![]() | 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 created the Ospedaletto Lodigiano derailment article. Not sure that I've got the correct Frecciarossa train as there are apparently two versions. Assistance appreciated. Mjroots ( talk) 13:40, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
I have made a proposal regarding spliting the Kaiping Tramway and Imperial Railways of North China at Talk:Kaiping Tramway and Imperial Railways of North China#suggestion for split. I'd like to hear your views on it. Johnson.Xia ( talk) 02:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 February 20#Template:Infobox German railway vehicle, it is proposed to merge Template:Infobox German railway vehicle with Template:Infobox locomotive.
~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I created Template:East Midlands Railway colour as it was a wanted template with 39 inbound links.
I cribbed from the color template of the defunct operator it replaced, Template:East Midlands Trains colour, and from the page East Midlands Railway. Please make any necessary corrections. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 21:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I created Template:Stockholmståg color using the color at Public transport in Stockholm#Suburban rail
There is a different color used at Stockholm commuter rail#Lines.
Can someone take a look at it and correct it if needed? davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 20:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Are there guidelines for how to name articles on French railway stations? There seem to be several different methods: sometimes just the name ( Châtelet–Les Halles), sometimes with a 'Gare/Gare de' prefix ( Gare Saint-Lazare, Gare de Groslay), sometimes with a 'station' suffix ( Montreuil station), sometimes with a 'railway station' suffix ( Les Coquetiers railway station), sometimes with a bracketed suffix ( Marly-le-Roi (SNCF)). An endash - inconsistently spaced or unspaced - is often used to indicate a station which serves two locations ( Gare de Mitry–Claye or Gare de Massy – Palaiseau), but this doesn't always match the French wikipedia ( fr:Gare de Mitry - Claye). We sometimes - probably incorrectly - use endashes for stations within a city (e.g. Gare de Versailles–Chantiers), but fr has Gare de Versailles-Chantiers (and for these the Transilien and SNCF, on their websites, just use a space ( Versailles Chantiers (Transilien), Versailles Chantiers (SNCF)}. But that's not universal either - e.g. we have Gare de Vanves–Malakoff but Transilien has Vanves - Malakoff, which matches fr:Gare de Vanves - Malakoff. There's a 3-way inconsistency between Issy–Val de Seine station and fr:Gare d'Issy-Val de Seine and Issy Val de Seine (Transilien)]. The history of article Gare de Versailles–Chantiers shows the result of this apparent lack of an agreed standard - it's been renamed five times since 2014. Colonies Chris ( talk) 20:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
{od}There is a further discussion of this issue, and the standard involved, here. Moonraker12 ( talk) 22:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 March 18#Southern Pacific 9010, although this wasn't tagged on the article so you may not have seen it. Andy Dingley ( talk) 19:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm currently trying to fix formatting issues on Taiwan train stations and I can't help to notice the naming schemes for the articles. For example, Keelung railway station is named with "railway station". I have looked at the proposed guidelines here and the talk about the proposed guidelines here. I also noticed that there hasn't been talk since May 2019. Can I have some guidance on naming conventions on train stations?
Just some observations on this topic: Tamachi Station (Tokyo) is named with a capitalized Station while Gangnam station isn't. My understanding of this topic is that in Japanese, train station names are usually followed by 駅, so that's why there is capitalization in the English name since it's the proper name as per WP:NCCAPS with it saying "Tamachi Station" in English on the main sign. This contrasts with Gangnam station because there isn't any proper noun usage when referring to the station itself (the signs don't say Gangnam Station just Gangnam). TRA's own English signage on each station is followed by a capitalized "Station" with no railway attached at each main entrance (other than the Main station for the Taipei and Kaohsiung) while the Chinese signage is suffixed with 車站. By following the Japanese train station article naming convention shouldn't Keelung railway station be named "Keelung Station"? Harrison Kuo ( talk) 09:10, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm seeing an error with the the bottom with platform/track info at Fullerton Transportation Center and can't figure out how to fix it. Anyone with more experience with the template have an idea? — GFOLEY FOUR!— 02:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm hoping someone will fix some recent errors.
Johnuniq ( talk) 06:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Recently I upload and take some photos of Tokyo Station in recent years and replace with the old one. However one of the users disagree with it and undo my edit. The current photos angles & perspective are not good and outdated (even without the outdoor plaza). But in Google search, most of the photos wide angle lens perspective to showing the surrounding environment of the Tokyo Station with the plaza view. -- Wpcpey ( talk) 02:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
My edit
The Current edit
I invite project members to help expand Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on public transport.
Stay safe, --- Another Believer ( Talk) 20:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
WP Trains technically-minded folks: A very small group of editors has been working to make errors related to short reference templates, like {{
sfn}}
, more visible. We are working to clean up a new error-tracking category,
Category:Harv and Sfn template errors, which tracks instances of short-reference templates that do not link to full citations. There are something close to 400 train-related articles in the error category right now. Almost all of them are there because they contain an {{
sfn}}
template that refers to, but does not link to, a full citation. The solution varies based on whether the full citation is present, and whether the short and full citations are formatted such that they match each other. In some cases, the full citation is missing entirely because the short citation was copied from another article, but the full citation was not copied.
I am posting this message here because the error messages about short reference errors are not yet visible to all editors, and I thought you might want to tidy up the errors before they became visible, probably in a month or two. There are instructions on the category page about how to make the error messages visible to you.
There is a detailed explanation of the different types of errors (including a small number of false positives) and how to fix them at the category page linked above. For a list of articles containing the most common train-related infoboxes, try this petscan search. There is more discussion at Module talk:Footnotes, where you are welcome to post if you have any questions. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 05:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
|year=
value of 1985 and |orig-year=
of 1922; the CITEREF generator uses 1985, but editors apparently put 1922 in the sfn template by mistake.–
Jonesey95 (
talk) 17:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Butt(:?|\(1995\))\|p
should match both faulty usages.
Mackensen
(talk) 21:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)There are a bunch of broken references to Jowett 2000, typically in articles that have a Jowett 1989 source. It is unclear to me whether those references are intended to point to Jowett 1989, or to {{ Jowett-Nationalised}}, which was published in 2000. Some investigation into the articles' history may be needed. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 21:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
I am absolutely an interloper here, but I have been working on template- and reference-related errors in train articles recently. In my travels, I have noticed a number of template redirects of the form {{ 0-902888-21-8}}. These are typically ISBNs, and the redirects link to book-based source templates for train topics, in this case {{ Whitehurst GW Engines from 1940}}.
Some of these redirects are used in articles, where they contrast negatively with the more helpful source templates that are typically based on the author's name and a brief hint at the book's topic. I find the ISBN-only templates opaque and unhelpful to readers and editors alike, but the experience of WP:Trains editors may be different. I nominated three of them for deletion here, and you are welcome to comment; I decided to come here to discuss before nominating more of them.
Would editors here be open to a mass nomination of these redirects for deletion? Existing instances of the ISBN-only templates in articles would be replaced by their editor-friendly targets. (Disclaimer: I don't yet know how to find all of these redirects, but I could work on that if editors here are open to replacement and deletion of them.) – Jonesey95 ( talk) 22:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Was just talking to someone who knows I edit Wikipedia, and they told me they'd come across two very similar lists of Glasgow subway stations: List of Glasgow Subway stations from 2017, and List of stations on the Glasgow Subway from 2019. Waaaay outside my area of competence, but hopefully someone here will be able to do whatever needs doing with them. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 12:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
@ Marcnut1996:@ Kerry Raymond:I was recently cleaning up another issue in some Sydney railway stations including Gordon railway station, Sydney when I noticed that some stations had an error message concerning missing titles from a reference which I corrected by adding the title without checking how effective the link [1] in reference 1 was Bureau of Transport Statistics. "Train Station Entries and Exits Data". Then in Marrickville railway station which I have not changed yet, I found a different URL in the reference [2] I then tried to decide which one would be the more effective and found that both lead to a page which does not provide the information but then links to various pages some of which are locked unless signed in and I think that applies to the page which contains the relevant information. I am looking for help as to what the URL should be in these references. Fleet Lists ( talk) 03:29, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
The succession box at the bottom of Manmad Junction railway station links to dab Summit railway station. {{ s-line}} uses {{ Indian Railways stations}}, which detects that we have no page Summit (Indian Railways station) (because the station has no article) and hopes that the page at the unqualified title is relevant. Would anyone like to suggest a fix? I suspect that there are other cases, probably leading to primary topic stations outside India rather than dabs, though it's hard to check until PetScan recovers. Certes ( talk) 17:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
|state1/2=
to {{
Indian Railways stations}}. That seems like the least bad solution. Case closed.
Certes (
talk) 12:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)I've noticed that the service patterns of many US station articles are being replaced by details of their current, temporarily reduced service. Is this desirable, or should I be politely reverting? Certes ( talk) 19:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
There are no trains running to your destination at the time you selected. Please try searching for a different time or day.or
Sorry, there are no departures from Heyford in the next 2 hours. To find the next available service travelling from this station - Plan journeyboth of which imply that there will be trains, but later on; or perhaps you might be served this page, which is better in some ways, worse in others. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 15:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This article recently had a new map added: {{ City of Memphis (train)}} created by Wof2500. The article has a hidden error: 'Lua error: expandTemplate: template "Green color" does not exist' and previewing an edit of the template shows Template:Green color (a red link). I think "Green" should be replaced in the template wikitext with a code appropriate for this train, and I'm hoping knows how to do that. Johnuniq ( talk) 03:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Naming conventions for stations in the Philippines are being discussed at Talk:Tutuban station (PNR)#Requested move 12 May 2020. Certes ( talk) 22:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Over the past couple of years, the SNCF has been replacing traditional TGV train services with new TGV inOui services. There's a couple reasons behind this, but you can read more here. As most of the current english language stations in france display the traditional tgv services, i've taken it upon my self to create appropriate templates for the commencements of TGV inOui stations. this is relation to the s-rail-start and s-lines templates that map out a trains route. A good example of one which I've already updated to the new service is Gare d'Auray, Auray station in english. Epluribusunumyall ( talk) 07:40, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
An article which may be of interest to members of this project— LMS Patriot Class 5551 The Unknown Warrior—has been proposed for merging with LMS-Patriot Project. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 16:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi folks, I'm working up a proposed naming convention ( User:Mackensen/Naming conventions (railway stations in Europe)) to unify the disparate informal conventions that currently exist for naming railway station articles in Europe. This is a clone of the UK and Polish conventions, with some language-specific tweaks. As can be seen from User talk:Mackensen/Naming conventions (railway stations in Europe)#Background there's a great deal of uniformity already, especially with main line stations. Feedback appreciated. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Further to WT:WikiProject Trains/Archive: 2020#Naming of French stations, Captain scarlet has undone the moves, with a rationale here. Certes ( talk) 10:10, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
A discussion affecting Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations) has opened up at the associated talk page Shadowssettle( talk) 12:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I've just disambiguated Miranda station, and cleaned up all the links I found to it. However, there are a couple I don't know how to fix, because they use templates I don't understand the mechanics of. See here for the list: Special:WhatLinksHere/Miranda_station
Can anyone who knows more about railway templates help fix this? -- The Anome ( talk) 20:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
I have started Norra Hälsinglands Järnväg, importing and translating the Swedish content, primarily to address the ambiguity of the TLA "NHJ". I'm not a trains person, so anyone who knows how to format such an article, please help. Thanks! BD2412 T 19:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
This article was nominated for GA and has been reviewed (see comments here), but there has been no response by the nominator since it was put on hold on 13 June 2020. The article will fail on 21 June unless the issues I raised are fully addressed. Can anyone help here? if I know someone is willing to pick this up, I'm willing to extend by a week. Amitchell125 ( talk) 08:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
A proposal for renaming is at Talk:Duri–Tangerang railway#Requested move 26 June 2020. Comments are invited. (Pinging Amakuru, Cuchullain, Dicklyon, Mackensen, SMcCandlish who who have participated in similar discussions before.). AlgaeGraphix ( talk) 17:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I just created an article entitled Abidjan-Ouagadougou Railway prompted by the Wikipedia:List of missing Africa topics, only to find when I'd finished that a much fuller version already exists here. The title of the existing article is in French, which is inappropriate in an English Wikipedia and can easily lead to this kind of reduplication. Also it is misleading because the word "régie" refers to state control, whereas the railway has been in the private sector for the past 25 years. I therefore recommend that the two articles be merged and the English title retained. Gnangbade ( talk) 09:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Are these correct?
line | a section of track between A and B, or a service between two or more destinations |
---|---|
Railway or Railroad (Capitalized) | a company involved in rail transport |
railway or railroad (lower case) | a section of track, or a service |
route | a service that follows part of, or one, or more lines or railways |
network or system | a group of routes or services |
AlgaeGraphix ( talk) 23:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
There's an RM discussion over some future Bangkok rapid transit lines at Talk:MRTA Yellow Line#Requested move 1 July 2020. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 16:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
The Donets Railway was at WP:PNTCU until yesterday, when I did some translation cleanup of the running text. This railway is in a part of the Ukraine whose sovereignty is disputed between Russia and Ukraine. I've listed a page move at Talk:Donets_Railway#Requested_move_5_July_2020 to which, I can imagine, editors here may wish to contribute. I've no particular stake either way, there are good arguments on both sides for retaining the existing name or moving it, since the more modern spelling seems to lean towards "Donetsk" but the historical spelling to "Donets".
To keep the discussion in one place, I suggest editors' comments are placed over at RM (the link above), rather than here: I'll cross-ref that to back to here once I've saved this post. 185.62.130.241 ( talk) 07:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I've come across a bunch of unsourced edits to locomotive articles from new accounts with locomotive-based usernames, ranging from extraordinary claims [3] to minor tweaks of infobox data [4]. So far I've found and reverted the following accounts:
PRR 2846 ( talk · contribs) PRR H10s 7688 ( talk · contribs) PRR L1S 2-10-0 ( talk · contribs) PRR E6s 460 ( talk · contribs) PRR GG1 4800 ( talk · contribs) PRR 4483 ( talk · contribs) PRR L1S 2-10-0 ( talk · contribs) Erie RR L1 2600 ( talk · contribs) PRR E2A 7002 ( talk · contribs)
I'm not sure if there's a systematic way to track these down aside from searching for usernames starting with "PRR". Keep your eyes open for random changes from redlinked locos. – dlthewave ☎ 04:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Requesting feedback on a change to Template:Infobox locomotive to aid with a merge of Template:Infobox German railway vehicle. Change will modify the "cylindersize" parameter. I don't really know much about trains, so input is appreciated. Discussion at Template talk:Infobox locomotive.
Also, as a sidenote, help is needed mapping parameters from the German infobox to the English infobox. Since I don't know much about trains, I'm confused on a couple. Discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Holding_cell#Transport, help with the remaining params appreciated. ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 14:58, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
According to the ORR website, there was an error with the source data which has affected a number of stations, mainly in Wales and the north of England and resulted in an overestimation of usage. Both the 2018/19 and 2017/18 data has been affected so someone (or multiple people) will need to go over all 2000+ stations to check if data is correct. It is hard to tell how many stations were affected or which stations they were so it may be best to unfortunately go over the whole lot. see here. I have started now going through A. Difficultly north ( talk) Simply south alt. 16:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Many train car articles often have a list under that category; however most of them are sourced to self published fancruft sites and I am questioning if exhibiting contents that could only be sourced from fancruft sites represent WP:DUE coverage of contents. Graywalls ( talk) 16:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Alright, let's split this into two
1.) Whether reliable sources exist or not. If we're talking aircraft, the FAA tail number registry is likely reliable. A WP:SPS fancruft site whose list is made up of his original research from the FAA database, as well as other sources, I would say it isn't, because, it is not reliably published, unless the author satisfies the definition of expert as used in our SPS guidelines. I'm just using aircraft example as I happen to be aware of the reliable registry, but perhaps such thing exists for train cars too.
2.) Order sheet records. Is it within due weight to have a huge data table of order sheet records of which customer bought what vehicles/train cars along with their serial #? I don't think that sort of data table is within the scope of an encyclopedia. Looking in the table for the EMD SW7 I see "Weyerhaueser Timber owns a quantity of 2 train cars, serial numbers 300 and 301, based on railfan research of factory order records and the railfanning website. Boeing_747-400#747-400F for example does not have a list of such. The FAA would have a reliable data of ownership of aircraft and tail number, however, I'd say details like "Delta Airlines, tail #xxxx, xxxx, xxxx and xxxx, quantity 5" "United qty 5, tail numbers xxxx to xxxx" and so forth would be inappropriate by WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Why should we have the most mundane of details in the article? But such things under the heading "original owners" seems to be very common in railroad vehicle articles for some reason.
Graywalls ( talk) 15:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Absolutely ridiculous to remove roster data from a locomotive article. Graywalls you're continuing this attack on U S history and U S historians. Graywalls you don't have credibility as an American historian and cannot discern real from unreal work. You're work is not PC: Prototypically correct, therefore should not be recognized as an editor of U S prototype railroading. It is common practice in most historical works to use rosters. It would take light years of time to compile all the roster information from historical works, therefore which compiled roster data is best to work from? All the roster data for the SW7 article is in the EMD product data. That primary source roster data is compiled on Don Strack's Utah Rails by locomotive historian A J Kristopans. You have already attacked this as a self published fan site, which it is not. Don Strack has had published in excess of 40 articles and books on locomotive history, his website reflects many of those published articles. You personally attacked Mr. Strack's work, which is pure history. Some of the Wikipedia locomotive rosters are the best general information on the net, the removal of said rosters just dumbs down Wikipedia. The Wikipedia locomotive rosters are not to the level of detail of a Railway & Locomotive Historical Society roster, nor do they need to be. Basic roster information should be As-built/Original Owners, the real question is how to note the originals or just leave that to all those specific interests and clear of Wikipedia. There really needs to be a discussion on what should or should not be noted. --
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)--
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)--
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)--
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Honestly, and I say this as a lifelong rail fan, I think Graywalls is right: these lists are inappropriately detailed for an encyclopedia. Actual and exact road numbers are too much. Detailed disposition if every singe unit built is too much. It's a rail fan's spotters guide, and Wikipedia is not a trainspotters guidebook. The fact that it's sourced to marginal sources that draw questions of reliability only makes it more obvious that it's too obscure, Tom specialized, and too much out of scope for an encyclopedia. oknazevad ( talk) 23:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, The are many Model railroad clubs and Historical Society's in West Virginia. None are listed on your page. Here are some.
Mon Valley Railroad Historical Society, Inc. Morgantown, WV www.MVRRC.org and www.facebook.com/MVRRHS
Clarksburg Area Model Railroad Club Clacksburg, WV https://www.facebook.com/camr.club/
Mid Ohio Valley Model Railroad Club, Parkersburg, WV http://www.movmrc.org/
Kanawha Valley Railroad Association, Charleston, WV http://www.kvrailroad.org/
Sincerely, Richard Henderson Membership Director Mon Valley Railroad Historical Society, Inc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6035:1A:DD57:5BBC:4C7E:6F4E ( talk) 17:36, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
This issue is related currently to Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian railways, but may or may not be expanded for this project (globally) also. I have already asked on WikiProject Indian railways at here, but asking here for more inputs.
I have a doubt regarding inclusion of individual articles on normal passenger trains (which are ~ 15,000 in India). For example articles like Indore–Ajmer_Link_Express, Rajendra_Nagar_Patna–Indore_Express. These both examples are completely normal trains, which clear fails WP:GNG and their is no other subject specific guidelines for trains (that I am able to find). Most of these articles (that I have gone through) are unsourced or poorly sourced stubs. I believe that these articles should not be included on English Wikipedia, this may also be a case of WP:NOTTRAVEL. Can someone provide their views about it and what is the general consensus regarding it ? Thanks. Zoodino ( talk) 11:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
I've started an article on the collision and derailment of a high-speed passenger train at Soure, Portugal. Portuguese speaking members of this WP may be able to expand it from the GPIAAF source used in the article. Mjroots ( talk) 18:16, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
So, I have a long-term interest in the Montour. The article is kinda bad, but using Google Books and montourrr.com (which was mostly made by a former employee) it could become massive, particulary the wesbsite's contents. Would anyone else be interested in improving the article? -- BlueCrab RedCrab 21:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Do each variant of train cars really need its own article? They already have a tendency to accumulate information clutter that's poorly sourced and are of interest to railfans only and I think it would be better if we can merge them. https://www.google.com/books/edition/American_Diesel_Locomotives/bVEhihy7tKEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=MP15AC+DC+reliability&pg=PA142&printsec=frontcover This soruce talks about it only as a variantion. Graywalls ( talk) 01:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. As there are lots of page moves involved, this will take some time. I will ping the involved editors once I am done, to re-check if some of the titles are left out from the moving. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 03:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
– See full list of stations (around 200) and rationale below © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 23:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
As a background, this pandemic I've been editing and updating Mexico City's stations. I've been wanting to do it for a while and now I had the chance. I thought leaving the titles to whenever I finish, but I think it would be better to discuss them now, all because of Buenavista station. We have Buenavista station (railway station), Metro Buenavista (metro station), Mexibús Buenavista (a bus station in the State of Mexico), Metrobús Buenavista (Line 1), Metrobús Buenavista (Line 3) and Metrobús Buenavista (Line 4) (interchange bus stations in Mexico City), and eventually Cablebús Buenavista and Buenavista train station (Santa María Petapa) ( Mayan Train) will exist in southern Mexico City and Oaxaca, respectively (all but the first 2 are redirects though). So I was thinking that as Wikipedia:Naming conventions (stations) is defunct, and there are no conventions for Mexican stations like those of Oceania, Poland, UK and the US, to standardize all of them. In all cases, I apply the standardization of "X station" without the sometimes unnecessary "(System Disambiguation)", except when it is required.
I add supplementary information respecting the following systems. © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
As I said I've been working on these. I have found English sources calling them "X metro station", [5] [6] [7] [8] or simply "X station" [9] [10]. However, as station names in Mexico tend to be repeated (like with Buenavista, we have Metrobús La Raza (Line 1), Metrobús La Raza (Line 3) La Raza ( Mexico City trolleybus system); Metro Juárez and Juárez railway station, etc.); I propose adding "metro" to distinguish them from other types of stations. Also note these articles have been named "Metro X" since 2004/5, because that's the colloquial name we use here in Mexico for all the metro stations ( [11] [12] [13] [14], etc.) However, I think it can create confusion for English speakers like it was said in this page move diff, or with the word "Metropolitan" like in Metro Manila in the Philippines, or Metro Sevilla and Seville Metro, or the fact that Bellas Artes metro station and Metro Bellas Artes are co-existing. Also, I must say that I am opposed to "X (Mexico City Metro)" because I find that disambiguation unhelpful in cases like Ferrería/Arena Ciudad de México (Mexico City Metro) (Ferrería is an avenue and Arena Ciudad de México is located like 500 meters away from Ferrería) or Viveros / Derechos Humanos (Mexico City Metro) ( Viveros de Coyoacán is a city park and the National Human Rights Commission (Mexico) headquarters are two different things that cannot be confused). These titles are as helpful as the now deprecated " Broadway–Lafayette Street/Bleecker Street (New York City Subway)" or " Chambers Street–World Trade Center/Park Place/Cortlandt Street (New York City Subway)". © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Articles |
---|
– See below © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC) |
As mentioned above Buenavista station is too ambiguous. For mere consistency, I propose moving all of them to "railway" as in Category:Railway stations in Manchester rather than by system. © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
The "Monterrey Metro" title is (I assume) based on the " Mexico City Metro" name. However, the official [15] and common name is "Metrorrey" [16]. For the stations, I suggest "X metro station" instead of "X (Metrorrey)" for mere consistency with Mexico City's stations. I suggest "X metro station (Metrorrey)" for ambiguous stations, but "X metro station (Monterrey)" can work as well. © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
The following stations are "affected" one way or another by these new titles:
-- © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
By way of background, articles used to be named using preemptive parenthetical disambiguation, for example Foo (System). That's what you're encountering, and we need to get away from it. As I understand it this is the proposed convention:
That's a reasonable standard and what's done for most European articles, and I think it makes sense. Mackensen (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
I have nominated Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-- ZKang123 ( talk) 08:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
I think this list ( List of highest railways) deserves more attention than it currently has. It has currently a very low standard for inclusion (2000 m) and probably neglects hundreds of railway lines (amusingly the Mexico City Metro discussed above is the perfect example). Unfortunately, findind reliable sources of information on the topic is hard and finding the railways on the maps (like I did for List of highest railways in Europe) is just not possible on a world scale. Any kind of help or suggestion will be "highly" appreciated, please see Talk:List of highest railways#Height cut-off and value of this list. Zach (Talk) 10:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 September 8 § File:Hick Hargreaves and Co. Ltd. advert.jpg. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 03:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Could someone help clean up Faenza railway station#Train services and Molfetta railway station#Train services? thank you! Frietjes ( talk) 17:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
The suburban rail traffic from Moscow is organized in suburban lines, or directions, which, as fas as I know, do not have established English names. There are 11 of them, and I already created 10 and will later on create one more. For whatever reason, this year there were a lot of activity moving these articles. For example, if we take Yaroslavsky suburban railway line, I created it in 2016 as Yaroslavsky suburban direction of Moscow Railway, and nobody cared about the name, before on 11 June it was moved to Yaroslavsky suburban railway line, Moscow. I went to Leutha's talk page to discuss, and they convinced me that the move was good. As a non-native English speaker, I obviously defer to the speakers' opinions in language matters. Fine. I moved the other 10, fixed the internal links, and thought we are done. Then somebody filed a RM, which I can not even find now because there are too many talk pages, and the RM was only about one article, not about all of them. I objected, nobody else cared, and RM was closed as no consensus. Then on 1 August AJP426 moved it to Yaroslavsky suburban railway line saying that disambiguation is not needed. I decided not to object and fixed some internal links. Now, today Александр Мотин moved it to Yaroslavskaya line citing this news site as a reason. I reverted this, since the move was undiscussed, and generally we should not move articles just because one news instance in English. However, I need to ask this project to help choosing the stable name, after which everything else would have to go through requested moves. I feel that three moves and one RM in a year for such articles is too much. I will be happy to provide additional info if needed. I do not care so much about the name, and will deter to the opinions of knowledgeable native speakers, but I do care about stability. Thanks in advance.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 10:30, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Why he doesn't provide any RS which prove current line names and when I request a citation he says it is disruptive? What does all that mean? Is the official site of Moscow Mayor is not reliable to find the correct title of the article? -- Александр Мотин ( talk) 15:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources
I admit it. I'm a geek. I read manhole covers. The other day, I was in Kingsbridge Heights and saw two manhole covers that said "N Y C & H H R R". I'm not actually sure they said that; those were the letters, but they were in a circle around the rim so it's hard to tell where you were supposed to start. I'm kicking myself now for not taking a photo. I'm guessing "New York City and something something Rail Road". The H's could be some combination of Harlem, Hudson, Heights, Highbridge, etc. This was a few blocks west of where I think the old New York and Putnam Railroad tracks ran. Anybody know anything about this? -- RoySmith (talk) 14:32, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Someone created this article on top of a radio station article (a history split was required), but it's in bad shape and I do not have the knowledge of trains or Indonesia to improve it. I was able to find an image. Could someone more familiar with the topic area assist? Raymie ( t • c) 17:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
A brand new Alstom Coradia train has been involved in an accident whilst being delivered from Poland to the Netherlands. Can we find a useable source for this please so that it can be added to the article? Mjroots ( talk) 20:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi.
On October 15 2020 the new Nuremberg U-Bahn station Großreuth (Nuremberg U-Bahn) opened. Unfortunately the template still displays the terminus of the line as being "Gustav Adolf Straße" which produces the odd result of "Kleinreuth" somehow being the next stop from Großreuth direction "Gustav Adolf Straße" while Gustav Adolf Straße is the next stop direction Nordwestring. Can one of you fine people please update the template accordingly? Hobbitschuster ( talk) 20:18, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Following the recent move from Howrah railway station to Howrah Junction railway station (which I have requested reversion prior to discussion concensus) people may care to examine the case for the appropriate primary name of this article. There is some prior discussion on the talk page of the article, and there has also been some editing to make "junction" more prevalent. People are welcome to have a look, and to consider the definition of "junction"!. This might get heated, but given the different views a discussion may be useful. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark ( talk) 23:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
There is long standing (since 2007!) question about the location of the Grand Junction Railway's 1837 Bescot Bridge (later Wood Green) station, and its relation to the similarly named Bescot (now Bescot Stadium), for which we have no opening date, on the talk page of the latter. Does anyone have sources that will resolve it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
References
I'm trying to find a reliable source for the claim at Third rail#Safety and Railway speed record#All passenger trains that "The world speed record for a third rail train is 174 (108 mph) km/h attained on 11 April 1988 by a British Class 442 EMU.". I have found it [on page 104 of this pdf http://static.scbist.com/scb/uploaded/331_frey_s_railway_electrification_systems_engineering.pdf], however that document dates from 2012 and the whole paragraph is an exact match for one that has been in our third rail article since 2009 so using that would be citogensis. The claim in our article originated with this anonymous edit in November 2007]. The SquareWheels website page at [25], updated in September 2007 but present in 2006 also [26] claims 109 mph set by a 442 on 11 April 1988. However I don't know how reliable it is. The 1 mph difference in speed given (our 108 mph is calculated from a km/h figure and so likely just a rounding difference) suggests it shares a common origin with our article rather than being a direct source.
Complicated things is this 2016 forum post, quoting an earlier (but unavailable to me) newsgroup posting, [27] claiming an unofficial(?) record of 117 mph at Staplehurst "in the build up to the Eurostar build." so probably circa 1990. I've not been able to find the provenance of that or any reliable confirmation of it. Thryduulf ( talk) 00:18, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
I have noticed a few people removing station layouts per this 2019 RFC. While I'm not opposed to the removal of layouts for minor stations, I looked at the RFC and the closing statement contradicts the option favored by most RFC participants.
The editor who closed the RFC,
Mgasparin, wrote in the closing statement that: So, it appears that the general consensus here is that station maps should be removed in their entirety per NOTGUIDE.
This is not supported by even a head-count of !votes. There are only four !votes which agreed with complete removal, three of which were the first !votes to be cast in the RFC. Eight other !votes clearly expressed a preference for "No general policy". By head count alone, the consensus should have been "No general policy". And, reading the comments, those who !voted for "No general policy" advocated for the removal of many station layouts, except if they were unusual enough or covered by reliable sources. I'm bringing this up only because I'm seeing people citing this RFC as a reason for removal.
epicgenius (
talk) 17:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I want to start by clarifying a few things from above. I don't think there's any disagreement that station layouts, as described in prose, should be included with an appropriate level of detail. What does need discussing is when tables or templates depicting these layouts are appropriate. First, I think when we talk about layouts and diagrams we're talking about two different things:
Beyond that, some station articles have lists of station exits. There's no uniform style for these but see Bakchon station#Exits for an example. Anything else? Mackensen (talk) 00:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
I personally despise the {{ routemap}} based diagrams; they almost invariably do an end-run around policy by including a level of detail and a deficit of references that would have an equivalent paragraph of prose deleted in a heartbeat for running afoul of WP:FANCRUFT, WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NOTDIR.- With all due respect, I do not think preference for which type of map to use should be relevant for such an RFC. This RFC needs to be relatively narrow in scope, and I agree that information should be backed up by reliable sources per WP:V/ WP:OR. However, it really shouldn't go beyond the issue of whether such layouts are appropriate. epicgenius ( talk) 03:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks everyone for your feedback so far. It's my impression that there are really three questions (platforms, tracks, and exits) and that everyone's opinion varies between the three. I've read over WP:RFC and I think the best course of action would be separate RfCs, either running together or one after the other. Each would propose a single question, such as "Should HTML table-based platform layouts be included in station articles?" Mackensen (talk) 13:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Should articles about railway stations include HTML table-formatted platform layouts (example: Bound Brook station#Station layout)? Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Should articles about railway stations include route diagram template-based track layouts (example: Dempster–Skokie station)? Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Should articles about railway stations include tables or lists of entrances and exits (example: Wudaokou station)? Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
It has been proposed that the De Akkers metro station crash article is merged into the De Akkers metro station article. Discussion at talk:De Akkers metro station. Please feel free to contribute. Mjroots ( talk) 06:24, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Please can someone take a look at recent edits by 88.97.111.167 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS)? I don't understand their purpose and they may not be helpful. Thanks, Certes ( talk) 16:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've boldly updated your project's peer review page ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Peer review) by updating the instructions and archiving old reviews.
The new instructions use Wikipedia's general peer review process ( WP:PR) to list peer reviews. Your project's reviews are still able to be listed on your local page too.
The benefits of this change is that review requests will get seen by a wider audience and are likely to be attended to in a more timely way (many WikiProject peer reviews remain unanswered after years). The Wikipedia peer review process is also more maintained than most WikiProjects, and this may help save time for your active members.
I've done this boldly as it seems your peer review page is pretty inactive and I am working through around 90 such similar peer review pages. Please feel free to discuss below - please ping me ({{ u|Tom (LT)}}) in your response.
Cheers and hope you are well, Tom (LT) ( talk) 23:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Rail transport modelling task force is inactive, so pinging this larger group for assistance with a query I posted there. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I've just gone through and changed the One-person operation article (formerly at One-man operation) to use gender neutral language where possible and appropriate (I think I got it all, but double checking would be good). However the article as a whole is in a dreadful state with very poor writing, out-of-date sections (some five years out of date), and woefully under-referenced. If anyone is looking for an article to improve then this one would certainly benefit. Thryduulf ( talk) 00:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
These search results show about 14 articles with redlinks to S-line templates. I figured that someone here might be able to fix them more adeptly than I would. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 22:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
I recently finished writing about all the steam locomotives that ever operated under Grand Canyon Railway ownership. Now, I'm trying to decide whether write about engine No. 539 or not. Also, if any one of you guys ever find any additional information about the GCRY roster, plus more specifications, adding them to Grand Canyon Railway 29, Grand Canyon Railway 4960, Lake Superior and Ishpeming 18, or even make a new article about any of the railway's other past locomotives, or at least let me know what needs to be done, that would be highly appreciated, either way. Thank you! User:Someone who likes train writing 08:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
An IP editor has made several intricate edits to California station route boxes. Please can an expert confirm or revert them? Some such as Bayshore station (Caltrain) are not exactly right (Former services now links to a dab) but I'm unsure whether to tweak or to revert wholesale. It's probably a regular, as their first contributions were plausible changes to module documentation. Certes ( talk) 23:00, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
I've found a couple of Montour Railroad photos, they are all either out of copyright, or they were published without a notice. I have the links for them. Montour 26 (a Mikado steam engine) Another Montour Mikado, #25. Another photo of 25. I'm wondering if anyone could upload them to commons as they are PD. Thanks, -- 108.17.71.32 ( talk) 16:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Months ago, I re-directed that article into ALCO PA, because that single train car fails to establish WP:SIGCOV to merit its own article. IP editor complained that it was undiscussed. I re-directed it rather than AfDing it per WP:ATD-R. In this kind of case, which form of discussion be opened? If I opened an AfD, I can predict the result would be merge and redirect. Graywalls ( talk) 01:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
It seems Graywalls is on a crusade against fancruft but some of it is valid information such as the utah rails refrences he removes than puts citation needed and deletes. Well some of it is trivia and should be deleted so maybe we can help graywalls understand the locomotives better and not delete stuff execpt for stuff that needs deleted -- 108.17.71.32 ( talk) 00:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Are there specific examples we can look at? Graywalls and I tend to agree that there's too much fancruft, though we draw the line differently and have differed on source reliability. An abstract discussion won't get us very far. Mackensen (talk) 02:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Once again it's being proposed that they be subst'd into their parent articles. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 December 24#Template:Munich–Holzkirchen railway. AlgaeGraphix ( talk) 19:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
As I've been creating railway station articles, I've been using this dataset published by MLIT, a Japanese government agency. It gives the number of passengers getting on and off at most (if no all) stations in Japan. However, I've come across another dataset published by JR East (one of Japan's many rail operators), which gives the number of passengers that are boarding only. Take Shin-Urayasu Station for example: the JR East data for 2016 gives 55,729 passengers, which is cited in the article. Meanwhile, the MLIT dataset gives 109,912 passengers for the same year, which is roughly double of JR East's. I've found that there's a mix; some articles are reporting both boarding and alighting, while others are reporting just boarding. I've even found articles that have taken MLIT's numbers and just divided it by two. So, in the infobox of the articles, which number do we report?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganbaruby ( talk • contribs) 14:30, 15 July 2020 (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 created the Ospedaletto Lodigiano derailment article. Not sure that I've got the correct Frecciarossa train as there are apparently two versions. Assistance appreciated. Mjroots ( talk) 13:40, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
I have made a proposal regarding spliting the Kaiping Tramway and Imperial Railways of North China at Talk:Kaiping Tramway and Imperial Railways of North China#suggestion for split. I'd like to hear your views on it. Johnson.Xia ( talk) 02:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 February 20#Template:Infobox German railway vehicle, it is proposed to merge Template:Infobox German railway vehicle with Template:Infobox locomotive.
~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I created Template:East Midlands Railway colour as it was a wanted template with 39 inbound links.
I cribbed from the color template of the defunct operator it replaced, Template:East Midlands Trains colour, and from the page East Midlands Railway. Please make any necessary corrections. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 21:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I created Template:Stockholmståg color using the color at Public transport in Stockholm#Suburban rail
There is a different color used at Stockholm commuter rail#Lines.
Can someone take a look at it and correct it if needed? davidwr/( talk)/( contribs) 20:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Are there guidelines for how to name articles on French railway stations? There seem to be several different methods: sometimes just the name ( Châtelet–Les Halles), sometimes with a 'Gare/Gare de' prefix ( Gare Saint-Lazare, Gare de Groslay), sometimes with a 'station' suffix ( Montreuil station), sometimes with a 'railway station' suffix ( Les Coquetiers railway station), sometimes with a bracketed suffix ( Marly-le-Roi (SNCF)). An endash - inconsistently spaced or unspaced - is often used to indicate a station which serves two locations ( Gare de Mitry–Claye or Gare de Massy – Palaiseau), but this doesn't always match the French wikipedia ( fr:Gare de Mitry - Claye). We sometimes - probably incorrectly - use endashes for stations within a city (e.g. Gare de Versailles–Chantiers), but fr has Gare de Versailles-Chantiers (and for these the Transilien and SNCF, on their websites, just use a space ( Versailles Chantiers (Transilien), Versailles Chantiers (SNCF)}. But that's not universal either - e.g. we have Gare de Vanves–Malakoff but Transilien has Vanves - Malakoff, which matches fr:Gare de Vanves - Malakoff. There's a 3-way inconsistency between Issy–Val de Seine station and fr:Gare d'Issy-Val de Seine and Issy Val de Seine (Transilien)]. The history of article Gare de Versailles–Chantiers shows the result of this apparent lack of an agreed standard - it's been renamed five times since 2014. Colonies Chris ( talk) 20:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
{od}There is a further discussion of this issue, and the standard involved, here. Moonraker12 ( talk) 22:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 March 18#Southern Pacific 9010, although this wasn't tagged on the article so you may not have seen it. Andy Dingley ( talk) 19:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm currently trying to fix formatting issues on Taiwan train stations and I can't help to notice the naming schemes for the articles. For example, Keelung railway station is named with "railway station". I have looked at the proposed guidelines here and the talk about the proposed guidelines here. I also noticed that there hasn't been talk since May 2019. Can I have some guidance on naming conventions on train stations?
Just some observations on this topic: Tamachi Station (Tokyo) is named with a capitalized Station while Gangnam station isn't. My understanding of this topic is that in Japanese, train station names are usually followed by 駅, so that's why there is capitalization in the English name since it's the proper name as per WP:NCCAPS with it saying "Tamachi Station" in English on the main sign. This contrasts with Gangnam station because there isn't any proper noun usage when referring to the station itself (the signs don't say Gangnam Station just Gangnam). TRA's own English signage on each station is followed by a capitalized "Station" with no railway attached at each main entrance (other than the Main station for the Taipei and Kaohsiung) while the Chinese signage is suffixed with 車站. By following the Japanese train station article naming convention shouldn't Keelung railway station be named "Keelung Station"? Harrison Kuo ( talk) 09:10, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm seeing an error with the the bottom with platform/track info at Fullerton Transportation Center and can't figure out how to fix it. Anyone with more experience with the template have an idea? — GFOLEY FOUR!— 02:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm hoping someone will fix some recent errors.
Johnuniq ( talk) 06:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Recently I upload and take some photos of Tokyo Station in recent years and replace with the old one. However one of the users disagree with it and undo my edit. The current photos angles & perspective are not good and outdated (even without the outdoor plaza). But in Google search, most of the photos wide angle lens perspective to showing the surrounding environment of the Tokyo Station with the plaza view. -- Wpcpey ( talk) 02:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
My edit
The Current edit
I invite project members to help expand Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on public transport.
Stay safe, --- Another Believer ( Talk) 20:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
WP Trains technically-minded folks: A very small group of editors has been working to make errors related to short reference templates, like {{
sfn}}
, more visible. We are working to clean up a new error-tracking category,
Category:Harv and Sfn template errors, which tracks instances of short-reference templates that do not link to full citations. There are something close to 400 train-related articles in the error category right now. Almost all of them are there because they contain an {{
sfn}}
template that refers to, but does not link to, a full citation. The solution varies based on whether the full citation is present, and whether the short and full citations are formatted such that they match each other. In some cases, the full citation is missing entirely because the short citation was copied from another article, but the full citation was not copied.
I am posting this message here because the error messages about short reference errors are not yet visible to all editors, and I thought you might want to tidy up the errors before they became visible, probably in a month or two. There are instructions on the category page about how to make the error messages visible to you.
There is a detailed explanation of the different types of errors (including a small number of false positives) and how to fix them at the category page linked above. For a list of articles containing the most common train-related infoboxes, try this petscan search. There is more discussion at Module talk:Footnotes, where you are welcome to post if you have any questions. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 05:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
|year=
value of 1985 and |orig-year=
of 1922; the CITEREF generator uses 1985, but editors apparently put 1922 in the sfn template by mistake.–
Jonesey95 (
talk) 17:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Butt(:?|\(1995\))\|p
should match both faulty usages.
Mackensen
(talk) 21:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)There are a bunch of broken references to Jowett 2000, typically in articles that have a Jowett 1989 source. It is unclear to me whether those references are intended to point to Jowett 1989, or to {{ Jowett-Nationalised}}, which was published in 2000. Some investigation into the articles' history may be needed. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 21:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
I am absolutely an interloper here, but I have been working on template- and reference-related errors in train articles recently. In my travels, I have noticed a number of template redirects of the form {{ 0-902888-21-8}}. These are typically ISBNs, and the redirects link to book-based source templates for train topics, in this case {{ Whitehurst GW Engines from 1940}}.
Some of these redirects are used in articles, where they contrast negatively with the more helpful source templates that are typically based on the author's name and a brief hint at the book's topic. I find the ISBN-only templates opaque and unhelpful to readers and editors alike, but the experience of WP:Trains editors may be different. I nominated three of them for deletion here, and you are welcome to comment; I decided to come here to discuss before nominating more of them.
Would editors here be open to a mass nomination of these redirects for deletion? Existing instances of the ISBN-only templates in articles would be replaced by their editor-friendly targets. (Disclaimer: I don't yet know how to find all of these redirects, but I could work on that if editors here are open to replacement and deletion of them.) – Jonesey95 ( talk) 22:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Was just talking to someone who knows I edit Wikipedia, and they told me they'd come across two very similar lists of Glasgow subway stations: List of Glasgow Subway stations from 2017, and List of stations on the Glasgow Subway from 2019. Waaaay outside my area of competence, but hopefully someone here will be able to do whatever needs doing with them. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 12:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
@ Marcnut1996:@ Kerry Raymond:I was recently cleaning up another issue in some Sydney railway stations including Gordon railway station, Sydney when I noticed that some stations had an error message concerning missing titles from a reference which I corrected by adding the title without checking how effective the link [1] in reference 1 was Bureau of Transport Statistics. "Train Station Entries and Exits Data". Then in Marrickville railway station which I have not changed yet, I found a different URL in the reference [2] I then tried to decide which one would be the more effective and found that both lead to a page which does not provide the information but then links to various pages some of which are locked unless signed in and I think that applies to the page which contains the relevant information. I am looking for help as to what the URL should be in these references. Fleet Lists ( talk) 03:29, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
The succession box at the bottom of Manmad Junction railway station links to dab Summit railway station. {{ s-line}} uses {{ Indian Railways stations}}, which detects that we have no page Summit (Indian Railways station) (because the station has no article) and hopes that the page at the unqualified title is relevant. Would anyone like to suggest a fix? I suspect that there are other cases, probably leading to primary topic stations outside India rather than dabs, though it's hard to check until PetScan recovers. Certes ( talk) 17:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
|state1/2=
to {{
Indian Railways stations}}. That seems like the least bad solution. Case closed.
Certes (
talk) 12:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)I've noticed that the service patterns of many US station articles are being replaced by details of their current, temporarily reduced service. Is this desirable, or should I be politely reverting? Certes ( talk) 19:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
There are no trains running to your destination at the time you selected. Please try searching for a different time or day.or
Sorry, there are no departures from Heyford in the next 2 hours. To find the next available service travelling from this station - Plan journeyboth of which imply that there will be trains, but later on; or perhaps you might be served this page, which is better in some ways, worse in others. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 15:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This article recently had a new map added: {{ City of Memphis (train)}} created by Wof2500. The article has a hidden error: 'Lua error: expandTemplate: template "Green color" does not exist' and previewing an edit of the template shows Template:Green color (a red link). I think "Green" should be replaced in the template wikitext with a code appropriate for this train, and I'm hoping knows how to do that. Johnuniq ( talk) 03:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Naming conventions for stations in the Philippines are being discussed at Talk:Tutuban station (PNR)#Requested move 12 May 2020. Certes ( talk) 22:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Over the past couple of years, the SNCF has been replacing traditional TGV train services with new TGV inOui services. There's a couple reasons behind this, but you can read more here. As most of the current english language stations in france display the traditional tgv services, i've taken it upon my self to create appropriate templates for the commencements of TGV inOui stations. this is relation to the s-rail-start and s-lines templates that map out a trains route. A good example of one which I've already updated to the new service is Gare d'Auray, Auray station in english. Epluribusunumyall ( talk) 07:40, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
An article which may be of interest to members of this project— LMS Patriot Class 5551 The Unknown Warrior—has been proposed for merging with LMS-Patriot Project. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 16:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi folks, I'm working up a proposed naming convention ( User:Mackensen/Naming conventions (railway stations in Europe)) to unify the disparate informal conventions that currently exist for naming railway station articles in Europe. This is a clone of the UK and Polish conventions, with some language-specific tweaks. As can be seen from User talk:Mackensen/Naming conventions (railway stations in Europe)#Background there's a great deal of uniformity already, especially with main line stations. Feedback appreciated. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 12:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Further to WT:WikiProject Trains/Archive: 2020#Naming of French stations, Captain scarlet has undone the moves, with a rationale here. Certes ( talk) 10:10, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
A discussion affecting Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK stations) has opened up at the associated talk page Shadowssettle( talk) 12:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I've just disambiguated Miranda station, and cleaned up all the links I found to it. However, there are a couple I don't know how to fix, because they use templates I don't understand the mechanics of. See here for the list: Special:WhatLinksHere/Miranda_station
Can anyone who knows more about railway templates help fix this? -- The Anome ( talk) 20:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
I have started Norra Hälsinglands Järnväg, importing and translating the Swedish content, primarily to address the ambiguity of the TLA "NHJ". I'm not a trains person, so anyone who knows how to format such an article, please help. Thanks! BD2412 T 19:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
This article was nominated for GA and has been reviewed (see comments here), but there has been no response by the nominator since it was put on hold on 13 June 2020. The article will fail on 21 June unless the issues I raised are fully addressed. Can anyone help here? if I know someone is willing to pick this up, I'm willing to extend by a week. Amitchell125 ( talk) 08:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
A proposal for renaming is at Talk:Duri–Tangerang railway#Requested move 26 June 2020. Comments are invited. (Pinging Amakuru, Cuchullain, Dicklyon, Mackensen, SMcCandlish who who have participated in similar discussions before.). AlgaeGraphix ( talk) 17:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I just created an article entitled Abidjan-Ouagadougou Railway prompted by the Wikipedia:List of missing Africa topics, only to find when I'd finished that a much fuller version already exists here. The title of the existing article is in French, which is inappropriate in an English Wikipedia and can easily lead to this kind of reduplication. Also it is misleading because the word "régie" refers to state control, whereas the railway has been in the private sector for the past 25 years. I therefore recommend that the two articles be merged and the English title retained. Gnangbade ( talk) 09:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Are these correct?
line | a section of track between A and B, or a service between two or more destinations |
---|---|
Railway or Railroad (Capitalized) | a company involved in rail transport |
railway or railroad (lower case) | a section of track, or a service |
route | a service that follows part of, or one, or more lines or railways |
network or system | a group of routes or services |
AlgaeGraphix ( talk) 23:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
There's an RM discussion over some future Bangkok rapid transit lines at Talk:MRTA Yellow Line#Requested move 1 July 2020. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 16:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
The Donets Railway was at WP:PNTCU until yesterday, when I did some translation cleanup of the running text. This railway is in a part of the Ukraine whose sovereignty is disputed between Russia and Ukraine. I've listed a page move at Talk:Donets_Railway#Requested_move_5_July_2020 to which, I can imagine, editors here may wish to contribute. I've no particular stake either way, there are good arguments on both sides for retaining the existing name or moving it, since the more modern spelling seems to lean towards "Donetsk" but the historical spelling to "Donets".
To keep the discussion in one place, I suggest editors' comments are placed over at RM (the link above), rather than here: I'll cross-ref that to back to here once I've saved this post. 185.62.130.241 ( talk) 07:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I've come across a bunch of unsourced edits to locomotive articles from new accounts with locomotive-based usernames, ranging from extraordinary claims [3] to minor tweaks of infobox data [4]. So far I've found and reverted the following accounts:
PRR 2846 ( talk · contribs) PRR H10s 7688 ( talk · contribs) PRR L1S 2-10-0 ( talk · contribs) PRR E6s 460 ( talk · contribs) PRR GG1 4800 ( talk · contribs) PRR 4483 ( talk · contribs) PRR L1S 2-10-0 ( talk · contribs) Erie RR L1 2600 ( talk · contribs) PRR E2A 7002 ( talk · contribs)
I'm not sure if there's a systematic way to track these down aside from searching for usernames starting with "PRR". Keep your eyes open for random changes from redlinked locos. – dlthewave ☎ 04:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Requesting feedback on a change to Template:Infobox locomotive to aid with a merge of Template:Infobox German railway vehicle. Change will modify the "cylindersize" parameter. I don't really know much about trains, so input is appreciated. Discussion at Template talk:Infobox locomotive.
Also, as a sidenote, help is needed mapping parameters from the German infobox to the English infobox. Since I don't know much about trains, I'm confused on a couple. Discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Holding_cell#Transport, help with the remaining params appreciated. ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 14:58, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
According to the ORR website, there was an error with the source data which has affected a number of stations, mainly in Wales and the north of England and resulted in an overestimation of usage. Both the 2018/19 and 2017/18 data has been affected so someone (or multiple people) will need to go over all 2000+ stations to check if data is correct. It is hard to tell how many stations were affected or which stations they were so it may be best to unfortunately go over the whole lot. see here. I have started now going through A. Difficultly north ( talk) Simply south alt. 16:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Many train car articles often have a list under that category; however most of them are sourced to self published fancruft sites and I am questioning if exhibiting contents that could only be sourced from fancruft sites represent WP:DUE coverage of contents. Graywalls ( talk) 16:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Alright, let's split this into two
1.) Whether reliable sources exist or not. If we're talking aircraft, the FAA tail number registry is likely reliable. A WP:SPS fancruft site whose list is made up of his original research from the FAA database, as well as other sources, I would say it isn't, because, it is not reliably published, unless the author satisfies the definition of expert as used in our SPS guidelines. I'm just using aircraft example as I happen to be aware of the reliable registry, but perhaps such thing exists for train cars too.
2.) Order sheet records. Is it within due weight to have a huge data table of order sheet records of which customer bought what vehicles/train cars along with their serial #? I don't think that sort of data table is within the scope of an encyclopedia. Looking in the table for the EMD SW7 I see "Weyerhaueser Timber owns a quantity of 2 train cars, serial numbers 300 and 301, based on railfan research of factory order records and the railfanning website. Boeing_747-400#747-400F for example does not have a list of such. The FAA would have a reliable data of ownership of aircraft and tail number, however, I'd say details like "Delta Airlines, tail #xxxx, xxxx, xxxx and xxxx, quantity 5" "United qty 5, tail numbers xxxx to xxxx" and so forth would be inappropriate by WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Why should we have the most mundane of details in the article? But such things under the heading "original owners" seems to be very common in railroad vehicle articles for some reason.
Graywalls ( talk) 15:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Absolutely ridiculous to remove roster data from a locomotive article. Graywalls you're continuing this attack on U S history and U S historians. Graywalls you don't have credibility as an American historian and cannot discern real from unreal work. You're work is not PC: Prototypically correct, therefore should not be recognized as an editor of U S prototype railroading. It is common practice in most historical works to use rosters. It would take light years of time to compile all the roster information from historical works, therefore which compiled roster data is best to work from? All the roster data for the SW7 article is in the EMD product data. That primary source roster data is compiled on Don Strack's Utah Rails by locomotive historian A J Kristopans. You have already attacked this as a self published fan site, which it is not. Don Strack has had published in excess of 40 articles and books on locomotive history, his website reflects many of those published articles. You personally attacked Mr. Strack's work, which is pure history. Some of the Wikipedia locomotive rosters are the best general information on the net, the removal of said rosters just dumbs down Wikipedia. The Wikipedia locomotive rosters are not to the level of detail of a Railway & Locomotive Historical Society roster, nor do they need to be. Basic roster information should be As-built/Original Owners, the real question is how to note the originals or just leave that to all those specific interests and clear of Wikipedia. There really needs to be a discussion on what should or should not be noted. --
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)--
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)--
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)--
SSW9389 (
talk) 10:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Honestly, and I say this as a lifelong rail fan, I think Graywalls is right: these lists are inappropriately detailed for an encyclopedia. Actual and exact road numbers are too much. Detailed disposition if every singe unit built is too much. It's a rail fan's spotters guide, and Wikipedia is not a trainspotters guidebook. The fact that it's sourced to marginal sources that draw questions of reliability only makes it more obvious that it's too obscure, Tom specialized, and too much out of scope for an encyclopedia. oknazevad ( talk) 23:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, The are many Model railroad clubs and Historical Society's in West Virginia. None are listed on your page. Here are some.
Mon Valley Railroad Historical Society, Inc. Morgantown, WV www.MVRRC.org and www.facebook.com/MVRRHS
Clarksburg Area Model Railroad Club Clacksburg, WV https://www.facebook.com/camr.club/
Mid Ohio Valley Model Railroad Club, Parkersburg, WV http://www.movmrc.org/
Kanawha Valley Railroad Association, Charleston, WV http://www.kvrailroad.org/
Sincerely, Richard Henderson Membership Director Mon Valley Railroad Historical Society, Inc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6035:1A:DD57:5BBC:4C7E:6F4E ( talk) 17:36, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
This issue is related currently to Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian railways, but may or may not be expanded for this project (globally) also. I have already asked on WikiProject Indian railways at here, but asking here for more inputs.
I have a doubt regarding inclusion of individual articles on normal passenger trains (which are ~ 15,000 in India). For example articles like Indore–Ajmer_Link_Express, Rajendra_Nagar_Patna–Indore_Express. These both examples are completely normal trains, which clear fails WP:GNG and their is no other subject specific guidelines for trains (that I am able to find). Most of these articles (that I have gone through) are unsourced or poorly sourced stubs. I believe that these articles should not be included on English Wikipedia, this may also be a case of WP:NOTTRAVEL. Can someone provide their views about it and what is the general consensus regarding it ? Thanks. Zoodino ( talk) 11:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
I've started an article on the collision and derailment of a high-speed passenger train at Soure, Portugal. Portuguese speaking members of this WP may be able to expand it from the GPIAAF source used in the article. Mjroots ( talk) 18:16, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
So, I have a long-term interest in the Montour. The article is kinda bad, but using Google Books and montourrr.com (which was mostly made by a former employee) it could become massive, particulary the wesbsite's contents. Would anyone else be interested in improving the article? -- BlueCrab RedCrab 21:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
Do each variant of train cars really need its own article? They already have a tendency to accumulate information clutter that's poorly sourced and are of interest to railfans only and I think it would be better if we can merge them. https://www.google.com/books/edition/American_Diesel_Locomotives/bVEhihy7tKEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=MP15AC+DC+reliability&pg=PA142&printsec=frontcover This soruce talks about it only as a variantion. Graywalls ( talk) 01:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. As there are lots of page moves involved, this will take some time. I will ping the involved editors once I am done, to re-check if some of the titles are left out from the moving. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 03:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
– See full list of stations (around 200) and rationale below © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 23:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
As a background, this pandemic I've been editing and updating Mexico City's stations. I've been wanting to do it for a while and now I had the chance. I thought leaving the titles to whenever I finish, but I think it would be better to discuss them now, all because of Buenavista station. We have Buenavista station (railway station), Metro Buenavista (metro station), Mexibús Buenavista (a bus station in the State of Mexico), Metrobús Buenavista (Line 1), Metrobús Buenavista (Line 3) and Metrobús Buenavista (Line 4) (interchange bus stations in Mexico City), and eventually Cablebús Buenavista and Buenavista train station (Santa María Petapa) ( Mayan Train) will exist in southern Mexico City and Oaxaca, respectively (all but the first 2 are redirects though). So I was thinking that as Wikipedia:Naming conventions (stations) is defunct, and there are no conventions for Mexican stations like those of Oceania, Poland, UK and the US, to standardize all of them. In all cases, I apply the standardization of "X station" without the sometimes unnecessary "(System Disambiguation)", except when it is required.
I add supplementary information respecting the following systems. © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
As I said I've been working on these. I have found English sources calling them "X metro station", [5] [6] [7] [8] or simply "X station" [9] [10]. However, as station names in Mexico tend to be repeated (like with Buenavista, we have Metrobús La Raza (Line 1), Metrobús La Raza (Line 3) La Raza ( Mexico City trolleybus system); Metro Juárez and Juárez railway station, etc.); I propose adding "metro" to distinguish them from other types of stations. Also note these articles have been named "Metro X" since 2004/5, because that's the colloquial name we use here in Mexico for all the metro stations ( [11] [12] [13] [14], etc.) However, I think it can create confusion for English speakers like it was said in this page move diff, or with the word "Metropolitan" like in Metro Manila in the Philippines, or Metro Sevilla and Seville Metro, or the fact that Bellas Artes metro station and Metro Bellas Artes are co-existing. Also, I must say that I am opposed to "X (Mexico City Metro)" because I find that disambiguation unhelpful in cases like Ferrería/Arena Ciudad de México (Mexico City Metro) (Ferrería is an avenue and Arena Ciudad de México is located like 500 meters away from Ferrería) or Viveros / Derechos Humanos (Mexico City Metro) ( Viveros de Coyoacán is a city park and the National Human Rights Commission (Mexico) headquarters are two different things that cannot be confused). These titles are as helpful as the now deprecated " Broadway–Lafayette Street/Bleecker Street (New York City Subway)" or " Chambers Street–World Trade Center/Park Place/Cortlandt Street (New York City Subway)". © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Articles |
---|
– See below © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC) |
As mentioned above Buenavista station is too ambiguous. For mere consistency, I propose moving all of them to "railway" as in Category:Railway stations in Manchester rather than by system. © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
The "Monterrey Metro" title is (I assume) based on the " Mexico City Metro" name. However, the official [15] and common name is "Metrorrey" [16]. For the stations, I suggest "X metro station" instead of "X (Metrorrey)" for mere consistency with Mexico City's stations. I suggest "X metro station (Metrorrey)" for ambiguous stations, but "X metro station (Monterrey)" can work as well. © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
The following stations are "affected" one way or another by these new titles:
-- © Tbhotch ™ ( en-3). 22:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
By way of background, articles used to be named using preemptive parenthetical disambiguation, for example Foo (System). That's what you're encountering, and we need to get away from it. As I understand it this is the proposed convention:
That's a reasonable standard and what's done for most European articles, and I think it makes sense. Mackensen (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
I have nominated Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-- ZKang123 ( talk) 08:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
I think this list ( List of highest railways) deserves more attention than it currently has. It has currently a very low standard for inclusion (2000 m) and probably neglects hundreds of railway lines (amusingly the Mexico City Metro discussed above is the perfect example). Unfortunately, findind reliable sources of information on the topic is hard and finding the railways on the maps (like I did for List of highest railways in Europe) is just not possible on a world scale. Any kind of help or suggestion will be "highly" appreciated, please see Talk:List of highest railways#Height cut-off and value of this list. Zach (Talk) 10:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 September 8 § File:Hick Hargreaves and Co. Ltd. advert.jpg. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 03:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Could someone help clean up Faenza railway station#Train services and Molfetta railway station#Train services? thank you! Frietjes ( talk) 17:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
The suburban rail traffic from Moscow is organized in suburban lines, or directions, which, as fas as I know, do not have established English names. There are 11 of them, and I already created 10 and will later on create one more. For whatever reason, this year there were a lot of activity moving these articles. For example, if we take Yaroslavsky suburban railway line, I created it in 2016 as Yaroslavsky suburban direction of Moscow Railway, and nobody cared about the name, before on 11 June it was moved to Yaroslavsky suburban railway line, Moscow. I went to Leutha's talk page to discuss, and they convinced me that the move was good. As a non-native English speaker, I obviously defer to the speakers' opinions in language matters. Fine. I moved the other 10, fixed the internal links, and thought we are done. Then somebody filed a RM, which I can not even find now because there are too many talk pages, and the RM was only about one article, not about all of them. I objected, nobody else cared, and RM was closed as no consensus. Then on 1 August AJP426 moved it to Yaroslavsky suburban railway line saying that disambiguation is not needed. I decided not to object and fixed some internal links. Now, today Александр Мотин moved it to Yaroslavskaya line citing this news site as a reason. I reverted this, since the move was undiscussed, and generally we should not move articles just because one news instance in English. However, I need to ask this project to help choosing the stable name, after which everything else would have to go through requested moves. I feel that three moves and one RM in a year for such articles is too much. I will be happy to provide additional info if needed. I do not care so much about the name, and will deter to the opinions of knowledgeable native speakers, but I do care about stability. Thanks in advance.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 10:30, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Why he doesn't provide any RS which prove current line names and when I request a citation he says it is disruptive? What does all that mean? Is the official site of Moscow Mayor is not reliable to find the correct title of the article? -- Александр Мотин ( talk) 15:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources
I admit it. I'm a geek. I read manhole covers. The other day, I was in Kingsbridge Heights and saw two manhole covers that said "N Y C & H H R R". I'm not actually sure they said that; those were the letters, but they were in a circle around the rim so it's hard to tell where you were supposed to start. I'm kicking myself now for not taking a photo. I'm guessing "New York City and something something Rail Road". The H's could be some combination of Harlem, Hudson, Heights, Highbridge, etc. This was a few blocks west of where I think the old New York and Putnam Railroad tracks ran. Anybody know anything about this? -- RoySmith (talk) 14:32, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Someone created this article on top of a radio station article (a history split was required), but it's in bad shape and I do not have the knowledge of trains or Indonesia to improve it. I was able to find an image. Could someone more familiar with the topic area assist? Raymie ( t • c) 17:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
A brand new Alstom Coradia train has been involved in an accident whilst being delivered from Poland to the Netherlands. Can we find a useable source for this please so that it can be added to the article? Mjroots ( talk) 20:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi.
On October 15 2020 the new Nuremberg U-Bahn station Großreuth (Nuremberg U-Bahn) opened. Unfortunately the template still displays the terminus of the line as being "Gustav Adolf Straße" which produces the odd result of "Kleinreuth" somehow being the next stop from Großreuth direction "Gustav Adolf Straße" while Gustav Adolf Straße is the next stop direction Nordwestring. Can one of you fine people please update the template accordingly? Hobbitschuster ( talk) 20:18, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Following the recent move from Howrah railway station to Howrah Junction railway station (which I have requested reversion prior to discussion concensus) people may care to examine the case for the appropriate primary name of this article. There is some prior discussion on the talk page of the article, and there has also been some editing to make "junction" more prevalent. People are welcome to have a look, and to consider the definition of "junction"!. This might get heated, but given the different views a discussion may be useful. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark ( talk) 23:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
There is long standing (since 2007!) question about the location of the Grand Junction Railway's 1837 Bescot Bridge (later Wood Green) station, and its relation to the similarly named Bescot (now Bescot Stadium), for which we have no opening date, on the talk page of the latter. Does anyone have sources that will resolve it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
References
I'm trying to find a reliable source for the claim at Third rail#Safety and Railway speed record#All passenger trains that "The world speed record for a third rail train is 174 (108 mph) km/h attained on 11 April 1988 by a British Class 442 EMU.". I have found it [on page 104 of this pdf http://static.scbist.com/scb/uploaded/331_frey_s_railway_electrification_systems_engineering.pdf], however that document dates from 2012 and the whole paragraph is an exact match for one that has been in our third rail article since 2009 so using that would be citogensis. The claim in our article originated with this anonymous edit in November 2007]. The SquareWheels website page at [25], updated in September 2007 but present in 2006 also [26] claims 109 mph set by a 442 on 11 April 1988. However I don't know how reliable it is. The 1 mph difference in speed given (our 108 mph is calculated from a km/h figure and so likely just a rounding difference) suggests it shares a common origin with our article rather than being a direct source.
Complicated things is this 2016 forum post, quoting an earlier (but unavailable to me) newsgroup posting, [27] claiming an unofficial(?) record of 117 mph at Staplehurst "in the build up to the Eurostar build." so probably circa 1990. I've not been able to find the provenance of that or any reliable confirmation of it. Thryduulf ( talk) 00:18, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
I have noticed a few people removing station layouts per this 2019 RFC. While I'm not opposed to the removal of layouts for minor stations, I looked at the RFC and the closing statement contradicts the option favored by most RFC participants.
The editor who closed the RFC,
Mgasparin, wrote in the closing statement that: So, it appears that the general consensus here is that station maps should be removed in their entirety per NOTGUIDE.
This is not supported by even a head-count of !votes. There are only four !votes which agreed with complete removal, three of which were the first !votes to be cast in the RFC. Eight other !votes clearly expressed a preference for "No general policy". By head count alone, the consensus should have been "No general policy". And, reading the comments, those who !voted for "No general policy" advocated for the removal of many station layouts, except if they were unusual enough or covered by reliable sources. I'm bringing this up only because I'm seeing people citing this RFC as a reason for removal.
epicgenius (
talk) 17:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I want to start by clarifying a few things from above. I don't think there's any disagreement that station layouts, as described in prose, should be included with an appropriate level of detail. What does need discussing is when tables or templates depicting these layouts are appropriate. First, I think when we talk about layouts and diagrams we're talking about two different things:
Beyond that, some station articles have lists of station exits. There's no uniform style for these but see Bakchon station#Exits for an example. Anything else? Mackensen (talk) 00:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
I personally despise the {{ routemap}} based diagrams; they almost invariably do an end-run around policy by including a level of detail and a deficit of references that would have an equivalent paragraph of prose deleted in a heartbeat for running afoul of WP:FANCRUFT, WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NOTDIR.- With all due respect, I do not think preference for which type of map to use should be relevant for such an RFC. This RFC needs to be relatively narrow in scope, and I agree that information should be backed up by reliable sources per WP:V/ WP:OR. However, it really shouldn't go beyond the issue of whether such layouts are appropriate. epicgenius ( talk) 03:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks everyone for your feedback so far. It's my impression that there are really three questions (platforms, tracks, and exits) and that everyone's opinion varies between the three. I've read over WP:RFC and I think the best course of action would be separate RfCs, either running together or one after the other. Each would propose a single question, such as "Should HTML table-based platform layouts be included in station articles?" Mackensen (talk) 13:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Should articles about railway stations include HTML table-formatted platform layouts (example: Bound Brook station#Station layout)? Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Should articles about railway stations include route diagram template-based track layouts (example: Dempster–Skokie station)? Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Should articles about railway stations include tables or lists of entrances and exits (example: Wudaokou station)? Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
It has been proposed that the De Akkers metro station crash article is merged into the De Akkers metro station article. Discussion at talk:De Akkers metro station. Please feel free to contribute. Mjroots ( talk) 06:24, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Please can someone take a look at recent edits by 88.97.111.167 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS)? I don't understand their purpose and they may not be helpful. Thanks, Certes ( talk) 16:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've boldly updated your project's peer review page ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Peer review) by updating the instructions and archiving old reviews.
The new instructions use Wikipedia's general peer review process ( WP:PR) to list peer reviews. Your project's reviews are still able to be listed on your local page too.
The benefits of this change is that review requests will get seen by a wider audience and are likely to be attended to in a more timely way (many WikiProject peer reviews remain unanswered after years). The Wikipedia peer review process is also more maintained than most WikiProjects, and this may help save time for your active members.
I've done this boldly as it seems your peer review page is pretty inactive and I am working through around 90 such similar peer review pages. Please feel free to discuss below - please ping me ({{ u|Tom (LT)}}) in your response.
Cheers and hope you are well, Tom (LT) ( talk) 23:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Rail transport modelling task force is inactive, so pinging this larger group for assistance with a query I posted there. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I've just gone through and changed the One-person operation article (formerly at One-man operation) to use gender neutral language where possible and appropriate (I think I got it all, but double checking would be good). However the article as a whole is in a dreadful state with very poor writing, out-of-date sections (some five years out of date), and woefully under-referenced. If anyone is looking for an article to improve then this one would certainly benefit. Thryduulf ( talk) 00:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
These search results show about 14 articles with redlinks to S-line templates. I figured that someone here might be able to fix them more adeptly than I would. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 22:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
I recently finished writing about all the steam locomotives that ever operated under Grand Canyon Railway ownership. Now, I'm trying to decide whether write about engine No. 539 or not. Also, if any one of you guys ever find any additional information about the GCRY roster, plus more specifications, adding them to Grand Canyon Railway 29, Grand Canyon Railway 4960, Lake Superior and Ishpeming 18, or even make a new article about any of the railway's other past locomotives, or at least let me know what needs to be done, that would be highly appreciated, either way. Thank you! User:Someone who likes train writing 08:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
An IP editor has made several intricate edits to California station route boxes. Please can an expert confirm or revert them? Some such as Bayshore station (Caltrain) are not exactly right (Former services now links to a dab) but I'm unsure whether to tweak or to revert wholesale. It's probably a regular, as their first contributions were plausible changes to module documentation. Certes ( talk) 23:00, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
I've found a couple of Montour Railroad photos, they are all either out of copyright, or they were published without a notice. I have the links for them. Montour 26 (a Mikado steam engine) Another Montour Mikado, #25. Another photo of 25. I'm wondering if anyone could upload them to commons as they are PD. Thanks, -- 108.17.71.32 ( talk) 16:26, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Months ago, I re-directed that article into ALCO PA, because that single train car fails to establish WP:SIGCOV to merit its own article. IP editor complained that it was undiscussed. I re-directed it rather than AfDing it per WP:ATD-R. In this kind of case, which form of discussion be opened? If I opened an AfD, I can predict the result would be merge and redirect. Graywalls ( talk) 01:06, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
It seems Graywalls is on a crusade against fancruft but some of it is valid information such as the utah rails refrences he removes than puts citation needed and deletes. Well some of it is trivia and should be deleted so maybe we can help graywalls understand the locomotives better and not delete stuff execpt for stuff that needs deleted -- 108.17.71.32 ( talk) 00:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Are there specific examples we can look at? Graywalls and I tend to agree that there's too much fancruft, though we draw the line differently and have differed on source reliability. An abstract discussion won't get us very far. Mackensen (talk) 02:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Once again it's being proposed that they be subst'd into their parent articles. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 December 24#Template:Munich–Holzkirchen railway. AlgaeGraphix ( talk) 19:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
As I've been creating railway station articles, I've been using this dataset published by MLIT, a Japanese government agency. It gives the number of passengers getting on and off at most (if no all) stations in Japan. However, I've come across another dataset published by JR East (one of Japan's many rail operators), which gives the number of passengers that are boarding only. Take Shin-Urayasu Station for example: the JR East data for 2016 gives 55,729 passengers, which is cited in the article. Meanwhile, the MLIT dataset gives 109,912 passengers for the same year, which is roughly double of JR East's. I've found that there's a mix; some articles are reporting both boarding and alighting, while others are reporting just boarding. I've even found articles that have taken MLIT's numbers and just divided it by two. So, in the infobox of the articles, which number do we report?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganbaruby ( talk • contribs) 14:30, 15 July 2020 (UTC)