![]() | This 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. |
There are a number of theories about the original source of the term gandy dancer, some fanciful, some straightforward. As far as the Wikipedia article is concerned, as well as speculation on countless websites, none of these theories have been satisfactorily nailed down. It would be great if some knowledgeable folks could weigh in on the gandy dancer talk page in an effort to find the real story from a reliable source. thanks, Richard Myers ( talk) 17:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to a tip, i'm exploring whether the term "gandy" comes from the Gaelic (Irish) word "cinnte", which can be translated as "certain". In other words, (Irish) track workers were certain to be on the job repairing the tracks, whether rain, shine, flood, or sickness. Richard Myers ( talk) 17:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Kirkby Branch Line has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Jeepday (
talk)
14:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
35 articles transclude this missing template. It looks to me as if someone was planning to create a navbox to link all the RandstadRail articles together, but never quite completed the process. Is there an expert here who can finish the job? - TB ( talk) 22:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
We have a few articles on individual items of rolling stock that are not locomotives. Category:Individual locomotives covers locomotives, but do we need a Category:Individual items of rolling stock to cover articles such as Cavell Van and Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car etc. Mjroots ( talk) 20:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Back in 2009, VIA Rail Canada stripped names from all its trains except for the Canadian and Ocean. The articles haven't yet been moved. I've done one, but would like to see consensus before continuing.
Hudson Bay (train) has been moved to Winnipeg–Churchill train. What do you think? — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 02:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, no VIA rail lines share common endpoints. As for the common name part of it, here is Via spokesperson Ali Macreag, quoted in the Oct 2009 Trains Magazine:
"We attempted to simplify designations along with the relaunch of our Web site because research showed that our customers were not only confused by all the different branding, but they couldn't remember the name of the train they were on or the class of service they traveled."
Therefore, I assume that the new name is intended to be used as the public name and that travelers refer to it that way. As for sources, travel reports tend not to mention the name of the train.— Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 00:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Going ahead. — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 20:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Earlier today, I created a dab-page for Berwyn Station, and after checking out the massive number of dab tags, I noticed there were others that specific categories, So how about a {{ disambig railroad station}} tag? ---- DanTD ( talk) 01:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
User:Secondarywaltz and/or at least one other anonymous IP has been removing color bars from station infoboxes, because he/they finds them redundant. Can this be settled without an edit war? ---- DanTD ( talk) 18:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I see something seriously wrong with the way a lot of Sacramento Light Rail stations are named. Back in May 2009, some user renamed stations like Roseville Road (Sacramento RT) to Roseville Road. If I looked up "Roseville Road," I'd think that was a link to an actual road or street. I might even think it's the name of part or all of a state or US highway. Why should Sacramento get all their system names removed from their articles? ---- DanTD ( talk) 16:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Montrain has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Jeepday (
talk)
00:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
American Steam Railroad has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots ( talk) 08:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've been trying to ask editors that I thought would be in the know, but they haven't answered me. Does anybody know exactly which railroads used Union Station (Dallas) before Amtrak took over passenger service in the United States in 1971? I have a few suspicions, bur I want to be able to confirm them. As a matter of fact, there are a lot of Union Station articles that don't cover the railroads they had originally served. ---- DanTD ( talk) 20:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Request for images at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_Railways#Image_request_Eurotunnel_Class_0001 - someone living near the channel tunnel with a camera etc.. Please respond there, and a belated happy new year. Sf5xeplus ( talk) 00:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Could someone please have a quick look at the infobox. I'm quite lost when it comes to gauges and radii. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 01:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I can't find any sources on Google. Help? Thanks. Perseus, Son of Zeus 23:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I want to move the Taiwan High Speed 700T train article name to a better name. However, I am not sure what version would fit the project guidelines most, and looking at articles on other high-speed trains, I found usage somewhat inconsequential.
The Taiwanese train was derived from the 700 Series Shinkansen, a type with multiple manufacturers that is operated by two companies (JR Central and JR West) on Japan's Shinkansen network (as far as I know, Shinkansen literally refers to the infrastructure), hence I see that the lack of manufacturer or operator designation for the 700 series is justified. The Taiwanese train has multiple manufacturers too, but is operated solely by the Taiwan High Speed Rail Consortium (THSRC), so "THSRC 700T Series" is one possibility. But, like in Japan, Taiwan's high-speed rail has a different gauge than the normal rail network, and the network name, "Taiwan High Speed Rail", or its acronym, "THSR" is used as often as, and interchangeably with, the company name. In fact the company's website writes: "the Taiwan High Speed Rail 700T trainsets". By Google hits, "THSR 700T" is way more common than "THSRC 700T". So "THSR 700T Series" would fit common usage, even though, if I am reading it right, not the WikiProject Trains style guide.
As for other high-speed trains:
-- Rontombontom ( talk) 10:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:RDT Rollbahn is orphaned and unused. Is it still wanted? If not, it can probably be deleted. It seems to be something to do with this, but I can't make head or tail of it. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
The person who misnamed those Sacramento RT light rail stations is threatening to undo my renaming of those articles. Somebody stop him. ---- DanTD ( talk) 12:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Whilst it is unfortunate that
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (stations) never got approved as a guideline, we in the UK have produced our own
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations). Every rail station has the word "station" in the article title, no matter what type of system it's on, nor whether it's name is itself unique. The only exceptions are combined rail/bus stations, which get the word "Interchange" instead, and stops on tram (streetcar) lines.
So, we have
Didcot Parkway railway station, even though there is no other Didcot station in the entire UK; and, AFAIK, nowhere else in the world is there a place/street/whatever named "Didcot Parkway" (there isn't even a street in Didcot named "Parkway" - we have Park Road, and also Broadway). Put simply, it's the name on the station signs ("Didcot Parkway"), plus the word "railway" (because there's only the national heavy-rail system there) plus the mandatory word "station".
Perhaps the UK guideline could be borrowed (and adjusted where necessary to suit different circumstances). --
Redrose64 (
talk)
15:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
(deindent) Gfoley4 said "So is this "new agreement" going to be for all stations on the Sacramento RT and MAX or just Roseville Road? ('cause that would be a bad idea)". My proposal would be to have station articles, in those cases where they are often referred to X station (like Roseville Road), at the Rosseville Road station and similar, and in those cases where there are different stations with the same name, a real disambiguator can be added (if there were other Roseville Road stations with an article, this could be Roseville Road station (Sacramento RT) or Roseville Road station (Sacramento) or whatever is preferred. The same goes for MAX and any other system. It's straightforward, makes clear that they are stations, and allows for disambiguation where needed, as is the general rule on Wikipedia. Fram ( talk) 08:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Meant to ask this days ago. This article was recently created, using the Polish version as a basis, as there apparently was no interwiki link from the Polish article. But I noticed that there's already an article for
head house covering the same thing (the buildings at stations themselves, which are suitable for an article from an architectural as well as a rail operations standpoint).
Obviously, there needs to be a merge, as having both is redundant. But what titleshould the merged article have? "Station building" sounds too generic and is used more as a description than as an actual noun. "Head house" I've heard used even for stations such as
Reading Terminal, but may be too obscure. I wanted others thoughts on the matter.
oknazevad (
talk)
13:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Sounds pretty good to me, though I will note that "head house" is not an NYC-specific term. As noted , it's used for the former Reading Terminal in Philadelphia, which was also a mainline railroad station. It may be that it specific to terminal stations though, as the "head" could be referring to the rail head. Now that I think about it, that may be the actual etymology. I think we have a good course of action here, though, as a specific usage, the NYC Subway specific material at head house should likely go to an article called head house (New York City Subway), while the existing head house article becomes a redirect to station building, reflecting its wider use. oknazevad ( talk) 14:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The Shay engine area does not mention the Shay engine (on static display) at the Royal Gorge Route station. They say it was being used on the Georgetown Loop Railway before they received it. I saw this engine the week after Christmas 2010. I have pictures, but can't copy and paste here.
Warren Nilsson 22:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.247.204.30 ( talk)
Opposition to the Guangzhou-Hong Kong Express Rail Link has been nominated for deletion. 65.93.13.210 ( talk) 03:55, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Feel free to discuss the splitting of this stub type at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/January/19. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
A bunch of rail templates have recently come up for deletion at WP:TFD. 65.93.14.196 ( talk) 05:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
West Midlands railway stations (disused)}}
was inconclusive, and it has been
relisted. Your comments are invited there. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)In the {{
Railgauge}}
template, the alternate name given for 1600 gauge is
Victorian broad gauge, which redirects onto
Rail gauge in Australia. There is an
Irish gauge article, which gives due prominence to its use in Victoria (Australia) and Brazil. Curiously, the Rail Gauges in Australia article fairly consistently refers to it as Irish gauge, and redirects back to
Irish gauge.
I posted this to the Template talk:RailGauge to ask if the alternate name could be changed to Irish gauge, and the reply was that it could, but to seek agreement from others first. If the concensus was to retain it as Victorian broad gauge, the Irish gauge article should be renamed as such. Tim PF ( talk) 14:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I am not a member of this project, so I am seeking guidance here before making any drastic changes to a group of pages that don't seem to meet WP quality standards. I first came across 1604 in rail transport which has no lead and two empty sections. Ditto 1427 in rail transport and I expect to find similar in Category:Rail transport timelines for the early years of railway history. These seem to list just one event in each year.
My proposal is to remove the Events, Births and Deaths sub headings so that the single 'event' described becomes the whole article. I will add a suitable stub flag and add this project banner to the Talk page.
I can see how the original authors have tried to maintain consistency amongst a group of related articles, but where this leads to empty or unnecessary subheads, I think it is not the right thing to do.
I also question the usefulness of the births and deaths sections. For example, 1737 in rail transport. Is the birth of Charles Carroll of Carrollton really significant in railway history? Would the railway have been built anyway without his help? My point here is that we could end up with an awful lot more of these articles if the birth of everyone associated with a railway is deemed noteworthy. Derek Andrews ( talk) 14:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)Really nice photo I just found (released by Seattle Municipal Archive) and uploaded to Commons. We don't have an article on this railway (and probably should). Also, someone more knowledgeable than I can probably add a bunch of relevant categories about that locomotive. - Jmabel | Talk 06:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Could this project be classified as a descendant? -- trevj ( talk) 13:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Gfoley4 has been trying to fix the S-line templates for Bay Area Rapid Transit stations, but none of his fixes have worked. I tried to use some Chicago 'L' S-Lines as an example of what could be done, but that hasn't worked either. Can somebody else fix what he has been trying to do? While you're at it, send him a message to invite him to the discussion. ---- DanTD ( talk) 02:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
s-line}}
group, and its usage in
Richmond Station (California), I really don't want to investigate it in any detail, and was hoping that others would. That template group is far too complicated for its own good, what with all the subtemplates. You've got one system, for which you seem to need four templates: {{
BART color}}
; {{
BART lines}}
; {{
BART stations}}
; and {{
BART style}}
, of which I see one is a redlink and therefore missing. You also have two lines, requiring {{
S-line/BART right/Orange}}
and {{
S-line/BART right/Red}}
in
Richmond Station (California) (the pairs being completed by {{
S-line/BART left/Orange}}
and {{
S-line/BART left/Red}}
- and since there are three other lines, you could need {{
S-line/BART left/Green}}
; {{
S-line/BART left/Yellow}}
; {{
S-line/BART left/Blue}}
; {{
S-line/BART right/Green}}
; {{
S-line/BART right/Yellow}}
; and {{
S-line/BART right/Blue}}
also). Whether these fourteen are set up properly or not I don't know; why all of these are necessary I also don't know.{{
XC colour}}
, {{
FGW colour}}
and {{
SWT colour}}
), and there's no mucking around with subtemplates. As their names suggest, they're used to obtain the colour values, but the routebox would work perfectly well using six-character colour values instead of templates. Much easier to set up. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
19:25, 5 February 2011 (UTC)User:Jmabel asked about the location of one image, now I'm asking about another. I'm not sure about the location, but when I zoomed in on it, I could barely make out the word "Glen Falls," and the only word I'm most certain of is the word "Glen." Can anybody else figure out where this could be? ---- DanTD ( talk) 15:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm looking to expand the article on the Virginia and Truckee Railroad. Right now the article is almost exclusively focused on the current incarnation of the V&T as a Heritage Railroad. Would fleshing it out with the full history of the original line be appropriate scope for this article, or would it be better in a separate one? Especially considering that the original V&T used the term Railway for its name, whereas the modern uses Railroad. I just want to make sure that whatever I do makes sense. Rails ( talk) 23:45, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The rail car article is currently a straight redirect to " railcar", but it appears that quite a few referencing articles mean " railroad car". I've already altered the railcars redirect page to add a "railroad car" option, and edited many of the referencing pages to hit the correct page, but there were not very many. Changing "rail car" to be a disambiguation page pointing to both "railcar" and "railroad car" might be useful, but I guess that quite a lot of articles erroneously link direct to "railcar" by mistake. Any suggestions? Tim PF ( talk) 03:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
disambiguation}}
page, and had a shot at adding a hatnote to
railcar.
Tim PF (
talk)
19:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)I presume you mean Template:Rail vehicles of New Zealand, and not the other three I also adjusted yesterday ( Template:Bavarian locomotives, Template:DRG locomotives and Template:Prussian locomotives), as opposed to the few more that I considered, but didn't do. I agree with your earlier comment that it would be much nicer if there was a fourth option on the "What links here" page to hide those also.
I've no problems with your change to rail car, or the removal of the third option of railcar's hatnote (which I had cribbed from the 3 option one I wrote a week or so ago for Bathroom, and just left the American catch all in); we both left in the 2nd link at the end of the lead, so that should be fine.
I forgot to consider changes to railroad car itself, and your change was definitely required, thankyou. But I wonder if it also needs something like "in the US, it is often referred to more simply as a rail car or railcar, but this should not be confused with the self-propelled railcar". Especially as it has links to Rail car mover and Rail car tracking device. Tim PF ( talk) 19:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
Infobox station}}
has been proposed for renaming; see
Template talk:Infobox station#Rename proposal. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
12:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Despite the line having been projected as Chambéry-Modane-Turin in what was initially a single country, there are two different articles for the French and Italian part of the line. Furthermore the first article makes confusion between the Chambéry-Modane-Turin and the Mont Cenis Pass Railway, giving wrong links (the interwiki link on the left leads to the Mont Cenis Pass Railway fr.wiki article, the link called "Mont Cenis Pass Railway" in the main text leads to the Fréjus tunnel article). I think both articles should be merged, as they describe what was historically a single railway. Finally a clear dinstinction should be made between the "Mont Cenis" and "Fréjus" names, they are two different mountain passes: the confusion is created because the Chambéry-Modane-Turin cross the Alps under the Fréjus pass, but is often called "Mont Cenis railway" because it replaced the Mont Cenis railway and road, which is some dozen of kilometres away from the Fréjus pass. I hope this is clear...any comment? Coccodrillo ( talk) 11:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good, except: Should it be Mont Cenis Pass Railway or Mont Cenis Pass railway? If the latter, then at least the link from Turin–Modane railway will work, but I think we need either an additional redirect or a move (with auto-redirect). Tim PF ( talk) 21:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
anchor}}
tag in
Culoz–Modane railway with a see also back to "
Turin–Modane railway#1917 accident", and changed the original link so that it hits the anchor (on a good day).
Tim PF (
talk)
22:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Category:Rail lines in Utah has been nominated for deletion; please see the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 20:30, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Railfans, I request your help. There is a very old merge tag on the page Train engine, suggesting a merge to Locomotive. Please comment at Talk:Train engine D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
The Lehigh Division article has ten red links. I don't know how to tag it, so I am mentioning it here. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 15:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
The Garrison train crash article has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots ( talk) 05:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Category:Former railway stations in the United States, which is under the purview of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Scott Alter ( talk) 00:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
The High-speed rail article has a huge mix of UK and US English. For example Level crossings are being called both Level Crossings and Grade crossings and Railways are being called both Railroads and Railways. In other articles 'Points' and 'Switches' are being used in the same paragraph! I think it should go by the most common International name, but that's not whats being shown. There needs to be a standardised use of English in all International Railway articles. (When I say International I mean articles which involve more than one country's railway). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Likelife ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
This is a slightly unusual situation. We are dealing with a worldwide topic where there is a great difference in terminology for the similar things. My solution would be a hatnote at the top of the article stating the the appropriate regional language is used in each section, say, British English in Europe, American English for North and South America, Australian English for Australasia. That just leaves Asia and Africa. I've not looked at the article, but if it is clear that a particular version of English is established there, then that is what should be used. Mjroots ( talk) 06:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, just saw your HotArticlesBot subscription request. Unfortunately, we are currently only accepting subscription requests for projects with 2500 or fewer articles during the trial period (due to the expensive database queries involved). Very sorry for this inconvenience. I'll be sure to let you know once we are accepting requests from larger projects. Thanks for your interest though! Kaldari ( talk) 22:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/WikiProject High-speed rail. -- Highspeedrailguy ( talk) 16:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I was updating infoboxes on the Woodhead Line and rediscovered what Keith D had commented on three years ago - is it Hazelhead or Hazlehead? Most references I have found call the settlement Hazlehead, but as the station was first opened in 1845 when the settlement may have been one slightly confused dog it is quite possible that it was opened as Hazelhead and renamed later. Would someone with a copy of Butt like to proffer an opinion? Scillystuff ( talk) 13:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Done article amended, reffed and moved. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
16:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm having a little discussion with User:Oldboltonian about how to name articles about railway lines, specifically those in France. Most of them are currently at "A–B railway", A and B being the termini of the line. Oldboltonian claims that 'railway' is usually used to refer to a railway company (which is not meant in these articles), and proposes "A–B line". My main objection is that 'line' may refer to anything linear, e.g. airline, shipping line, bus line, and I do think that 'railway' is used for a railroad connection. Thoughts? Markussep Talk 18:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
For years I've been begging somebody to help me move certain templates in Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates and have had no replies whatsoever. The following Amtrak templates are out of alphabetical order:
No matter what I do, I can't get these damn things to alphabetize. The normal ways of alphabetizing them doesn't work. And I known this because I was able to move those. I even tried a method of doing so that I was doing with categories in
Category:Trolleybus systems by city, and that didn't work either. Why the hell won't anybody either fix them, or tell me how to do it myself?! ----
DanTD (
talk)
13:30, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
[[Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates|Black Hawk]] {{Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
has a
Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates, that overrides the first one. On
Template:Amtrak Black Hawk I would (1) exchange these two items and (2) put each on a separate line. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
18:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid that I needed to amend
Template:Amtrak Black Hawk, because you'd moved some of the documentation outside the <noinclude>...</noinclude>
, which meant that it was appearing on pages transcluding this template (ie on
Black Hawk (Amtrak train)). Here's how the template now ends:
|}<noinclude> {{Amtrak-railway-routemap}} Based on [http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=43331 this]. [[Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates|Black Hawk]] </noinclude>
<noinclude>
goes first, and is butted up to the last item of "real" template code - the close-table marker |}
{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
goes after the <noinclude>
, because it's general documentation{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
also allows its sort key to override any sort key set in {{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
</noinclude>
finishes the enclosure of the documentation. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)<noinclude>...</noinclude>
, see the very bottom of the infobox in
Carolinian (train). --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
after the </noinclude>
which caused it to appear on
Lone Star (Amtrak train). Here's
my fix; and
Template:Amtrak Shuttle exhibited the same problem, so I've
fixed that too.I've added the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami to the List of rail accidents (2010–2019) as four trains were reported to have been swept away by the tsunami. I think the article should be added to {{ 2011 railway accidents}} but before that is done, the earthquake article needs to be expanded - possibly by adding a "Transportation" subsection to the "Aftermath" section. Rail could then possibly be a subsection of that. Once that is done, then the template can be added to the earthquake article, with a targeted link to the section. Opening for discussion, will inform WP:EARTHQUAKES. Mjroots ( talk) 05:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
High speed tilting train is a stub, has no references, and is only linked to from high-speed rail -- not even from tilting train. I think that its topic is useful, but I cannot really see that it justifies more than a section (or sub-section) in either or both of high-speed rail and tilting train. That said, I think the table may have a use, but as a template which may be used by both articles. An alternative for the table might be to merge it into the existing Template:High-speed rail, either by flagging the tilting trains in the latter, or by splitting the trains into "non-tilting" and "tilting" columns.
The "Tilting trains around the world" section of Tilting trains is a long bulleted list that is only likely to get longer, which I seem to think is deprecated. I think it should be used to start a Template:Tilting trains, rather in the manner of Template:High-speed rail, possibly also incorporating speed ranges in the manner of the table at High speed tilting train (and Template:High-speed rail).
If you have any thoughts on this, please contribute to the discussions I have started at Talk:High speed tilting train and Talk:Tilting train#Tilting trains around the world respectively. Tim PF ( talk) 15:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
See Special:Contributions/114.79.22.126. How important were Indonesia's locomotives on an international level? Does their use of heavy, fast trains over a narrow gauge line increase the significance of this for the pacifics & hudsons? Andy Dingley ( talk) 12:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi guys/gals, I just came across Chennai – Trivandrum Superfast Express which was created a few days ago. Now I know that Wikipedia articles should not have the actual train schedule in the article and that those parts of the article need to be removed, but is this train line actually notable? I'm vaguely under the impression that all, or at least most, train lines are notable, so I thought that instead of sending it to AfD, it would be better to ask here first about what should be done with the article. Any help/suggestions would be appreciated. Cheers, Jenks24 ( talk) 20:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
{{
India-rail-stub}}
is probably best, so I've added that. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
21:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
{{
db-a7}}
tag, but I'm not myself inclined to add a {{
hang on}}
at the moment. I don't actually think it meets the
A7 criteria, but this is largely due to its presence may prevent a lot of stubby articles or overload of
List of named passenger trains of India.
Tim PF (
talk)
14:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I don't know if this is the best place to put this, but I need some advice on the naming of subway station articles, specifically relating to the Shanghai Metro. Previously, all of the Shanghai Metro articles were named in the same format: XXX (Shanghai Metro), where XXX is the name of the station, for example Shiguang Road (Shanghai Metro), Huamu Road (Shanghai Metro). However, recently, a user left a notice on talk page that he wished to rename the format and then with limited discussion, he has begun to move the article names from XXX (Shanghai Metro) to XXX Station, only using (Shanghai Metro) where there is a confusion with another system that has a station of the same name. I began a discussion with him and to this moment he has stopped with about 20 to 30 articles already moved to the new format he proposes. From looking at various metro systems around the world, I've seen different conventions used for this, for example NYC uses South Ferry – Whitehall Street (New York City Subway), aka having the systen name attached to it except when theres a disambiguation (in the NYC case, same name on different lines), so that makes sense. Similarly, Toronto has its names with TTC always attached, Don Mills (TTC), York Mills (TTC). Recently, it seems (from looking at a few articles) that all Hong Kong MTR stations had their name from XXX (MTR) moved to XXX Station, with XXX Station (MTR) where disambiguation was necessary.
I don't know how to proceed to this, the user's point is that his method of "Station" instead of XXX (Shanghai Metro) is "better" or "more favourable". There are hundreds of articles that would have to be renamed and I'm just wondering if this renaming process is necessary.
Thank you, Heights (Want to talk?) 21:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Done
Are there any pictures of the
Silverliner V on WP? --
Highspeedrailguy (
talk)
16:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi all,
Following on from the
Chennai – Trivandrum Superfast Express thread above, I found hundreds of other articles on Indian train services which seem to be very low on notability. Most have one source - a timetable website which allows some (not all) details to be verified. Some have no source at all. They typically have content/formatting problems as well; certain typos seem to be very widespread, so I assume there's been a lot of copy & pasting.
Unilaterally sending them all to AfD, individually, would be disruptive, so I'd like community input: What should we do? If many are deletion candidates, I think it would be a good idea to tie them up in a neat bundle rather than AfDing individually. Perhaps we need some kind of "triage" to quickly distinguish between the fixers and the ones which should be nominated for deletion. Any comments / suggestions? bobrayner ( talk) 11:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Template:Omaha Railroads has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk)
01:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
There are a number of theories about the original source of the term gandy dancer, some fanciful, some straightforward. As far as the Wikipedia article is concerned, as well as speculation on countless websites, none of these theories have been satisfactorily nailed down. It would be great if some knowledgeable folks could weigh in on the gandy dancer talk page in an effort to find the real story from a reliable source. thanks, Richard Myers ( talk) 17:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to a tip, i'm exploring whether the term "gandy" comes from the Gaelic (Irish) word "cinnte", which can be translated as "certain". In other words, (Irish) track workers were certain to be on the job repairing the tracks, whether rain, shine, flood, or sickness. Richard Myers ( talk) 17:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Kirkby Branch Line has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Jeepday (
talk)
14:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
35 articles transclude this missing template. It looks to me as if someone was planning to create a navbox to link all the RandstadRail articles together, but never quite completed the process. Is there an expert here who can finish the job? - TB ( talk) 22:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
We have a few articles on individual items of rolling stock that are not locomotives. Category:Individual locomotives covers locomotives, but do we need a Category:Individual items of rolling stock to cover articles such as Cavell Van and Peacekeeper Rail Garrison Car etc. Mjroots ( talk) 20:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Back in 2009, VIA Rail Canada stripped names from all its trains except for the Canadian and Ocean. The articles haven't yet been moved. I've done one, but would like to see consensus before continuing.
Hudson Bay (train) has been moved to Winnipeg–Churchill train. What do you think? — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 02:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, no VIA rail lines share common endpoints. As for the common name part of it, here is Via spokesperson Ali Macreag, quoted in the Oct 2009 Trains Magazine:
"We attempted to simplify designations along with the relaunch of our Web site because research showed that our customers were not only confused by all the different branding, but they couldn't remember the name of the train they were on or the class of service they traveled."
Therefore, I assume that the new name is intended to be used as the public name and that travelers refer to it that way. As for sources, travel reports tend not to mention the name of the train.— Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 00:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Going ahead. — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 20:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Earlier today, I created a dab-page for Berwyn Station, and after checking out the massive number of dab tags, I noticed there were others that specific categories, So how about a {{ disambig railroad station}} tag? ---- DanTD ( talk) 01:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
User:Secondarywaltz and/or at least one other anonymous IP has been removing color bars from station infoboxes, because he/they finds them redundant. Can this be settled without an edit war? ---- DanTD ( talk) 18:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I see something seriously wrong with the way a lot of Sacramento Light Rail stations are named. Back in May 2009, some user renamed stations like Roseville Road (Sacramento RT) to Roseville Road. If I looked up "Roseville Road," I'd think that was a link to an actual road or street. I might even think it's the name of part or all of a state or US highway. Why should Sacramento get all their system names removed from their articles? ---- DanTD ( talk) 16:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Montrain has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Jeepday (
talk)
00:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
American Steam Railroad has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots ( talk) 08:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've been trying to ask editors that I thought would be in the know, but they haven't answered me. Does anybody know exactly which railroads used Union Station (Dallas) before Amtrak took over passenger service in the United States in 1971? I have a few suspicions, bur I want to be able to confirm them. As a matter of fact, there are a lot of Union Station articles that don't cover the railroads they had originally served. ---- DanTD ( talk) 20:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Request for images at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_Railways#Image_request_Eurotunnel_Class_0001 - someone living near the channel tunnel with a camera etc.. Please respond there, and a belated happy new year. Sf5xeplus ( talk) 00:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Could someone please have a quick look at the infobox. I'm quite lost when it comes to gauges and radii. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 01:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I can't find any sources on Google. Help? Thanks. Perseus, Son of Zeus 23:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I want to move the Taiwan High Speed 700T train article name to a better name. However, I am not sure what version would fit the project guidelines most, and looking at articles on other high-speed trains, I found usage somewhat inconsequential.
The Taiwanese train was derived from the 700 Series Shinkansen, a type with multiple manufacturers that is operated by two companies (JR Central and JR West) on Japan's Shinkansen network (as far as I know, Shinkansen literally refers to the infrastructure), hence I see that the lack of manufacturer or operator designation for the 700 series is justified. The Taiwanese train has multiple manufacturers too, but is operated solely by the Taiwan High Speed Rail Consortium (THSRC), so "THSRC 700T Series" is one possibility. But, like in Japan, Taiwan's high-speed rail has a different gauge than the normal rail network, and the network name, "Taiwan High Speed Rail", or its acronym, "THSR" is used as often as, and interchangeably with, the company name. In fact the company's website writes: "the Taiwan High Speed Rail 700T trainsets". By Google hits, "THSR 700T" is way more common than "THSRC 700T". So "THSR 700T Series" would fit common usage, even though, if I am reading it right, not the WikiProject Trains style guide.
As for other high-speed trains:
-- Rontombontom ( talk) 10:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:RDT Rollbahn is orphaned and unused. Is it still wanted? If not, it can probably be deleted. It seems to be something to do with this, but I can't make head or tail of it. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
The person who misnamed those Sacramento RT light rail stations is threatening to undo my renaming of those articles. Somebody stop him. ---- DanTD ( talk) 12:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Whilst it is unfortunate that
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (stations) never got approved as a guideline, we in the UK have produced our own
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations). Every rail station has the word "station" in the article title, no matter what type of system it's on, nor whether it's name is itself unique. The only exceptions are combined rail/bus stations, which get the word "Interchange" instead, and stops on tram (streetcar) lines.
So, we have
Didcot Parkway railway station, even though there is no other Didcot station in the entire UK; and, AFAIK, nowhere else in the world is there a place/street/whatever named "Didcot Parkway" (there isn't even a street in Didcot named "Parkway" - we have Park Road, and also Broadway). Put simply, it's the name on the station signs ("Didcot Parkway"), plus the word "railway" (because there's only the national heavy-rail system there) plus the mandatory word "station".
Perhaps the UK guideline could be borrowed (and adjusted where necessary to suit different circumstances). --
Redrose64 (
talk)
15:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
(deindent) Gfoley4 said "So is this "new agreement" going to be for all stations on the Sacramento RT and MAX or just Roseville Road? ('cause that would be a bad idea)". My proposal would be to have station articles, in those cases where they are often referred to X station (like Roseville Road), at the Rosseville Road station and similar, and in those cases where there are different stations with the same name, a real disambiguator can be added (if there were other Roseville Road stations with an article, this could be Roseville Road station (Sacramento RT) or Roseville Road station (Sacramento) or whatever is preferred. The same goes for MAX and any other system. It's straightforward, makes clear that they are stations, and allows for disambiguation where needed, as is the general rule on Wikipedia. Fram ( talk) 08:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Meant to ask this days ago. This article was recently created, using the Polish version as a basis, as there apparently was no interwiki link from the Polish article. But I noticed that there's already an article for
head house covering the same thing (the buildings at stations themselves, which are suitable for an article from an architectural as well as a rail operations standpoint).
Obviously, there needs to be a merge, as having both is redundant. But what titleshould the merged article have? "Station building" sounds too generic and is used more as a description than as an actual noun. "Head house" I've heard used even for stations such as
Reading Terminal, but may be too obscure. I wanted others thoughts on the matter.
oknazevad (
talk)
13:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Sounds pretty good to me, though I will note that "head house" is not an NYC-specific term. As noted , it's used for the former Reading Terminal in Philadelphia, which was also a mainline railroad station. It may be that it specific to terminal stations though, as the "head" could be referring to the rail head. Now that I think about it, that may be the actual etymology. I think we have a good course of action here, though, as a specific usage, the NYC Subway specific material at head house should likely go to an article called head house (New York City Subway), while the existing head house article becomes a redirect to station building, reflecting its wider use. oknazevad ( talk) 14:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The Shay engine area does not mention the Shay engine (on static display) at the Royal Gorge Route station. They say it was being used on the Georgetown Loop Railway before they received it. I saw this engine the week after Christmas 2010. I have pictures, but can't copy and paste here.
Warren Nilsson 22:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.247.204.30 ( talk)
Opposition to the Guangzhou-Hong Kong Express Rail Link has been nominated for deletion. 65.93.13.210 ( talk) 03:55, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Feel free to discuss the splitting of this stub type at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/January/19. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
A bunch of rail templates have recently come up for deletion at WP:TFD. 65.93.14.196 ( talk) 05:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
West Midlands railway stations (disused)}}
was inconclusive, and it has been
relisted. Your comments are invited there. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)In the {{
Railgauge}}
template, the alternate name given for 1600 gauge is
Victorian broad gauge, which redirects onto
Rail gauge in Australia. There is an
Irish gauge article, which gives due prominence to its use in Victoria (Australia) and Brazil. Curiously, the Rail Gauges in Australia article fairly consistently refers to it as Irish gauge, and redirects back to
Irish gauge.
I posted this to the Template talk:RailGauge to ask if the alternate name could be changed to Irish gauge, and the reply was that it could, but to seek agreement from others first. If the concensus was to retain it as Victorian broad gauge, the Irish gauge article should be renamed as such. Tim PF ( talk) 14:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I am not a member of this project, so I am seeking guidance here before making any drastic changes to a group of pages that don't seem to meet WP quality standards. I first came across 1604 in rail transport which has no lead and two empty sections. Ditto 1427 in rail transport and I expect to find similar in Category:Rail transport timelines for the early years of railway history. These seem to list just one event in each year.
My proposal is to remove the Events, Births and Deaths sub headings so that the single 'event' described becomes the whole article. I will add a suitable stub flag and add this project banner to the Talk page.
I can see how the original authors have tried to maintain consistency amongst a group of related articles, but where this leads to empty or unnecessary subheads, I think it is not the right thing to do.
I also question the usefulness of the births and deaths sections. For example, 1737 in rail transport. Is the birth of Charles Carroll of Carrollton really significant in railway history? Would the railway have been built anyway without his help? My point here is that we could end up with an awful lot more of these articles if the birth of everyone associated with a railway is deemed noteworthy. Derek Andrews ( talk) 14:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)Really nice photo I just found (released by Seattle Municipal Archive) and uploaded to Commons. We don't have an article on this railway (and probably should). Also, someone more knowledgeable than I can probably add a bunch of relevant categories about that locomotive. - Jmabel | Talk 06:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Could this project be classified as a descendant? -- trevj ( talk) 13:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
User:Gfoley4 has been trying to fix the S-line templates for Bay Area Rapid Transit stations, but none of his fixes have worked. I tried to use some Chicago 'L' S-Lines as an example of what could be done, but that hasn't worked either. Can somebody else fix what he has been trying to do? While you're at it, send him a message to invite him to the discussion. ---- DanTD ( talk) 02:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
s-line}}
group, and its usage in
Richmond Station (California), I really don't want to investigate it in any detail, and was hoping that others would. That template group is far too complicated for its own good, what with all the subtemplates. You've got one system, for which you seem to need four templates: {{
BART color}}
; {{
BART lines}}
; {{
BART stations}}
; and {{
BART style}}
, of which I see one is a redlink and therefore missing. You also have two lines, requiring {{
S-line/BART right/Orange}}
and {{
S-line/BART right/Red}}
in
Richmond Station (California) (the pairs being completed by {{
S-line/BART left/Orange}}
and {{
S-line/BART left/Red}}
- and since there are three other lines, you could need {{
S-line/BART left/Green}}
; {{
S-line/BART left/Yellow}}
; {{
S-line/BART left/Blue}}
; {{
S-line/BART right/Green}}
; {{
S-line/BART right/Yellow}}
; and {{
S-line/BART right/Blue}}
also). Whether these fourteen are set up properly or not I don't know; why all of these are necessary I also don't know.{{
XC colour}}
, {{
FGW colour}}
and {{
SWT colour}}
), and there's no mucking around with subtemplates. As their names suggest, they're used to obtain the colour values, but the routebox would work perfectly well using six-character colour values instead of templates. Much easier to set up. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
19:25, 5 February 2011 (UTC)User:Jmabel asked about the location of one image, now I'm asking about another. I'm not sure about the location, but when I zoomed in on it, I could barely make out the word "Glen Falls," and the only word I'm most certain of is the word "Glen." Can anybody else figure out where this could be? ---- DanTD ( talk) 15:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm looking to expand the article on the Virginia and Truckee Railroad. Right now the article is almost exclusively focused on the current incarnation of the V&T as a Heritage Railroad. Would fleshing it out with the full history of the original line be appropriate scope for this article, or would it be better in a separate one? Especially considering that the original V&T used the term Railway for its name, whereas the modern uses Railroad. I just want to make sure that whatever I do makes sense. Rails ( talk) 23:45, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The rail car article is currently a straight redirect to " railcar", but it appears that quite a few referencing articles mean " railroad car". I've already altered the railcars redirect page to add a "railroad car" option, and edited many of the referencing pages to hit the correct page, but there were not very many. Changing "rail car" to be a disambiguation page pointing to both "railcar" and "railroad car" might be useful, but I guess that quite a lot of articles erroneously link direct to "railcar" by mistake. Any suggestions? Tim PF ( talk) 03:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
disambiguation}}
page, and had a shot at adding a hatnote to
railcar.
Tim PF (
talk)
19:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)I presume you mean Template:Rail vehicles of New Zealand, and not the other three I also adjusted yesterday ( Template:Bavarian locomotives, Template:DRG locomotives and Template:Prussian locomotives), as opposed to the few more that I considered, but didn't do. I agree with your earlier comment that it would be much nicer if there was a fourth option on the "What links here" page to hide those also.
I've no problems with your change to rail car, or the removal of the third option of railcar's hatnote (which I had cribbed from the 3 option one I wrote a week or so ago for Bathroom, and just left the American catch all in); we both left in the 2nd link at the end of the lead, so that should be fine.
I forgot to consider changes to railroad car itself, and your change was definitely required, thankyou. But I wonder if it also needs something like "in the US, it is often referred to more simply as a rail car or railcar, but this should not be confused with the self-propelled railcar". Especially as it has links to Rail car mover and Rail car tracking device. Tim PF ( talk) 19:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
Infobox station}}
has been proposed for renaming; see
Template talk:Infobox station#Rename proposal. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
12:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Despite the line having been projected as Chambéry-Modane-Turin in what was initially a single country, there are two different articles for the French and Italian part of the line. Furthermore the first article makes confusion between the Chambéry-Modane-Turin and the Mont Cenis Pass Railway, giving wrong links (the interwiki link on the left leads to the Mont Cenis Pass Railway fr.wiki article, the link called "Mont Cenis Pass Railway" in the main text leads to the Fréjus tunnel article). I think both articles should be merged, as they describe what was historically a single railway. Finally a clear dinstinction should be made between the "Mont Cenis" and "Fréjus" names, they are two different mountain passes: the confusion is created because the Chambéry-Modane-Turin cross the Alps under the Fréjus pass, but is often called "Mont Cenis railway" because it replaced the Mont Cenis railway and road, which is some dozen of kilometres away from the Fréjus pass. I hope this is clear...any comment? Coccodrillo ( talk) 11:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good, except: Should it be Mont Cenis Pass Railway or Mont Cenis Pass railway? If the latter, then at least the link from Turin–Modane railway will work, but I think we need either an additional redirect or a move (with auto-redirect). Tim PF ( talk) 21:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
anchor}}
tag in
Culoz–Modane railway with a see also back to "
Turin–Modane railway#1917 accident", and changed the original link so that it hits the anchor (on a good day).
Tim PF (
talk)
22:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Category:Rail lines in Utah has been nominated for deletion; please see the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you, -- Black Falcon ( talk) 20:30, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Railfans, I request your help. There is a very old merge tag on the page Train engine, suggesting a merge to Locomotive. Please comment at Talk:Train engine D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
The Lehigh Division article has ten red links. I don't know how to tag it, so I am mentioning it here. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 15:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
The Garrison train crash article has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots ( talk) 05:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Category:Former railway stations in the United States, which is under the purview of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Scott Alter ( talk) 00:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
The High-speed rail article has a huge mix of UK and US English. For example Level crossings are being called both Level Crossings and Grade crossings and Railways are being called both Railroads and Railways. In other articles 'Points' and 'Switches' are being used in the same paragraph! I think it should go by the most common International name, but that's not whats being shown. There needs to be a standardised use of English in all International Railway articles. (When I say International I mean articles which involve more than one country's railway). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Likelife ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
This is a slightly unusual situation. We are dealing with a worldwide topic where there is a great difference in terminology for the similar things. My solution would be a hatnote at the top of the article stating the the appropriate regional language is used in each section, say, British English in Europe, American English for North and South America, Australian English for Australasia. That just leaves Asia and Africa. I've not looked at the article, but if it is clear that a particular version of English is established there, then that is what should be used. Mjroots ( talk) 06:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, just saw your HotArticlesBot subscription request. Unfortunately, we are currently only accepting subscription requests for projects with 2500 or fewer articles during the trial period (due to the expensive database queries involved). Very sorry for this inconvenience. I'll be sure to let you know once we are accepting requests from larger projects. Thanks for your interest though! Kaldari ( talk) 22:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/WikiProject High-speed rail. -- Highspeedrailguy ( talk) 16:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I was updating infoboxes on the Woodhead Line and rediscovered what Keith D had commented on three years ago - is it Hazelhead or Hazlehead? Most references I have found call the settlement Hazlehead, but as the station was first opened in 1845 when the settlement may have been one slightly confused dog it is quite possible that it was opened as Hazelhead and renamed later. Would someone with a copy of Butt like to proffer an opinion? Scillystuff ( talk) 13:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Done article amended, reffed and moved. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
16:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm having a little discussion with User:Oldboltonian about how to name articles about railway lines, specifically those in France. Most of them are currently at "A–B railway", A and B being the termini of the line. Oldboltonian claims that 'railway' is usually used to refer to a railway company (which is not meant in these articles), and proposes "A–B line". My main objection is that 'line' may refer to anything linear, e.g. airline, shipping line, bus line, and I do think that 'railway' is used for a railroad connection. Thoughts? Markussep Talk 18:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
For years I've been begging somebody to help me move certain templates in Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates and have had no replies whatsoever. The following Amtrak templates are out of alphabetical order:
No matter what I do, I can't get these damn things to alphabetize. The normal ways of alphabetizing them doesn't work. And I known this because I was able to move those. I even tried a method of doing so that I was doing with categories in
Category:Trolleybus systems by city, and that didn't work either. Why the hell won't anybody either fix them, or tell me how to do it myself?! ----
DanTD (
talk)
13:30, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
[[Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates|Black Hawk]] {{Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
has a
Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates, that overrides the first one. On
Template:Amtrak Black Hawk I would (1) exchange these two items and (2) put each on a separate line. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
18:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid that I needed to amend
Template:Amtrak Black Hawk, because you'd moved some of the documentation outside the <noinclude>...</noinclude>
, which meant that it was appearing on pages transcluding this template (ie on
Black Hawk (Amtrak train)). Here's how the template now ends:
|}<noinclude> {{Amtrak-railway-routemap}} Based on [http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=43331 this]. [[Category:Amtrak railway line navbox templates|Black Hawk]] </noinclude>
<noinclude>
goes first, and is butted up to the last item of "real" template code - the close-table marker |}
{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
goes after the <noinclude>
, because it's general documentation{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
also allows its sort key to override any sort key set in {{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
</noinclude>
finishes the enclosure of the documentation. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:40, 11 March 2011 (UTC)<noinclude>...</noinclude>
, see the very bottom of the infobox in
Carolinian (train). --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
{{
Amtrak-railway-routemap}}
after the </noinclude>
which caused it to appear on
Lone Star (Amtrak train). Here's
my fix; and
Template:Amtrak Shuttle exhibited the same problem, so I've
fixed that too.I've added the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami to the List of rail accidents (2010–2019) as four trains were reported to have been swept away by the tsunami. I think the article should be added to {{ 2011 railway accidents}} but before that is done, the earthquake article needs to be expanded - possibly by adding a "Transportation" subsection to the "Aftermath" section. Rail could then possibly be a subsection of that. Once that is done, then the template can be added to the earthquake article, with a targeted link to the section. Opening for discussion, will inform WP:EARTHQUAKES. Mjroots ( talk) 05:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
High speed tilting train is a stub, has no references, and is only linked to from high-speed rail -- not even from tilting train. I think that its topic is useful, but I cannot really see that it justifies more than a section (or sub-section) in either or both of high-speed rail and tilting train. That said, I think the table may have a use, but as a template which may be used by both articles. An alternative for the table might be to merge it into the existing Template:High-speed rail, either by flagging the tilting trains in the latter, or by splitting the trains into "non-tilting" and "tilting" columns.
The "Tilting trains around the world" section of Tilting trains is a long bulleted list that is only likely to get longer, which I seem to think is deprecated. I think it should be used to start a Template:Tilting trains, rather in the manner of Template:High-speed rail, possibly also incorporating speed ranges in the manner of the table at High speed tilting train (and Template:High-speed rail).
If you have any thoughts on this, please contribute to the discussions I have started at Talk:High speed tilting train and Talk:Tilting train#Tilting trains around the world respectively. Tim PF ( talk) 15:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
See Special:Contributions/114.79.22.126. How important were Indonesia's locomotives on an international level? Does their use of heavy, fast trains over a narrow gauge line increase the significance of this for the pacifics & hudsons? Andy Dingley ( talk) 12:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi guys/gals, I just came across Chennai – Trivandrum Superfast Express which was created a few days ago. Now I know that Wikipedia articles should not have the actual train schedule in the article and that those parts of the article need to be removed, but is this train line actually notable? I'm vaguely under the impression that all, or at least most, train lines are notable, so I thought that instead of sending it to AfD, it would be better to ask here first about what should be done with the article. Any help/suggestions would be appreciated. Cheers, Jenks24 ( talk) 20:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
{{
India-rail-stub}}
is probably best, so I've added that. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
21:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
{{
db-a7}}
tag, but I'm not myself inclined to add a {{
hang on}}
at the moment. I don't actually think it meets the
A7 criteria, but this is largely due to its presence may prevent a lot of stubby articles or overload of
List of named passenger trains of India.
Tim PF (
talk)
14:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I don't know if this is the best place to put this, but I need some advice on the naming of subway station articles, specifically relating to the Shanghai Metro. Previously, all of the Shanghai Metro articles were named in the same format: XXX (Shanghai Metro), where XXX is the name of the station, for example Shiguang Road (Shanghai Metro), Huamu Road (Shanghai Metro). However, recently, a user left a notice on talk page that he wished to rename the format and then with limited discussion, he has begun to move the article names from XXX (Shanghai Metro) to XXX Station, only using (Shanghai Metro) where there is a confusion with another system that has a station of the same name. I began a discussion with him and to this moment he has stopped with about 20 to 30 articles already moved to the new format he proposes. From looking at various metro systems around the world, I've seen different conventions used for this, for example NYC uses South Ferry – Whitehall Street (New York City Subway), aka having the systen name attached to it except when theres a disambiguation (in the NYC case, same name on different lines), so that makes sense. Similarly, Toronto has its names with TTC always attached, Don Mills (TTC), York Mills (TTC). Recently, it seems (from looking at a few articles) that all Hong Kong MTR stations had their name from XXX (MTR) moved to XXX Station, with XXX Station (MTR) where disambiguation was necessary.
I don't know how to proceed to this, the user's point is that his method of "Station" instead of XXX (Shanghai Metro) is "better" or "more favourable". There are hundreds of articles that would have to be renamed and I'm just wondering if this renaming process is necessary.
Thank you, Heights (Want to talk?) 21:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Done
Are there any pictures of the
Silverliner V on WP? --
Highspeedrailguy (
talk)
16:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi all,
Following on from the
Chennai – Trivandrum Superfast Express thread above, I found hundreds of other articles on Indian train services which seem to be very low on notability. Most have one source - a timetable website which allows some (not all) details to be verified. Some have no source at all. They typically have content/formatting problems as well; certain typos seem to be very widespread, so I assume there's been a lot of copy & pasting.
Unilaterally sending them all to AfD, individually, would be disruptive, so I'd like community input: What should we do? If many are deletion candidates, I think it would be a good idea to tie them up in a neat bundle rather than AfDing individually. Perhaps we need some kind of "triage" to quickly distinguish between the fixers and the ones which should be nominated for deletion. Any comments / suggestions? bobrayner ( talk) 11:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Template:Omaha Railroads has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk)
01:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)