Talk:Merano derailment

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Type of train involved?[edit]

Per the Italian Wikipedia article on the line , the train involved was probably a GTW 2/6. Can anyone confirm this? Mjroots (talk) 10:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look the same as the one in the image on the ANSA article - the GTW 2/6 has a slanted front, the one in the image does not. However, I'm not entirley sure if the one on the ANSA article is an actual picture of the train involved or a stock image of a train accident. [1] Wackywace (talk) 11:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC has some good aerial footage at the start of the video clearly showing a quite modern train similar to that shown in the it.Wiki article on the line. The photo on the it.wiki article is in the commons:Category:Stadler GTW. Mjroots (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is definitely a third generation GTW 2/6 made by Stadler Rail AG of Switzerland. There is a picture of the actual South Tyrol version of the train on the Stadler GTW page. I'll add this info to the article. Mu2 20:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's also better described as having two coaches, with a very short one bogie power unit in between, the train having only three bogies in total, and the power unit having a corridor through, so a "two passenger coach" train is a better description. Mu2 20:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks to me like a single articulated railcar of the "two bedrooms and a bath" style. So it's more of a light railcar than a proper train...192.12.88.7 (talk) 20:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/rubriche/english/2010/04/12/visualizza_new.html_1761651595.html

Image[edit]

Does anyone have a licenced image that we could use for this page? I know that ANSA article has one but it is copyrighted to them. If there is no image as of now, is there a possibility someone could produce a map showing the crash site? Wackywace (talk) 11:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image added now that we have established the type of train involved. Mjroots (talk) 20:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only a partial derailment? Media reporting/translations slightly exaggerated too?[edit]

At least some of the pictures (e.g. aerial ones) suggest a partial derailment only, of just the front coach and middle bit. Also the media talking about a risk of the train "falling" into the river really seem to mean the less dramatic act of sliding a bit further down a tree covered bank towards the river? Mu2 20:41, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a derailment. Even if only one axle of a bogie in a 12 coach train is derailed, it's a derailment. The article can always be rewritten to state that not all vehicles were derailed (see Marden rail crash). Mjroots (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Location and Naming convention[edit]

The article states that the crash happened at Merano. The Guardian reports here that the accident occurred at Castelbello. Italian Wikipedia also reports that the derailment occurred at Castelbello. Can we confirm exactly where the incident occurred?

Secondly, we have used the Italian version for all names. The Wikipedia convention for Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol is that we use, where there is no well known English name, the name used by the majority language group in the comune/gemeinde. Castelbello should, under this convention, be changed to Kastelbell; Laces to Latsch and Venosta Valley to Vinschgau or Vinschgau Valley, the names used for the pages on each of those subjects. The area as a whole is 96.51 per cent German speaking, 3.41 per cent Italian speaking, and 0.08 per cent Ladin speaking. The other names quoted, Merano, Bolzano and the Adige are in accordance with Wikipedia's naming policy, which is to use the Italian version. This policy was agreed, after many months of edit warring, as the compromise solution for this linguistically mixed area, and appears to have prevented any repetition of the disruption that had previously occurred. Skinsmoke (talk) 23:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, there's more. On the Victims section, Silandro should be Schlanders; Prato allo Stelvio should be Prad am Stilfser Joch; Lasa should be Laas; Castelbello-Ciardes should be Kastelbell-Tschars; and Martello should be Martell. You will notice that all the victims names are German. Skinsmoke (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The initial reports all said Merano. I used the names given in the sources - Castelbello, Laces etc. I'm not sure that the article needs to be moved based on one source using a different name to all the rest. Mjroots (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The opening paragraph of the Guardian article linked above says At least nine people reported killed and 30 injured after landslide derails train near Italian city of Merano. I'd say that the article title is correct per WP:COMMONNAME. Mjroots (talk) 04:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A quick note about the name of the article: first the train was came from Mals and went to Merano. It was a regular train of the Vinschgaubahn (Vinschgau train), which services the Vinschgau Valley. All 12 trains used on the line are Stadler GTW 2/6. One of these trains derailed between the villages of Latsch and Kastelbell somewhere on this stretch of the line. "2010 Merano train derailment" is fine with me- more accurate would be 2010 Vinschgaubahn train derailment (article about the line in German: de:Vinschgaubahn). Everything else is correct. --noclador (talk) 07:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't suggesting changing the title. Just that we got the detail of the story correct. I think 2010 Merano train derailment is fine for the title, as that is probably how it will be known, though time will tell. Skinsmoke (talk) 13:25, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update?[edit]

The article say that an investigation is "under way"? As the accident happened nine months ago, perhaps the information needs to be updated? Boneyard90 (talk) 15:53, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not unreasonable for accident investigations to take a year or more before a final report is release. I'd say 2 years was a reasonable point at which we would expect to have had a report published and the article should be tagged as needing updating. Mjroots (talk) 13:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Merano derailment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Merano_derailment&oldid=1206514260"