opposite meanings in the USA, where we would refer to "passing sidings". It's particularly questionable in this article since CTC is (as far as I know) of American origin. In another instance we have interlocking tower and signal box, which appear on inspection to be, respectively, the USA and UK names for the same thing.
As it seems I will be end up creating articles in the course of this I would like some sort of organizing principle for the naming. I'm likely to us US names for things, and we are liekly to end up with even more of a hodge-podge of names than we have already. Mangoe 01:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
In other articles where there are regional variations this is mentioned in the text. If the variations are major then an entire section could be devoted to the description of the variations. SilkTork 20:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I understand that Wikipedia is a multinational project, and I've always tried to be sensitive to how countries outside of the U.S. use the English language (which, admittedly, we did not invent). I definitely don't go around editing articles to conform all to American usage. However, the radical difference in terminology between North American railroads and railways in the rest of the English-speaking world can lead to some very choppy and inconsistently-written Wikipedia articles. In most rail-related articles, it's very obvious that the articles were written by many different people, as terms, usage, and style vary wildly between paragraphs and even sentences in the same paragraph. Non-cohesive writing is, I believe, somewhat destructive to the sense of flow and order that should be in every Wikipedia article.
I'm not sure what the solution is--I hesitate to call for standardizing terminology to one standard or the other, and it's very cumbersome to put "U.S.: xxx, U.K.: yyy" (or the longer but more inclusive and accurate "North America: xxx; Commonwealth: yyy") at every point (no pun intended) in the article . Any suggestions? Or do you all vote that it's OK as is?
I'm going to place a copy of this post in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#The Regional Terminology Problem--the discussion's kind of started there. cluth 02:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Teminology translator | |
---|---|
(set of) points | UK, Aus |
switch, turnout | USA |
Should we (a) select regional terminology according to the guidelines, and (b) include "translation boxes" in the articles near the first uses of the words, as at right? — Philip J. Rayment 08:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
As part of the update to the {{ TrainsWikiProject}} template, I've setup the project's article assessment categories and intro page. This assessment system is basically a copy of the assessment systems already used by some other WikiProjects, and I've gone through several hundred articles where the template is included and sorted them into the appropriate assessment categories (and found a few to nominate for GA status in the process). If you've got some time, take a look at the list of articles in Category:Unassessed rail transport articles and add the appropriate class parameter to the project banner template, following the guidelines on the assessment intro page. The counts at the top of the intro page and the log at the bottom are both automatically updated once a day.
I will be monitoring this category as well and assessing more articles as I have time. I haven't added the importance scale to the template yet; that will be the next major task once the quality assessments are under control. Slambo (Speak) 11:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
There has been some debate recently about which term to use for the Train station article. The debate has largely centred on the British v American argument - yet it appears to me more one of simple common sense. The main and sub-categories are Railway station. In the article itself the term Railway station appears 3 times as frequently as Train station. Train station in this instance looks rather odd, lonely and somehow perverse. An argument that the use of Train station is older is possibly wrong because there is evidence that Railway station has been in use for longer than initially appears and might have been corrupted or deleted. Due to the awkward behaviour of RichardHarrold people may have got themselves into an entrenched situation which has blinded them to the simple common sense use of Railway station over train station. A glance at Category:Railway stations shows how at this stage changing all the cats into Train stations would be more difficult than simply changing the name of the main category article. Lets have some plain and simple consistency here. SilkTork 20:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Exile 20:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello all. Is there any all-wiki rule on how to name articles on particular train/railway stations? In most European countries for the sake of simplicity the local rail operators use local names in international planning. Thus the German DB informs of trains to Praha Hlavni Nadrazi rather than "Prager Hauptbahnhof" or "Prague Main Station", Belgian trains run through Warszawa to Moskva rather than through Varsovie to Moscu and so on. At the same time the naming scheme for cities is pretty clear that we should name the articles on cities with the English name where available. What solution should we adopt here? The question is by no means academic as my recent example of Warszawa Gdańska shows.
Another issue is whether we should include the descriptive of "station" to the name of the article when there is none in the real life. For instance, should the article on Berlin Hauptbahnhof be moved to Berlin Hauptbahnhof Station or not? What do you think? // Halibu tt 10:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
There's borderline cases of course, but my suggestion would be to omit the "railway station" at the end whenever it is a well-known large station (either some sort of Hauptbahnhof or other large station) and the risk of having a name collide with another entity is comparably low. ( Hamburg-Altona railway station would be sensible since there could be a Hamburg-Altona article at some point, whilst Warszawa Centralna has a pretty low risk of colliding with a Warsaw-related article. As I said, it's borderline.) -- doco (☏) 08:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
A user is reverting edits to train articles. Please look at Rebecca's contributions list at least back to 23 September. I believe the original edits improve the articles and the reverts make the articles worse. I do not want to undo the reverts myself but other editors may wish to do so. bobblewik 10:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
The stub article Godavari Express, about a named passenger train service in India is nominated for deletion on the grounds (?) that it is "Non-notable listcruft". The article is labelled as being in WikiProject Trains, so what's notable in this field? Mereda 11:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed that the small stub Bainbridge Northern Railway was nominated for deletion - see discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bainbridge Northern Railway. I already voted "keep", but am still wondering if nominating this for AfD was reasonable. It's obscure, but that in itself is not reason for deletion. So far I can't find an AAR designation on the web for it, but I'm not sure where to look (I've tried the "B"s at the Railserve AAR listings [1], but so far haven't come accross it. They've got to update their serch function). Any thoughts about warrenting an article for such an obscure railroad? -- Marriedtofilm 18:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeouinaru Station
In case anyone is interested, there's an AfD for a subway station in Seoul, Korea, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeouinaru Station. It's only a stub, but as with all these things, there's room for improvement. Anyway, I voted keep citing WP:AFDP about train/subway stations, but I'd be interested in what others from our project weighing in on this would think. -- Oakshade 07:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
There's a railroad company called ENSCO Inc.. They appear, among other things, to make high-tech railroad signaling and monitoring systems. It is up for AfD ( AfD page here). I don't know much about this company and if what it does is worthy of an article so I haven't voted yet. Maybe someone here can give their wisdom on this. -- Oakshade 05:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Right now User:Attilios and I are on the verge of another edit war over locomotive and the various related type articles, particularly electric locomotive. The latter has a section on "advantages and disadvantages". The problem, it appears, is that electrification in Europe (particularly on the continent) and in North America took very different paths. It is proving difficult to write this in a way that is acceptable to him and also preserves an accurate picture of the NA situation. You can visit the articles for a better picture of the dispute, but suffice to say that he has dropped this into the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias open tasks hopper.
What I would like to do is the following:
We have a similar problem with railcar and the various multiple unit articles, except in this case the problem runs the other direction (the articles are very Eurocentric).
If people could comment, or better still, update the articles accordingly... Mangoe 21:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Beland ( talk · contribs) has tagged a large number of glossary pages with {{ Move to Wiktionary}} today. Looking at his contributions list, I don't think it'll be too long before it pops up on WP:AN/I or similar discussion areas. In a quick search around the wiki, I don't see any further discussion on this matter, so I've removed the tag from the article. Slambo (Speak) 13:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I've just added the importance
parameter to {{
TrainsWikiProject}} and created the associated categories. I marked all the articles linked from {{
Train topics}}, this project's core topics, as Top importance. I've added some basic information on grading by importance to the
assessment department page, but there's easily more that could be said on this topic. Tomorrow, the importance assessment counts should start showing up in the
statistics as well as on the
work list.
This importance parameter is to identify an article's importance to the Trains WikiProject and not to any subproject or task force. I plan to add subproject and task force importance parameters to the template as they are needed, probably starting with Underground since there are quality assessments there now too. Slambo (Speak) 14:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
class
. What do you think?
Slambo
(Speak)
19:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, now I've got subproject importance ratings integrated for both
WP:LUL and
WP:NYCS (although the latter project has not yet created the assessment tasks or categories). The LUL-importance
parameter can be used to set the importance within WP:LUL, while NYCS-importance
can be used for WP:NYCS. If you have any questions, please ask.
Slambo
(Speak)
15:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I just got done making pages for all of the Passenger trains in both Arizona and Virginia. I still have to go over them and make some minor corrections. I made two categories one for Passenger train stations in Virginia and one for Passenger train stations in Arizona. Im not sure which state I will work on next. John R G 05:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
A proposal has been made to delete Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo/Improve. I originally created this page as a place to list articles that need improvement. With the updates to {{ TrainsWikiProject}} and the automatically generated lists based on parameters to it, the Improve page has become superfluous. Since this is a project-specific page, rather than going through WP:MFD, please join the talk page discussion there. AdThanksVance. Slambo (Speak) 12:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Unless I hear otherwise, I will delete Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo/Improve tomorrow. Slambo (Speak) 13:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan to me. I don't see the necessity of maintaining two project pages when everything can be addressed on one. Erzahler 18:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The deed is done. I'm updating links now... Slambo (Speak) 17:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
With the Improve page now deleted, I've put some more time into the main
project todolist page. This page is now much more useful, pointing to other categories and lists of tasks within the project. This morning, for example, I just added the unref=yes
parameter to {{
TrainsWikiProject}} to highlight articles that lack
references, and added a link on the todolist page to its associated category:
Unreferenced rail transport articles. When you've got some time, please peruse the todolist and work on items that are listed.
Slambo
(Speak)
13:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi all. Do someone have a scheme of the limit size for railway vehicles in Germany and Russia? Those nations use a bigger encumbrance limit than most of Europe, but I can't find anything about them. I need these data for a new article for it.wiki. -- Jollyroger 09:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Please, someone give a look HERE. If a native speaker can fix my poor translation, I will later move that to en.wiki and call for the Polski translation. This is part of a joint project to write articles on machines used both in Italy and in Poland. If someone speak Italian and wants to do a little translation works, on it.wiki we completed almost all the articles about the actual electric locomotives and coaches. Ask me if you want to bring some of them to en.wiki and find any trouble. -- Jollyroger 21:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Can someone drop in on WP:CFD#Category:Loop_lines CfD for a discussion on a rename of Category:Loop lines. I'm not sure what the right rename should be and would like an expert to point the discussion in the correct direction. Vegaswikian 06:34, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
The stub category ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:United States rail stubs is rather large now: I've proposed some possible new sub-categories here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2006/October#US_rail_subtypes. If anyone has any thoughts, suggestions, offers of help, please wade in. Alai 06:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey there. I've got a proposal: why don't we set up a Wikiproject:Trains newsletter, similar to the Wikipedia Signpost. Perhaps if we had this and filled it with a list of articles on the to-do list that are in need of work. As well as requests for editors to work on the to-do lists, we could have the latest rail news and Wikiproject:Trains news.
I would be willing to be the editor for the newsletter, although I would be looking for 1 or 2 willing Wikiproject:Trains memebers to help.
What do you think?
-- Anthony cfc ( talk • c • ama) Sunday, 22/Oct/2006 ( UTC)
Thanks for the interest. Unfortunately, no-one else seems to be showing interest so perhaps we should back-shelve the newsletter proposition for now. Cheers anyway. -- Anthony cfc ( talk • c • ama) Sunday, 22/Oct/2006 ( UTC)
Please can someone give a look at FS ALn 772? It will need some major tranlsation fixes. Moreover:
thanks pals -- Jollyroger 21:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I just corrected a small error on the Challenger (passenger train) page--all dome cars were not removed in 1970, only the dome diners and I have the relevant Official Guides as a reference. However, when I attempted to cite my source using the citation template, I couldn't get it to work. What am I doing wrong? Ehbowen 05:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Another editor has decided to move Baldwin's article so the title has his middle name spelled out rather than as an initial. I moved it back this morning seeing no consensus or policy for the original move, but the other editor has moved it back to the spelled out name again. All of the reference material on a quick check through my library refers to him with a middle initial, if it's included at all. I've asked the editor for his reasoning on the move, but I'd like to hear what other TWP members think of the page title. Is there a consensus for the move or should it stay at its original title? AdThanksVance. Slambo (Speak) 17:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Though I'm sure this is fairly far down the list of important train articles, the "Acquisitions" section said it was acquired by another company in 2063, which must be wrong. -- GeoffreyVS 05:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC).
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 23:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to let everyone know that I am in the process of setting up a new website devoted to North American passenger train timetables as published in the Official Guide of the Railways. While it's not much to look at now, I'm hoping to add four to five timetables a week on a consistent basis. I do take special requests (as time permits); email me at the address on the main page of the site. Currently I have at least one Official Guide from every year from 1954 through 1971 except 1955; I also have one each from 1889, 1916, 1938, 1941, 1947, and 1950. I hope that I can be of some help to everyone in the future. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ehbowen ( talk • contribs) 02:14, October 27, 2006.
Is there a list or database online of the divisions of the major U.S. railroads? For instance, I found out that the Interstate Railroad is now part of the NS Pocahontas Division, but I'd like to know all the lines that form that division. -- NE2 02:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm still trying to figure out the names of the Norfolk Southern lines. The milepost prefixes seem to be used often, but are ambiguous: there are separate SA Lines in South Carolina (Branchville to Augusta) and Georgia (Savannah to Augusta). Can someone offer advice? -- NE2 19:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The Clinchfield Railroad is now CSX's Kingsport and Blue Ridge Subdivisions. Would it be better to let Clinchfield Railroad cover the history and write articles about the subdivisions, or to put everything in the former name? -- NE2 02:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
There are two items of importance that you might not have noticed with this WikiProject.
First, I've been working with another editor to get a bot that will automatically update the list of articles within the scope of the project for the Recent changes link on the main project page. On a weekly interval, the bot will build a list of all articles with {{ TrainsWikiProject}} on their talk pages and store it on the recent changes list.
The second items regards a new entry in the project navigation box (which is now at the top of many of the project pages, like on this page). The Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Manual of style (MOS) link is the newest addition. Hearing no objections to anything on the MOS page that I mentioned many months ago (see previous discussions above), I made a bold move and moved my proposed page to the live address. The guidelines there are based on what I've seen in looking at almost 8,000 articles while doing the assessments. If there's something in there that needs to change, please speak up.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled editing, already in progress. B-) Slambo (Speak) 18:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I think there would be much value in this, there is certainly a great need to add proper images (photos) to rail-related articles and to replace fair use with free images wherever possible. Any interest?-- Lord Kinbote 19:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello all, I just wanted to put a link here to my collection of railroad-related photos: http://lensovet.rrpicturearchives.net; please look through the photos there and let me know which ones you would like me to upload. I will then upload the photos to the Commons using my license. Also, there might be some photos on http://lensovet.byethost12.com/photos/gallery2/; if there are any photos you would like to see on wiki that are there, let me know as well.
Thanks! — lensovet– talk – 05:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Whyte notation about the need for separate articles on each of the types listed on {{ Whyte types}}. Please join the discussion there. AdThanksVance. Slambo (Speak) 11:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
FYI, I have two articles that you may wish to incorporate into your works. In both cases, light rail is among the options being considered. The CCT is in need of more information and the Red Line is in need of a cleanup. I added relevant tags to the discussion pages and have added a bit to the CCT, but do not know much more about either project nor too much about trains in general to provide much further information -- so I'm just passing on the work to you folks. Enjoy! -- Thisisbossi 01:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Another editor added the {{ mergeinto}} template on Canadian National Railway suggesting that the content there should be merged into Canadian National Railway Company. Please join the discussion on the proposed destination's talk page. Slambo (Speak) 11:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
See Template talk:Infobox UK station#Bilingual station names for my proposed way to standardise the formatting of stations that have names in more than one language (e.g. English and Welsh names). Thryduulf 22:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
There are two list articles in the TWP "Requests for assessment" queue, but I'm unsure how list articles fit into the current grading scheme. Please join the discussion. Slambo (Speak) 14:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm working on an SVG map of the CSX network from the BTS data and other sources, and have a few questions about what they own:
If anyone can clarify any of these issues, it would be most appreciated. Thank you. -- NE2 23:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Here's what I currently have:
If someone can help me, I can complete this. -- NE2 18:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
There is yet another discussion on using "(U.S.)", "(United States)", or even ("United States of America)" as disambiguators instead of "(US)" as in current practice. Please join the discussion. Slambo (Speak) 16:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know anything about the subject, but others here may be interested. -- NE2 01:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The article reads like he's just a random historian. -- NE2 01:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
The article titled ' Railroad engineer' is subject to some discussion on it's talk page. Perhaps others with an interest in trains would like to put their input.
You can read the talk page but in summary, the debate so far seems to be:
There are some other comments there such as "some US regulations say it's called an engineer", but the US government does not determine Wikipedia naming policy and has no oversight over what terms are called in the English language as a whole (at least outside of the USA).
Anyway - get stuck in.-- jrleighton 00:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
The British train drivers' union is called the "Association of Locomotive ENGINEERS and Firemen". So it looks like the term originated in the UK and then went out of use there.
Exile 20:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion about whether we should set criteria for inlcusion of accients on the List of rail accidents page, and if so what the criteria should be.
The discussion is located at Talk:List of rail accidents/Criteria for inclusion, where your input would be most welcome. Thryduulf 00:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This is an AfD grouping that might be of interest here. There are 33 railroads up for deletion (yes, 33). These are either of defunct railroads or ones that were just proposed. All the articles seem to only be excerpts from old Florida law archives and are not exaclty helpful and are frequently confusing as to indicate if the railroads were actually built/operated or not. -- Oakshade 22:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I've been thinking about the structure of categories for major railroads, like Category:Pennsylvania Railroad or Category:New York Central Railroad. Can I get some comments on whether the following is a good idea:
Thank you. -- NE2 07:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Since there has been no response, I'm going to start doing this for the NYC. Hopefully I'll find any flaws early on. -- NE2 09:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I've completed the reorganizaton of Category:New York Central Railroad; what do you think? -- NE2 11:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I give it thumbs up. n2xjk 15:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
London Underground is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy ( Talk) 02:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
HSR-350x is a recent Korean High-speed rail, developped by KRRI. I'm working on this article called Korean G-7, which talks about HSR 350x. You can help developing this article, if you like. Nevertheless, I need help uploading image for HSR-350x. -- User: Kingj123 23:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I've been concentrating on articles about lines ( Category:CSX Transportation lines, Category:Norfolk Southern Railway lines, etc.) rather than the railroad companies that built and operated them. I believe that they should be mostly separate, even where the extents are the same, since the railroad company usually had some operating history before the line became part of a bigger system. However, in cases where the bigger company leased the smaller one from opening day, there's usually almost nothing to say about the smaller company. In these cases, like Bergen County Line and Bergen County Railroad, should the railroad redirect to the line? (This probably isn't the best example, since the Bergen County Line has been extended.) -- NE2 10:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Category:Baltimore and Ohio Railroad includes a number of towns along the line. Is this a good idea? -- NE2 20:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
While tending to the Indian station Kodai road due to an AfD, I noticed a similar issue with List of railway stations in India where almost all of the links are to the cities and towns and not the stations. I don't think it's a good idea and a bit of a time waster for both the eidtors and readers. -- Oakshade 21:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
There was an AFD discussion that affects a number of articles within this project's scope. The result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Key of the Gulf Railroad was to merge the associated articles into List of defunct Florida railroads. We need a volunteer to perform the merge on the articles listed in the AFD. Slambo (Speak) 20:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 December 10#Category:Passenger train stations in Arizona is a proposition to have consistent names for the subcategories of Category:Railway stations in the United States. Posting here to alert members of this project. Tinlinkin 13:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
After discussion over the summer about requiring inline citations and some time of very little activity on current GA listed rail transport articles, several articles within this project's scope are now likely to be delisted from GA status. I've tried to solicit assistance ( see above broken anchor) in September on improving these articles to current GA standards.
I made a list at that time of some tasks that need to be completed. Please take some time as soon as possible to "adopt" an article and help to get it up to current GA requirements. Slambo (Speak) 19:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
About 35 of the 46 articles have now been tagged on their talk pages with a polite warning of pending delisting. Slambo (Speak) 12:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Beg pardon if this is the wrong fora. I've designed a set of generic succession boxes modelled on the Template:S-start system with the idea that they could replace the limited single-use boxes. I'm experimenting with this system at Union Station (New Haven). Is this something worth pursuing? Mackensen (talk) 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
One minor thing to keep in mind is that there might be multiple stations with the same name on a system. An optional "prev_disambig" could take care of this - if prev_disambig exists, use prev_station (prev_disambig), otherwise prev_station (s-rail/system disambig). -- NE2 19:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I've got a working example up at Niles, Michigan. For reference, it calls the following templates:
-- Mackensen (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
This probably isn't related to the design of the templates, but how do we want to handle branches? On a system with many trains along a single line (like commuter systems, but not most of Amtrak), the succession is for lines rather than individual trains. But how do we handle situations where a branch service merges with the main line? I would suggest only including the branch on the main line stations at the last station before the split, but then we don't show all the possible destinations on the "to" line at other main line stations. There is also a possibility that no main line trains, only some branch trains, stop at some stations on the main line; the whole situation can become pretty complicated when we try to reconcile the divide between lines and services. And if we go by services, what happens in a "skip-stop" situation, if trains in the A-B-C-D order can go from A to B or skip B to stop at C, but trains that serve B always skip C on their way to D (or maybe only Foo Branch trains serve both B and C)? But if we go by lines, we need to decide where to draw the line and say "ok, these services coincide for long enough that we should choose the more major one and only list it" - because it's pretty clear that at
Secaucus Junction we should keep at least most of the lines separate, since most of them split at Secaucus or Newark Penn, but what about the
North Jersey Coast Line or
Bergen County Line? --
NE2
23:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
We have a small problem: the single-terminus ends need to be linked in the switch statement or they will not be linked in the box. But then the check to see whether this is equal to the next station fails:
{{s-start}} {{s-line|system=Amtrak|line=Lake Shore Limited|previous=Chicago|next=whatever's next|type=Both}} {{s-line|system=Amtrak|line=Lake Shore Limited|previous=[[Union Station (Chicago)|Chicago]]|next=whatever's next|type=Both}} {{s-line|system=Amtrak|line=Lake Shore Limited|previous=Niles|next=who knows?|type2=Both}} {{end}}
I'm not sure how to fix this. -- NE2 02:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Something I pled for in the NJ Transit succession boxes (and couldn't get consensus for or against) was making sure succession boxes are transparent and easily editable. While I like the uniformity that comes from the use of Template:Amtrak line and Template:Amtrak line2, it was very unclear to me, when trying to edit Union Station (Chicago), how to add a new line, especially one that was identical in route to an existing line and therefore (depending on style judgement) collapsible into one line (I speak of Illini (Amtrak) and Saluki (Amtrak), and Illinois Zephyr and Carl Sandburg (Amtrak)). It is also unclear to me how Template:Amtrak stations saves any time or effort over just using wikicode, because of the very high number of exceptions that will eventually have to be included in the template (including just about every station on the Northeast Corridor that I can think of off the top of my head. I beg you to reconsider, and allow wikicoded station links (minimally) in station succession boxes. Thank you, — CComMack ( t– c) 04:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't have time to respond to all of this, but I'll try. There are several benefits of the new system:
-- Mackensen (talk) 11:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
On a different matter, I think I've finally fixed that nagging problem with multiple stops. Mackensen (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
And on yet another matter, I've created Template:S-jnct to deal with junctions. There's an example of it at Union Station (New Haven). Mackensen (talk) 20:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Would it be possible, like I've seen with person succession boxes, to combine the "Boston South - Terminus" lines - at least in groups of 3 and 4 - on Back Bay (MBTA station)? -- NE2 21:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Union Station has an additional line that could be documented... CDOT's Shore Line East. just adding s-rail and s-line invocations failed horribly so I am guessing there is more you have to do? Does CDOT need to be set up like MetroNorth and Amtrak are? ++ Lar: t/ c 16:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The short answer is yes it does. We (I) really need to document how this is done, although it's reasonably straightforward once you wrap your head around it. You need five templates to make the system work. Let's start with the New Haven example. You add two boxes:
{{s-rail|title=CDOT}}
{{s-line|system=CDOT|line=Shore Line|previous=Bridgeport|next=State Street}}
Now, that gives this:
{{s-start}} {{s-rail|title=CDOT}} {{s-line|system=CDOT|line=Shore Line|previous=Bridgeport|next=State Street}} {{end}}
Which is pretty ugly and broken. However, it does link you to most of the templates that you need to create. I've paired each one with the equivalent example from the MBTA (since it's simpler than Amtrak).
When you've created those three you'll be prompted for two more tables, which define the left- and right-hand terminals for the particular line. Mackensen (talk) 16:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
On the Long Island Rail Road, should we use services or lines? At Jamaica, there are really only three lines to the east, but ten services are included. It is very hard to verify with the timetables that the next stop on Ronkonkoma Branch trains is indeed New Hyde Park - in other words that all Ronkonkoma Branch trains skip Hollis, Queens Village, Bellerose, and Floral Park. And this may change with the next schedule change; in other words, someone has to go through and check each time new schedules come out. But it's very clear that the next Main Line station is Hollis. I don't know how well "Main Line" is known to the public though. Does anyone have any ideas? -- NE2 00:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
With the Long Island Rail Road, there are many variations of services. They don't change frequently, but they can be very flexible. Very few Ronkonkoma Branch trains will stop at New Hyde Park; rather many of them stop at Mineola and Hicksville. (There used to be a weekend service pattern where Ronkonkoma Branch trains would stop at New Hyde Park and Carle Place as part of a skip-stop pattern, this is now discontinued.) Most service to St. Albans is from the Babylon Branch, yet is attributed to the West Hempstead Branch. There are other service anomalies that occur during rush hours (train 1501 from East Williston, local up to Floral Park, arriving Penn at 8:14; train 2350 from Penn at 4:54, local beginning at New Hyde Park, terminates at Farmingdale). And a few Montauk Branch trains stop at Mineola or Hicksville. In my opinion, the succession boxes should show which services serve a station (not only shown with termini). I don't know if a service that rarely serves a particular station is worth mentioning in the succession box. But NE2's solution regarding lines looks promising. Tinlinkin 15:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Forgive me for butting in here, but can you guys give me a digest of what exactly the problem is here since I'm not too familiar with LIRR scheduling? I dunno, on the other side of the hudson, we have the M&E lines and those have various express services. for example, some trains only go to summit, some trains go to dover but make no stops until summit, etc. we just list every stop on the line, regardless of how many times it's actually serviced per week. there's a few stops on the raritan valley line that get a total of 2 trains per day, but we still put them there. similarly, RVL service to hoboken is weekend-only, and we notate it as such. — lensovet– talk – 19:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
The book was published in 1946. Any works published first in the U.S. and published before 1964 are out of copyright unless their copyright was renewed with the U.S. Copyright Office. There is a database of copyright renewals at [5], and the PRR Centennial History's copyright was not renewed.
Would anyone be interested in helping to OCR it for Wikisource? Someone has scanned it and uploaded it to [6]. -- NE2 10:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I have noted that most articles use "and" rather than "&", and I agree with this. I was hoping to cite something either at this WikiProject or at the manual of style that says that for an uncontroversial move of Wilmington & Western Railroad, but it doesn't seem to be stated anywhere. Shall I add it to the WikiProject page, or is it hiding somewhere? -- NE2 10:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Long time ago I put a question on the talk page of this article which isn't answered yet. Does anyone know (or can find out) which gauge the narrow gauge line of the Grafton Centre Railroad had? Grtx, -- Thogo (Talk) 12:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
This list has been nominated for deletion. While it is not strictly a rail subject, it is closely related. -- NE2 15:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I just read about a patent issued to Google for the look of the search results. What interested me more in the story and what we can use here is the Google Patent Search. The about page lists some helpful searching tips too. Slambo (Speak) 15:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I created this template for use on individual freight lines (rather than companies): see it in use on Fort Wayne Line. -- NE2 13:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
On December 10th, Algoma Central Railway was nominated for delisting from Good Article status due to its lack of citations. Today I added seven citations from four sources to the article, however if anyone else has contributions that could help the article keep its Good Article status, please feel free to lend a hand! -- Kralizec! ( talk) 00:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Would it be reasonable to make some sort of offshoot of the reference desk for rail-related questions, so those with information can help those who need information for an article they are writing? -- NE2 16:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I've added a list of presidents to Long Island Rail Road, and there's a gap between the 1920s and 1949. The PRR directly operated the LIRR from 1929 to 1949; is this why there's a gap? -- NE2 16:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm currently rewriting and expanding Long Island Rail Road, and I seem to be better at describing history of construction than general history of operations once construction ends. Is anyone interested in helping out? I'm hoping that we can eventually bring this up to featured article standards. To that end, it might need more reliable sources to replace the PRR Chronology. -- NE2 19:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
It would be helpful if in assessing and improving railroad articles, editors made sure to mention whether railroads provide or have provided passenger or freight service, or both. This basic information is often missing. If there are major customers (a named population center, a large industrial customer, a certain industry clustered in a geographic area), that would also be very informative. Thanks! -- Beland 01:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
10 Seoul, Korea rail stations are up for deletion. Like alot of stations on this project, there isn't alot of text in the article, but alot of infobox information. I think like all articles like this, they can be expanded over time, but there are many in WP who feel that they're not inherently notable. Others on this project might want to weigh in on them. -- Oakshade 01:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I've started on a campaign to improve the Category:Railway signalling articles, and the terminology difference is starting to become a problem. My current strategy is this:
Right now, the problem is, on the most immediate level, that the central articles are centered on British practice. I suppose I can get past this except that the terminology conflict has reared its head again. For example, in Centralized traffic control it says that "The term CTC generally applies to a single track railway with crossing loops." In the usual perverse fashion, "crossing" and "loop" have almost opposite meanings in the USA, where we would refer to "passing sidings". It's particularly questionable in this article since CTC is (as far as I know) of American origin. In another instance we have interlocking tower and signal box, which appear on inspection to be, respectively, the USA and UK names for the same thing.
As it seems I will be end up creating articles in the course of this I would like some sort of organizing principle for the naming. I'm likely to us US names for things, and we are liekly to end up with even more of a hodge-podge of names than we have already. Mangoe 01:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
In other articles where there are regional variations this is mentioned in the text. If the variations are major then an entire section could be devoted to the description of the variations. SilkTork 20:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I understand that Wikipedia is a multinational project, and I've always tried to be sensitive to how countries outside of the U.S. use the English language (which, admittedly, we did not invent). I definitely don't go around editing articles to conform all to American usage. However, the radical difference in terminology between North American railroads and railways in the rest of the English-speaking world can lead to some very choppy and inconsistently-written Wikipedia articles. In most rail-related articles, it's very obvious that the articles were written by many different people, as terms, usage, and style vary wildly between paragraphs and even sentences in the same paragraph. Non-cohesive writing is, I believe, somewhat destructive to the sense of flow and order that should be in every Wikipedia article.
I'm not sure what the solution is--I hesitate to call for standardizing terminology to one standard or the other, and it's very cumbersome to put "U.S.: xxx, U.K.: yyy" (or the longer but more inclusive and accurate "North America: xxx; Commonwealth: yyy") at every point (no pun intended) in the article . Any suggestions? Or do you all vote that it's OK as is?
I'm going to place a copy of this post in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#The Regional Terminology Problem--the discussion's kind of started there. cluth 02:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Teminology translator | |
---|---|
(set of) points | UK, Aus |
switch, turnout | USA |
Should we (a) select regional terminology according to the guidelines, and (b) include "translation boxes" in the articles near the first uses of the words, as at right? — Philip J. Rayment 08:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
As part of the update to the {{ TrainsWikiProject}} template, I've setup the project's article assessment categories and intro page. This assessment system is basically a copy of the assessment systems already used by some other WikiProjects, and I've gone through several hundred articles where the template is included and sorted them into the appropriate assessment categories (and found a few to nominate for GA status in the process). If you've got some time, take a look at the list of articles in Category:Unassessed rail transport articles and add the appropriate class parameter to the project banner template, following the guidelines on the assessment intro page. The counts at the top of the intro page and the log at the bottom are both automatically updated once a day.
I will be monitoring this category as well and assessing more articles as I have time. I haven't added the importance scale to the template yet; that will be the next major task once the quality assessments are under control. Slambo (Speak) 11:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
There has been some debate recently about which term to use for the Train station article. The debate has largely centred on the British v American argument - yet it appears to me more one of simple common sense. The main and sub-categories are Railway station. In the article itself the term Railway station appears 3 times as frequently as Train station. Train station in this instance looks rather odd, lonely and somehow perverse. An argument that the use of Train station is older is possibly wrong because there is evidence that Railway station has been in use for longer than initially appears and might have been corrupted or deleted. Due to the awkward behaviour of RichardHarrold people may have got themselves into an entrenched situation which has blinded them to the simple common sense use of Railway station over train station. A glance at Category:Railway stations shows how at this stage changing all the cats into Train stations would be more difficult than simply changing the name of the main category article. Lets have some plain and simple consistency here. SilkTork 20:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Exile 20:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello all. Is there any all-wiki rule on how to name articles on particular train/railway stations? In most European countries for the sake of simplicity the local rail operators use local names in international planning. Thus the German DB informs of trains to Praha Hlavni Nadrazi rather than "Prager Hauptbahnhof" or "Prague Main Station", Belgian trains run through Warszawa to Moskva rather than through Varsovie to Moscu and so on. At the same time the naming scheme for cities is pretty clear that we should name the articles on cities with the English name where available. What solution should we adopt here? The question is by no means academic as my recent example of Warszawa Gdańska shows.
Another issue is whether we should include the descriptive of "station" to the name of the article when there is none in the real life. For instance, should the article on Berlin Hauptbahnhof be moved to Berlin Hauptbahnhof Station or not? What do you think? // Halibu tt 10:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
There's borderline cases of course, but my suggestion would be to omit the "railway station" at the end whenever it is a well-known large station (either some sort of Hauptbahnhof or other large station) and the risk of having a name collide with another entity is comparably low. ( Hamburg-Altona railway station would be sensible since there could be a Hamburg-Altona article at some point, whilst Warszawa Centralna has a pretty low risk of colliding with a Warsaw-related article. As I said, it's borderline.) -- doco (☏) 08:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
A user is reverting edits to train articles. Please look at Rebecca's contributions list at least back to 23 September. I believe the original edits improve the articles and the reverts make the articles worse. I do not want to undo the reverts myself but other editors may wish to do so. bobblewik 10:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
The stub article Godavari Express, about a named passenger train service in India is nominated for deletion on the grounds (?) that it is "Non-notable listcruft". The article is labelled as being in WikiProject Trains, so what's notable in this field? Mereda 11:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed that the small stub Bainbridge Northern Railway was nominated for deletion - see discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bainbridge Northern Railway. I already voted "keep", but am still wondering if nominating this for AfD was reasonable. It's obscure, but that in itself is not reason for deletion. So far I can't find an AAR designation on the web for it, but I'm not sure where to look (I've tried the "B"s at the Railserve AAR listings [1], but so far haven't come accross it. They've got to update their serch function). Any thoughts about warrenting an article for such an obscure railroad? -- Marriedtofilm 18:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeouinaru Station
In case anyone is interested, there's an AfD for a subway station in Seoul, Korea, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeouinaru Station. It's only a stub, but as with all these things, there's room for improvement. Anyway, I voted keep citing WP:AFDP about train/subway stations, but I'd be interested in what others from our project weighing in on this would think. -- Oakshade 07:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
There's a railroad company called ENSCO Inc.. They appear, among other things, to make high-tech railroad signaling and monitoring systems. It is up for AfD ( AfD page here). I don't know much about this company and if what it does is worthy of an article so I haven't voted yet. Maybe someone here can give their wisdom on this. -- Oakshade 05:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Right now User:Attilios and I are on the verge of another edit war over locomotive and the various related type articles, particularly electric locomotive. The latter has a section on "advantages and disadvantages". The problem, it appears, is that electrification in Europe (particularly on the continent) and in North America took very different paths. It is proving difficult to write this in a way that is acceptable to him and also preserves an accurate picture of the NA situation. You can visit the articles for a better picture of the dispute, but suffice to say that he has dropped this into the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias open tasks hopper.
What I would like to do is the following:
We have a similar problem with railcar and the various multiple unit articles, except in this case the problem runs the other direction (the articles are very Eurocentric).
If people could comment, or better still, update the articles accordingly... Mangoe 21:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Beland ( talk · contribs) has tagged a large number of glossary pages with {{ Move to Wiktionary}} today. Looking at his contributions list, I don't think it'll be too long before it pops up on WP:AN/I or similar discussion areas. In a quick search around the wiki, I don't see any further discussion on this matter, so I've removed the tag from the article. Slambo (Speak) 13:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I've just added the importance
parameter to {{
TrainsWikiProject}} and created the associated categories. I marked all the articles linked from {{
Train topics}}, this project's core topics, as Top importance. I've added some basic information on grading by importance to the
assessment department page, but there's easily more that could be said on this topic. Tomorrow, the importance assessment counts should start showing up in the
statistics as well as on the
work list.
This importance parameter is to identify an article's importance to the Trains WikiProject and not to any subproject or task force. I plan to add subproject and task force importance parameters to the template as they are needed, probably starting with Underground since there are quality assessments there now too. Slambo (Speak) 14:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
class
. What do you think?
Slambo
(Speak)
19:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, now I've got subproject importance ratings integrated for both
WP:LUL and
WP:NYCS (although the latter project has not yet created the assessment tasks or categories). The LUL-importance
parameter can be used to set the importance within WP:LUL, while NYCS-importance
can be used for WP:NYCS. If you have any questions, please ask.
Slambo
(Speak)
15:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I just got done making pages for all of the Passenger trains in both Arizona and Virginia. I still have to go over them and make some minor corrections. I made two categories one for Passenger train stations in Virginia and one for Passenger train stations in Arizona. Im not sure which state I will work on next. John R G 05:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
A proposal has been made to delete Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo/Improve. I originally created this page as a place to list articles that need improvement. With the updates to {{ TrainsWikiProject}} and the automatically generated lists based on parameters to it, the Improve page has become superfluous. Since this is a project-specific page, rather than going through WP:MFD, please join the talk page discussion there. AdThanksVance. Slambo (Speak) 12:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Unless I hear otherwise, I will delete Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo/Improve tomorrow. Slambo (Speak) 13:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan to me. I don't see the necessity of maintaining two project pages when everything can be addressed on one. Erzahler 18:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The deed is done. I'm updating links now... Slambo (Speak) 17:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
With the Improve page now deleted, I've put some more time into the main
project todolist page. This page is now much more useful, pointing to other categories and lists of tasks within the project. This morning, for example, I just added the unref=yes
parameter to {{
TrainsWikiProject}} to highlight articles that lack
references, and added a link on the todolist page to its associated category:
Unreferenced rail transport articles. When you've got some time, please peruse the todolist and work on items that are listed.
Slambo
(Speak)
13:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi all. Do someone have a scheme of the limit size for railway vehicles in Germany and Russia? Those nations use a bigger encumbrance limit than most of Europe, but I can't find anything about them. I need these data for a new article for it.wiki. -- Jollyroger 09:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Please, someone give a look HERE. If a native speaker can fix my poor translation, I will later move that to en.wiki and call for the Polski translation. This is part of a joint project to write articles on machines used both in Italy and in Poland. If someone speak Italian and wants to do a little translation works, on it.wiki we completed almost all the articles about the actual electric locomotives and coaches. Ask me if you want to bring some of them to en.wiki and find any trouble. -- Jollyroger 21:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Can someone drop in on WP:CFD#Category:Loop_lines CfD for a discussion on a rename of Category:Loop lines. I'm not sure what the right rename should be and would like an expert to point the discussion in the correct direction. Vegaswikian 06:34, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
The stub category ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:United States rail stubs is rather large now: I've proposed some possible new sub-categories here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2006/October#US_rail_subtypes. If anyone has any thoughts, suggestions, offers of help, please wade in. Alai 06:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey there. I've got a proposal: why don't we set up a Wikiproject:Trains newsletter, similar to the Wikipedia Signpost. Perhaps if we had this and filled it with a list of articles on the to-do list that are in need of work. As well as requests for editors to work on the to-do lists, we could have the latest rail news and Wikiproject:Trains news.
I would be willing to be the editor for the newsletter, although I would be looking for 1 or 2 willing Wikiproject:Trains memebers to help.
What do you think?
-- Anthony cfc ( talk • c • ama) Sunday, 22/Oct/2006 ( UTC)
Thanks for the interest. Unfortunately, no-one else seems to be showing interest so perhaps we should back-shelve the newsletter proposition for now. Cheers anyway. -- Anthony cfc ( talk • c • ama) Sunday, 22/Oct/2006 ( UTC)
Please can someone give a look at FS ALn 772? It will need some major tranlsation fixes. Moreover:
thanks pals -- Jollyroger 21:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I just corrected a small error on the Challenger (passenger train) page--all dome cars were not removed in 1970, only the dome diners and I have the relevant Official Guides as a reference. However, when I attempted to cite my source using the citation template, I couldn't get it to work. What am I doing wrong? Ehbowen 05:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Another editor has decided to move Baldwin's article so the title has his middle name spelled out rather than as an initial. I moved it back this morning seeing no consensus or policy for the original move, but the other editor has moved it back to the spelled out name again. All of the reference material on a quick check through my library refers to him with a middle initial, if it's included at all. I've asked the editor for his reasoning on the move, but I'd like to hear what other TWP members think of the page title. Is there a consensus for the move or should it stay at its original title? AdThanksVance. Slambo (Speak) 17:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Though I'm sure this is fairly far down the list of important train articles, the "Acquisitions" section said it was acquired by another company in 2063, which must be wrong. -- GeoffreyVS 05:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC).
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 23:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to let everyone know that I am in the process of setting up a new website devoted to North American passenger train timetables as published in the Official Guide of the Railways. While it's not much to look at now, I'm hoping to add four to five timetables a week on a consistent basis. I do take special requests (as time permits); email me at the address on the main page of the site. Currently I have at least one Official Guide from every year from 1954 through 1971 except 1955; I also have one each from 1889, 1916, 1938, 1941, 1947, and 1950. I hope that I can be of some help to everyone in the future. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ehbowen ( talk • contribs) 02:14, October 27, 2006.
Is there a list or database online of the divisions of the major U.S. railroads? For instance, I found out that the Interstate Railroad is now part of the NS Pocahontas Division, but I'd like to know all the lines that form that division. -- NE2 02:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm still trying to figure out the names of the Norfolk Southern lines. The milepost prefixes seem to be used often, but are ambiguous: there are separate SA Lines in South Carolina (Branchville to Augusta) and Georgia (Savannah to Augusta). Can someone offer advice? -- NE2 19:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The Clinchfield Railroad is now CSX's Kingsport and Blue Ridge Subdivisions. Would it be better to let Clinchfield Railroad cover the history and write articles about the subdivisions, or to put everything in the former name? -- NE2 02:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
There are two items of importance that you might not have noticed with this WikiProject.
First, I've been working with another editor to get a bot that will automatically update the list of articles within the scope of the project for the Recent changes link on the main project page. On a weekly interval, the bot will build a list of all articles with {{ TrainsWikiProject}} on their talk pages and store it on the recent changes list.
The second items regards a new entry in the project navigation box (which is now at the top of many of the project pages, like on this page). The Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Manual of style (MOS) link is the newest addition. Hearing no objections to anything on the MOS page that I mentioned many months ago (see previous discussions above), I made a bold move and moved my proposed page to the live address. The guidelines there are based on what I've seen in looking at almost 8,000 articles while doing the assessments. If there's something in there that needs to change, please speak up.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled editing, already in progress. B-) Slambo (Speak) 18:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I think there would be much value in this, there is certainly a great need to add proper images (photos) to rail-related articles and to replace fair use with free images wherever possible. Any interest?-- Lord Kinbote 19:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello all, I just wanted to put a link here to my collection of railroad-related photos: http://lensovet.rrpicturearchives.net; please look through the photos there and let me know which ones you would like me to upload. I will then upload the photos to the Commons using my license. Also, there might be some photos on http://lensovet.byethost12.com/photos/gallery2/; if there are any photos you would like to see on wiki that are there, let me know as well.
Thanks! — lensovet– talk – 05:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Whyte notation about the need for separate articles on each of the types listed on {{ Whyte types}}. Please join the discussion there. AdThanksVance. Slambo (Speak) 11:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
FYI, I have two articles that you may wish to incorporate into your works. In both cases, light rail is among the options being considered. The CCT is in need of more information and the Red Line is in need of a cleanup. I added relevant tags to the discussion pages and have added a bit to the CCT, but do not know much more about either project nor too much about trains in general to provide much further information -- so I'm just passing on the work to you folks. Enjoy! -- Thisisbossi 01:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Another editor added the {{ mergeinto}} template on Canadian National Railway suggesting that the content there should be merged into Canadian National Railway Company. Please join the discussion on the proposed destination's talk page. Slambo (Speak) 11:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
See Template talk:Infobox UK station#Bilingual station names for my proposed way to standardise the formatting of stations that have names in more than one language (e.g. English and Welsh names). Thryduulf 22:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
There are two list articles in the TWP "Requests for assessment" queue, but I'm unsure how list articles fit into the current grading scheme. Please join the discussion. Slambo (Speak) 14:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm working on an SVG map of the CSX network from the BTS data and other sources, and have a few questions about what they own:
If anyone can clarify any of these issues, it would be most appreciated. Thank you. -- NE2 23:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Here's what I currently have:
If someone can help me, I can complete this. -- NE2 18:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
There is yet another discussion on using "(U.S.)", "(United States)", or even ("United States of America)" as disambiguators instead of "(US)" as in current practice. Please join the discussion. Slambo (Speak) 16:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know anything about the subject, but others here may be interested. -- NE2 01:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The article reads like he's just a random historian. -- NE2 01:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
The article titled ' Railroad engineer' is subject to some discussion on it's talk page. Perhaps others with an interest in trains would like to put their input.
You can read the talk page but in summary, the debate so far seems to be:
There are some other comments there such as "some US regulations say it's called an engineer", but the US government does not determine Wikipedia naming policy and has no oversight over what terms are called in the English language as a whole (at least outside of the USA).
Anyway - get stuck in.-- jrleighton 00:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
The British train drivers' union is called the "Association of Locomotive ENGINEERS and Firemen". So it looks like the term originated in the UK and then went out of use there.
Exile 20:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion about whether we should set criteria for inlcusion of accients on the List of rail accidents page, and if so what the criteria should be.
The discussion is located at Talk:List of rail accidents/Criteria for inclusion, where your input would be most welcome. Thryduulf 00:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This is an AfD grouping that might be of interest here. There are 33 railroads up for deletion (yes, 33). These are either of defunct railroads or ones that were just proposed. All the articles seem to only be excerpts from old Florida law archives and are not exaclty helpful and are frequently confusing as to indicate if the railroads were actually built/operated or not. -- Oakshade 22:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I've been thinking about the structure of categories for major railroads, like Category:Pennsylvania Railroad or Category:New York Central Railroad. Can I get some comments on whether the following is a good idea:
Thank you. -- NE2 07:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Since there has been no response, I'm going to start doing this for the NYC. Hopefully I'll find any flaws early on. -- NE2 09:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I've completed the reorganizaton of Category:New York Central Railroad; what do you think? -- NE2 11:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I give it thumbs up. n2xjk 15:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
London Underground is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy ( Talk) 02:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
HSR-350x is a recent Korean High-speed rail, developped by KRRI. I'm working on this article called Korean G-7, which talks about HSR 350x. You can help developing this article, if you like. Nevertheless, I need help uploading image for HSR-350x. -- User: Kingj123 23:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I've been concentrating on articles about lines ( Category:CSX Transportation lines, Category:Norfolk Southern Railway lines, etc.) rather than the railroad companies that built and operated them. I believe that they should be mostly separate, even where the extents are the same, since the railroad company usually had some operating history before the line became part of a bigger system. However, in cases where the bigger company leased the smaller one from opening day, there's usually almost nothing to say about the smaller company. In these cases, like Bergen County Line and Bergen County Railroad, should the railroad redirect to the line? (This probably isn't the best example, since the Bergen County Line has been extended.) -- NE2 10:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Category:Baltimore and Ohio Railroad includes a number of towns along the line. Is this a good idea? -- NE2 20:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
While tending to the Indian station Kodai road due to an AfD, I noticed a similar issue with List of railway stations in India where almost all of the links are to the cities and towns and not the stations. I don't think it's a good idea and a bit of a time waster for both the eidtors and readers. -- Oakshade 21:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
There was an AFD discussion that affects a number of articles within this project's scope. The result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Key of the Gulf Railroad was to merge the associated articles into List of defunct Florida railroads. We need a volunteer to perform the merge on the articles listed in the AFD. Slambo (Speak) 20:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 December 10#Category:Passenger train stations in Arizona is a proposition to have consistent names for the subcategories of Category:Railway stations in the United States. Posting here to alert members of this project. Tinlinkin 13:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
After discussion over the summer about requiring inline citations and some time of very little activity on current GA listed rail transport articles, several articles within this project's scope are now likely to be delisted from GA status. I've tried to solicit assistance ( see above broken anchor) in September on improving these articles to current GA standards.
I made a list at that time of some tasks that need to be completed. Please take some time as soon as possible to "adopt" an article and help to get it up to current GA requirements. Slambo (Speak) 19:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
About 35 of the 46 articles have now been tagged on their talk pages with a polite warning of pending delisting. Slambo (Speak) 12:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Beg pardon if this is the wrong fora. I've designed a set of generic succession boxes modelled on the Template:S-start system with the idea that they could replace the limited single-use boxes. I'm experimenting with this system at Union Station (New Haven). Is this something worth pursuing? Mackensen (talk) 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
One minor thing to keep in mind is that there might be multiple stations with the same name on a system. An optional "prev_disambig" could take care of this - if prev_disambig exists, use prev_station (prev_disambig), otherwise prev_station (s-rail/system disambig). -- NE2 19:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I've got a working example up at Niles, Michigan. For reference, it calls the following templates:
-- Mackensen (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
This probably isn't related to the design of the templates, but how do we want to handle branches? On a system with many trains along a single line (like commuter systems, but not most of Amtrak), the succession is for lines rather than individual trains. But how do we handle situations where a branch service merges with the main line? I would suggest only including the branch on the main line stations at the last station before the split, but then we don't show all the possible destinations on the "to" line at other main line stations. There is also a possibility that no main line trains, only some branch trains, stop at some stations on the main line; the whole situation can become pretty complicated when we try to reconcile the divide between lines and services. And if we go by services, what happens in a "skip-stop" situation, if trains in the A-B-C-D order can go from A to B or skip B to stop at C, but trains that serve B always skip C on their way to D (or maybe only Foo Branch trains serve both B and C)? But if we go by lines, we need to decide where to draw the line and say "ok, these services coincide for long enough that we should choose the more major one and only list it" - because it's pretty clear that at
Secaucus Junction we should keep at least most of the lines separate, since most of them split at Secaucus or Newark Penn, but what about the
North Jersey Coast Line or
Bergen County Line? --
NE2
23:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
We have a small problem: the single-terminus ends need to be linked in the switch statement or they will not be linked in the box. But then the check to see whether this is equal to the next station fails:
{{s-start}} {{s-line|system=Amtrak|line=Lake Shore Limited|previous=Chicago|next=whatever's next|type=Both}} {{s-line|system=Amtrak|line=Lake Shore Limited|previous=[[Union Station (Chicago)|Chicago]]|next=whatever's next|type=Both}} {{s-line|system=Amtrak|line=Lake Shore Limited|previous=Niles|next=who knows?|type2=Both}} {{end}}
I'm not sure how to fix this. -- NE2 02:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Something I pled for in the NJ Transit succession boxes (and couldn't get consensus for or against) was making sure succession boxes are transparent and easily editable. While I like the uniformity that comes from the use of Template:Amtrak line and Template:Amtrak line2, it was very unclear to me, when trying to edit Union Station (Chicago), how to add a new line, especially one that was identical in route to an existing line and therefore (depending on style judgement) collapsible into one line (I speak of Illini (Amtrak) and Saluki (Amtrak), and Illinois Zephyr and Carl Sandburg (Amtrak)). It is also unclear to me how Template:Amtrak stations saves any time or effort over just using wikicode, because of the very high number of exceptions that will eventually have to be included in the template (including just about every station on the Northeast Corridor that I can think of off the top of my head. I beg you to reconsider, and allow wikicoded station links (minimally) in station succession boxes. Thank you, — CComMack ( t– c) 04:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't have time to respond to all of this, but I'll try. There are several benefits of the new system:
-- Mackensen (talk) 11:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
On a different matter, I think I've finally fixed that nagging problem with multiple stops. Mackensen (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
And on yet another matter, I've created Template:S-jnct to deal with junctions. There's an example of it at Union Station (New Haven). Mackensen (talk) 20:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Would it be possible, like I've seen with person succession boxes, to combine the "Boston South - Terminus" lines - at least in groups of 3 and 4 - on Back Bay (MBTA station)? -- NE2 21:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Union Station has an additional line that could be documented... CDOT's Shore Line East. just adding s-rail and s-line invocations failed horribly so I am guessing there is more you have to do? Does CDOT need to be set up like MetroNorth and Amtrak are? ++ Lar: t/ c 16:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The short answer is yes it does. We (I) really need to document how this is done, although it's reasonably straightforward once you wrap your head around it. You need five templates to make the system work. Let's start with the New Haven example. You add two boxes:
{{s-rail|title=CDOT}}
{{s-line|system=CDOT|line=Shore Line|previous=Bridgeport|next=State Street}}
Now, that gives this:
{{s-start}} {{s-rail|title=CDOT}} {{s-line|system=CDOT|line=Shore Line|previous=Bridgeport|next=State Street}} {{end}}
Which is pretty ugly and broken. However, it does link you to most of the templates that you need to create. I've paired each one with the equivalent example from the MBTA (since it's simpler than Amtrak).
When you've created those three you'll be prompted for two more tables, which define the left- and right-hand terminals for the particular line. Mackensen (talk) 16:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
On the Long Island Rail Road, should we use services or lines? At Jamaica, there are really only three lines to the east, but ten services are included. It is very hard to verify with the timetables that the next stop on Ronkonkoma Branch trains is indeed New Hyde Park - in other words that all Ronkonkoma Branch trains skip Hollis, Queens Village, Bellerose, and Floral Park. And this may change with the next schedule change; in other words, someone has to go through and check each time new schedules come out. But it's very clear that the next Main Line station is Hollis. I don't know how well "Main Line" is known to the public though. Does anyone have any ideas? -- NE2 00:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
With the Long Island Rail Road, there are many variations of services. They don't change frequently, but they can be very flexible. Very few Ronkonkoma Branch trains will stop at New Hyde Park; rather many of them stop at Mineola and Hicksville. (There used to be a weekend service pattern where Ronkonkoma Branch trains would stop at New Hyde Park and Carle Place as part of a skip-stop pattern, this is now discontinued.) Most service to St. Albans is from the Babylon Branch, yet is attributed to the West Hempstead Branch. There are other service anomalies that occur during rush hours (train 1501 from East Williston, local up to Floral Park, arriving Penn at 8:14; train 2350 from Penn at 4:54, local beginning at New Hyde Park, terminates at Farmingdale). And a few Montauk Branch trains stop at Mineola or Hicksville. In my opinion, the succession boxes should show which services serve a station (not only shown with termini). I don't know if a service that rarely serves a particular station is worth mentioning in the succession box. But NE2's solution regarding lines looks promising. Tinlinkin 15:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Forgive me for butting in here, but can you guys give me a digest of what exactly the problem is here since I'm not too familiar with LIRR scheduling? I dunno, on the other side of the hudson, we have the M&E lines and those have various express services. for example, some trains only go to summit, some trains go to dover but make no stops until summit, etc. we just list every stop on the line, regardless of how many times it's actually serviced per week. there's a few stops on the raritan valley line that get a total of 2 trains per day, but we still put them there. similarly, RVL service to hoboken is weekend-only, and we notate it as such. — lensovet– talk – 19:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
The book was published in 1946. Any works published first in the U.S. and published before 1964 are out of copyright unless their copyright was renewed with the U.S. Copyright Office. There is a database of copyright renewals at [5], and the PRR Centennial History's copyright was not renewed.
Would anyone be interested in helping to OCR it for Wikisource? Someone has scanned it and uploaded it to [6]. -- NE2 10:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I have noted that most articles use "and" rather than "&", and I agree with this. I was hoping to cite something either at this WikiProject or at the manual of style that says that for an uncontroversial move of Wilmington & Western Railroad, but it doesn't seem to be stated anywhere. Shall I add it to the WikiProject page, or is it hiding somewhere? -- NE2 10:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Long time ago I put a question on the talk page of this article which isn't answered yet. Does anyone know (or can find out) which gauge the narrow gauge line of the Grafton Centre Railroad had? Grtx, -- Thogo (Talk) 12:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
This list has been nominated for deletion. While it is not strictly a rail subject, it is closely related. -- NE2 15:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I just read about a patent issued to Google for the look of the search results. What interested me more in the story and what we can use here is the Google Patent Search. The about page lists some helpful searching tips too. Slambo (Speak) 15:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I created this template for use on individual freight lines (rather than companies): see it in use on Fort Wayne Line. -- NE2 13:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
On December 10th, Algoma Central Railway was nominated for delisting from Good Article status due to its lack of citations. Today I added seven citations from four sources to the article, however if anyone else has contributions that could help the article keep its Good Article status, please feel free to lend a hand! -- Kralizec! ( talk) 00:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Would it be reasonable to make some sort of offshoot of the reference desk for rail-related questions, so those with information can help those who need information for an article they are writing? -- NE2 16:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I've added a list of presidents to Long Island Rail Road, and there's a gap between the 1920s and 1949. The PRR directly operated the LIRR from 1929 to 1949; is this why there's a gap? -- NE2 16:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm currently rewriting and expanding Long Island Rail Road, and I seem to be better at describing history of construction than general history of operations once construction ends. Is anyone interested in helping out? I'm hoping that we can eventually bring this up to featured article standards. To that end, it might need more reliable sources to replace the PRR Chronology. -- NE2 19:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
It would be helpful if in assessing and improving railroad articles, editors made sure to mention whether railroads provide or have provided passenger or freight service, or both. This basic information is often missing. If there are major customers (a named population center, a large industrial customer, a certain industry clustered in a geographic area), that would also be very informative. Thanks! -- Beland 01:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
10 Seoul, Korea rail stations are up for deletion. Like alot of stations on this project, there isn't alot of text in the article, but alot of infobox information. I think like all articles like this, they can be expanded over time, but there are many in WP who feel that they're not inherently notable. Others on this project might want to weigh in on them. -- Oakshade 01:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)