Talk:List of train songs

Notability
I believe that this list does meet wikipedia notability guidelines, though it should be placed in context. For instance, the importance of train songs to American music history should be mentioned. Of the importance of the ubiquitous railroads to the development of the blues at the turn of the 20th century. It provides a starting point for those interested in railroad songs in general to discover noteworthy composers and artists through other linked wiki articles. --Rico (talk) 17:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Rico: the train song is a well-known and significant genre and a list like this is useful. I also agree with him that the lead section should be expanded. Still, as no-one has given a reason why the article might fail the notability test, I’ll remove the tag. Ian Spackman (talk) 13:00, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

How to define "train song"?
Perhaps we might establish a rubric to help us analyze train songs. But what characteristics should we include? Here are some suggestions:

Rhythm: Does the song have a steady chucka-chucka rhythm?

Tempo: Does the song have a tempo change?

Lyrics: Do the lyrics include references to trains, travelling, hobos and the like?

Title: Does the title reference trains or railroads?

Melody: Does song employ a Doppler-esque shift? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.35.230 (talk) 22:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Recommendations
I've been editing the train song list recently to add more current examples, hunt down performers for listings that have none, remove highly unnotable entries, correct errors in titles/performers/wikilinks and clean up other issues. Along the way, several things became apparent, most of which are related to notability and each of which has a relatively easy solution:


 * Notability - Criteria is needed for including and excluding songs. Recommendations: Limit the list to songs where trains must have something to do with the theme rather than just being mentioned a one point. Require that songs must be performed by notable (wikilinked) artists or have some other verifiable significance.
 * Completeness - Given that more than 10,000 train songs exist and that some have hundreds of different covers, striving for completeness is neither possible nor desireable. Recommendation: Enforce notability guidelines, but allow listings without attribution. The rationale for this exception is covered under the next point.
 * Verifiability - All entries must be vetted, yet a list of references would considerably lengthen the article and wouldn't be very useful since only a couple sources are needed to verify the bulk of what's included here. Recommendations: Require that songs must be checked against sources like allmusic.com. Songs that can't be found in a rudimentary Google search should be removed.
 * Uniqueness - Composers should be included to both credit the songwriters (useful info) and make clear the difference between unique songs that share the same titles. Recommendation: Provide credits where possible and require this as part of the notability guidelines; for example, if a writer can't be identified and the song isn't traditional, it's not likely to be notable.
 * Length - Listing multiple performers by using multiple entries unnecessarily bloats the list. Recommendation: List each song once, followed by performers' wikilinks. Note that most significant artists are wikilinked, and the few that aren't should be redlinked to encourage creating articles on them.
 * Introduction - The lead paragraphs should provide a history of the form. Recommendation: Research and write an account of 5-10 paragraphs. As the intro grows, it could become its own linked article, as it should.

None of the above would take an inordinate amount of work. For example, here's how the "O" section would look with a few minutes of editing:


 * "Oh, The Mountains" - Roger Ilott
 * 1) "Old 901"
 * 2) "Old Buddy, Goodnight" - Utah Phillips
 * 3) "Old Gospel Train" - Dorothy Love Coates
 * 4) "Old Iron Trail" - Boxcar Willie
 * 5) "Old Train" - Seldom Scene; Tony Rice Unit
 * 6) "On a Cold Winter's Night"
 * 7) "On the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe" - Tommy Dorsey; Johnny Mercer
 * 8) "On the Night Train" - Henry Lawson & Roger Ilott
 * 9) "On the Railway" (traditional)
 * 10) "On the Slow Train" - Flanders and Swann
 * 11) "On the Southbound" - Mac Wiseman
 * 12) "On the Train" - Janis Ian
 * 13) "Once Great Railway Family, The" - Keith Foster & Roger Ilott
 * 14) "One After 909" - The Beatles
 * 15) "One More Ride" - Hank Snow; Johnny Cash
 * 16) "One Toke Over the Line" - Brewer & Shipley
 * 17) "Orange Blossom Special" - Johnny Cash; Charlie Daniels Band; Flatt & Scruggs; Johnson Mountain Boys; Bill Monroe & His Bluegrass Boys; Seatrain; Donna Stoneman; Carl Story

Condensing the section eliminates 10 of 28 listings. Besides reducing length, it also allows for adding more cover versions. The only difficulty is discerning unique versions of songs, but that has to be done anyway as part of the vetting process (easy to do in allmusic's database).

I'm perfectly willing to undertake whatever's needed, but would appreciate hearing from others before moving ahead. Thanks.Allreet (talk) 14:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S. An important point: As credited in the introduction, the WP list was copied from another site. Even if that site is license free, this is bothersome. Most if not all lists found elsewhere on the internet are ridden with errors and provide no indication of their sources. I've already scoured three-quarters of the WP list through independent sources and very shortly intend to replace the credit (but include this site and others as external sources) with an explanation of the referencing.


 * The list was originally compiled at my site and I moved it to WP so it could be user-maintained. I'm happy to see the additions, research,  and development of criteria that have happened here.  Thanks, all.  --Rico (talk) 21:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Waste Of Space
There's a lot of unused space on the right, maybe make columns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.162.44 (talk) 22:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Though this response is late, a couple points should be made since the above comment is legit. Adding artists to the songs is now filling in the space on the right. Also, columns use more space vertically, don't accommodate listing multiple artists very well, and are harder to edit, especially for newcomers. Allreet (talk) 20:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Additions
I added a couple of songs last night, Long Train by Hamilton Camp, and Hurricane by Steve Gillette (yes, Hurricane is a train song!). Sad to see that there is so little discussion here. Train songs are an important part of folk music history and this page deserves a lot more attention! I hope somebody reads this and wants to jump back in. Vlmagee (talk) 16:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

EMR A Train Song???
How did Gordon Lightfoot's "Early Mornin' Rain" make this list? It's about an AIRPORT. That raises another issue. The list should include any given song once, according to author - not be a catalogue of who performed it. Sensei48 (talk) 07:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * EMR mentions the possibility of taking a train, a passing reference that hardly qualifies the song for train song-hood.
 * On the other subject, I'm not so sure the list should be limited to one version per song, but I'm wide open to the possibility. Obviously, this would make life, both selection and long-overdue sourcing, a lot easier. There are some benefits, however, to listing more than one version. For example, a song written and recorded by Jimmie Rodgers becomes all the more notable when we learn it was covered over the years by Johnny Cash, Hank Snow and Jerry Lee Lewis. The beneficiary of that history is the reader, who in many cases won't know the original performer but will recognize the cover artists. Similarly, limiting a song's listing to the author's version overlooks versions by others that may be even more notable. On the other hand, a great deal of subjectivity comes into play, meaning how are we to judge which versions should be included and which aren't worth bothering with? It's difficult enough to verify the existence of many of the songs listed here, let alone their relative notability. Given all that, the possibilities are:
 * Limit the list to the original version. Best would be to include the composer and original performer, since verifying composers is considerably more difficult than verifying performers. Songs without one or the other simply wouldn't qualify.
 * Maintain the current format, which allows separate listings for notable versions of the same song.
 * Provide one listing per song followed by the composer in parentheses and then every notable artist who performed it (notability determined by having a Wikipedia page).
 * Personally, I'm torn between the first and third. What do others think? Allreet (talk) 16:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the first option is the worst, since there is no strict principle requiring us to omit notable information in that way. I don't care between #2 and #3.  Wareh (talk) 18:21, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Finally removed Early Morning Rain. Also removed Lucinda Williams's Can't Let Go (my own entry) and Van Morrison's Madame George. The rule of thumb is that a passing reference does not make a song a train song. Allreet (talk) 00:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Then "TCB" & "The Gambler", & a couple of others, should come out, too.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  20:35, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Consolidating songs' artists and adding composers
I've begun consolidating artists so that there's just one listing per song, followed by the song's performers. This requires researching and including the composers to differentiate who was recording which version. For example, there are several songs entitled "Last Train" composed by different songwriters. Without the writers, nobody can tell which song is being referenced. For other songs, where there is just one composer/version, consolidating the artists saves space and allows more artists to be included, as a previous editor suggested (and provided an example to make the point). Overall, I think these changes are for the better. Consider what I'm doing now as a "test" case that can be reverted if needed. If anyone objects or has additional feedback for improvement, please post your comments here. Allreet (talk) 14:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I've started adding citations, at this point most sourced through AllMusic by searching for a song, then listing the most notable recordings. I then link to individual albums and listen to the songs to disambig the versions. If I find a unique version, I enter a separate listing. What's emerging—by adding and consolidating artists, adding composers and including citations—is a listing that is far more interesting and useful. Allreet (talk) 05:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * (Replying to your first comment)  I think this is a very reasonable approach. Do you think the entries might be better bulleted instead of numbered? Rivertorch (talk) 05:49, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The numbering doesn't seem to serve any purpose. Bullets would be better. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Rivertorch (talk) 16:52, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 21:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Methodology
The list is looking much better already. I'm wondering about the songs followed by more than one performer's name: should the order be alphabetical or chronological by year of release? In instances where the songwriter (or one of them) recorded a version of the song, how should that be handled, I wonder. Rivertorch (talk) 06:37, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I wanted to restore this comment in order to opine that, as an ideal, chronological order would be much better. At least, it is awkward if the original performer is unclear from the list. The value of chronological information outweighs the questionable value of alphabetization (since there are not many names here). So the ideal would be: "Elvis Presley (1953), Emmylou Harris (1979)," etc. I understand if the ideal isn't soon achievable; my main suggestion would be that, as editors do research that may turn up dates, that they be inserted into the list, so that at least the information is there for the future. Wareh (talk) 14:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that chronological order would be preferable in theory. In practice, however, I suppose it may not be too feasible. Most editors who add a name (or a song with multiple names) aren't going to know (or bother) to check the dates, so there would be new, improperly sorted entries among the older, sorted ones—a potential source of confusion to readers. Adding the dates, as you suggest, would help to sort that out, I guess. However, there will be instances where two versions of a song were released in the same year, and determining the month (let alone the exact date) may be impossible. I suspect there are quite a few cases where it's not clear who the "original" performer is, but I may be wrong. Rivertorch (talk) 18:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No disagreement; let's just throw in a given artist's earliest known recording date, if we're looking at it anyway, so that our readers get some historical perspective where possible (regardless of the order). If sometimes the dates don't clear things up, that's no big deal--other times they will. Wareh (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Allreet may like to weigh in, but it sounds good to me. Rivertorch (talk) 21:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Please pardon the late response. I think noting the first recording of a song is valuable, both in identifying the artist and the song's period of origin. My only concern is the research, as Rivertorch points out, and with that, the need for more footnotes. Where possible, I've been using a single reference for a given song. Only AllMusic allows this since few if any other reliable (non-wiki) sources provide such a wide listing of performers, and even fewer include the composers, which is essential for disambiguation. Fortunately, AllMusic also provides the date of the album. So as long as someone is certain that AllMusic or some other source verifies the notation, I'd favor inclusion of "Elvis (1953)". Trying to list the performers chronologically, however, strikes me as an immense amount of work for moderate return. Allreet (talk) 18:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Can you please tell me how many songs are on this list so I don't have to count? Thank you. Toteburger (talk) 00:52, 20 October 2011 (UTC) Toteburger


 * 709 songs after removing two. Allreet (talk) 00:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Bold song titles
As I noted in my edit summary, I'm bolding song titles to make them stand out from the text. With the addition of composers, artists and citations (essential, I think), the song titles are becoming obscured. I've only changed the first few sections as a test and would appreciate what others think. About this and the list in general. Allreet (talk) 06:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've bolded nearly half of the song titles. If needed, I can easily remove the mark-ups, though I believe they help. For example, with the titles bolded, I can scroll and still scan the titles, whereas with the half that isn't, I find myself having to stop every now and then. I'll be contacting previous editors and commenters for their input. Allreet (talk) 08:04, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I personally don't find it makes much of a difference for me, but Allreet offers reasonable grounds for doing it, and I certainly have no objection. Thanks, Allreet, for all your hard work on this page! Wareh (talk) 00:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Wareh. Using bold titles differs from the usual practice on list pages, so I thought about this long and hard. Generally, what I mentioned above holds true: with all of the artist wikilinks in blue, the titles - in black - become almost secondary and tend to get lost visually. That point became even clearer when I saw the list on a smart phone. The bolding makes an even bigger difference in the smaller format. Given no objections, I've proceeded with bolding all of the titles. Allreet (talk) 20:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Dramatic increase in page visits
Visits to the list have increased dramatically over the past three years. Compare the page views from January 2009 to those from November 2011. Allreet (talk) 07:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The train don't stop here anymore
Is there a good reason a song, "Transylvania Terror Train", by a fictional band, is on the list...? TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura  21:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Good question, especially as you begin to dig into it. This is one of several hundred songs I haven't gotten around to yet, so I wasn't aware of its background. For those who don't know, "Transylvania Terror Train" by Captain Clegg & The Night Creatures is from Rob Zombie's 2009 remake, Halloween II. The "band" is Jesse Dayton's, has its own website and had plans to tour (from what I read) in the spirit of other "fictional" bands such as Spinal Tap, and The Ruttles. But back to the question, who would you credit "Man of Constant Sorrow" to? Not Union Station. The primary source is the O Brother, Where Art Thou album, which credits The Soggy Bottom Boys, unreal as they may be, without mentioning Union Station. So is Spinal Tap fictional? And were the Beatles or the Mothers of Invention real? Of course, they were, but what they both have in common with Captain Clegg is that they were inventions, springboards for the imaginations, extensions of the personas, of their creators. Anyway, my inclination is to credit Captain Clegg and possibly add Jesse Dayton et al in parentheses, as I might do with Soggy Bottom's version of "Constant Sorrow". Allreet (talk) 15:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The obvious response escaped me: The song is certainly real, and the only question is how do you credit it? Allreet (talk) 16:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I haven't seen the film, so I was also wondering if it was actually on the soundtrack. If it is, the musicians would be credited on the DVD; the film company would have to pay them, & the royalties would go somewhere, so there'd have to be a correct credit. As to why I didn't think of that before... :(  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  20:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I've added Jesse Dayton as the composer and a citation linking it to the soundtrack album on Allmusic, which credits Captain Clegg & The Night Creatures. The wikilink for Captain Clegg redirects to Halloween II, so I guess the only question remaining is: If someone or something does not have its own wiki page, does it really exist? >:D  Allreet (talk) 19:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * An excellent question. Until somebody creates the page, anyhow. :) Thx for the effort.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  21:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It is not an excellent question. It really is disappointing that people who struggle with such questions consider themselves competent to edit an encyclopedia. The criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia is notability, not existence. There are plenty of things like the loch ness monster, yeti, and sasquatch that do not exist yet which have Wikipedia articles because they are notable, and similarly there are plenty of things, millions of them in fact, that exist but which are not sufficiently notable to have Wikipedia articles. So yes, something or someone can "exist" without having a Wikilink.  Cottonshirt  τ   12:23, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Cottonshirt apparently misses the humor, the tongue in cheek, in the preceding exchange. Allreet (talk) 17:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

One country perspective
I have added the globalize template to this article because it discusses and lists train songs as though they are a uniquely US phenomenon. The second sentence even claims (without source) that the theme started with the advent of railroads in the US, and the second paragraph claims (again without source) that the first train songs date to two years before the country's first public railway began operating. Use of the definite article and singular noun imply that only one country is involved or need be considered. The article fails to mention any other country or to even imply that any other country might have either railroads or train songs.  Cottonshirt  τ   03:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Contrary to Cottonshirt's assertions, sources are provided for the history in the introduction:
 * Green, Archie (Editor) (1968). "Railroad Songs and Ballads: From the Archive of Folk Song". Library of Congress.
 * Cohen, Norm (2000). Long Steel Rail: The Railroad in American Folksong, 2nd Ed. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
 * Examples of train songs from countries other than the U.S. are included in the list, which invariably favors English-speaking countries because one of the criteria for inclusion is that the artists or songs have wikilinks to ensure notability. Since this is the English version of Wikipedia, I'm not sure how songs from China or India, for example, can be used if notability and verifiabilty cannot be satisfied. Allreet (talk) 18:46, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I've made a few edits to broaden the introduction. I believe this should satisfy the problem referenced by Cottonshirt. Ideally, some mention of the development of train songs in countries other than the U.S. would help even further, but unfortunately, I could find no source materials and have reason to doubt any exist. For, example, in the U.S., which accounts for more than 10,000 train songs, only two books have been written on the subject and one authoritative paper. Other countries have vastly fewer songs to contribute, so the chances are slim that anybody has written anything of note, and an extensive search of the internet seems to support this conclusion. Meanwhile, I plan to inform Cottonshirt of my intention to remove the Globalize template, barring the possibility that some materials might be found to elaborate on how train songs developed in other countries. Allreet (talk) 18:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I've found an excellent web source that should help fill in some of the "holes." Part of the difficulty in finding this is that in the UK the term "railway" is used instead of "railroad," which makes a difference in a search. The holes referred to include classical music, UK and other European songs from the 1800s to present, and so forth. The link; http://www.philpacey.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/musrail.html#1820. I plan to research and cite selected works from this list, while continuing to source existing entries, over the ensuing months. I also intend to include this site in the External Links section. Allreet (talk) 17:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The following countries were represented in the list when the template was added (there may be others): U.S., Canada, U.K., Ireland, France, Italy, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Latvia, Russia, South Africa, Jamaica, Chile, Brazil, Australia and Japan. Over the past few days, I've added artists/composers from two countries that were not previously represented, Switzerland and Senegal. Allreet (talk) 23:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Size split?
 Split  = Article is over 100 kB, and should be split. Thoughts? Suggestions?--Jax 0677 (talk) 19:41, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * It is a little large, actually over 200k. Much of the size is due to the extensive references. The only logical way to split it would be alphabetically, as far as I can see. Something like 0–G, H–R, and S–Z, maybe. I'd like to hear what Allreet thinks. Rivertorch (talk) 21:27, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * One thing that should be considered is how this affects navigation, particularly for smartphone users but PC users as well. Currently, phone users see the TOC box for jumping to a specific letter section followed by a scrolling list of all sections 0-Z. They then have the option of jumping to a particular letter section from the TOC or scrolling to a desired letter. Would splitting the article decrease ease-of-use for this audience? And how would it affect navigation for PC users? I realize size is of concern, but apparently Wikipedia's server speed has been improved, reducing load time considerably (about 8 seconds on a five-year-old laptop and less than 2 seconds on a smartphone). What, then, is the advantage of a split? WP:SPLITLIST suggests that a split may not be necessary, but I could be missing something and apart for the above, I'm open to the idea. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Having been stuck with a very slow Internet connection until fairly recently, I'm sympathetic to load-time concerns that may be an issue for some users regardless of Wikipedia's server speed. I never edit (or browse, for that matter) with a smartphone or tablet, so I can't speak to that, but I will say that the article is very easy to navigate on my aging Mac. Splitting it would make navigation more of a hassle, no doubt. Rivertorch (talk) 05:29, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Rivertorch: You can see what smartphone users see by clicking the "Mobile view" link that's at the bottom of Wikipedia pages. Similarly, phone users have a "Desktop" link that displays wiki pages in standard view. Allreet (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The mobile view usually doesn't work very well on my browser. In this case, it functions (more or less) and the page seems to be navigable enough. Shrug. I think the easy navigation of the current setup may outweigh the advantages of smaller pages. If no one is specifically reporting size-related problems, maybe it would be best to hold off on a split. Rivertorch (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Removed templates on Globalization and Article Size
I've removed the Globalize and Article Size templates, as well as the related Multiple Issues template. Both of the main issues were discussed in the above Talk articles, and while no definitive conclusion was reached, the discussions ended with comments leaning toward maintaining the article as it stands. To summarize:


 * Globalize - I've edited the introduction to lend a more worldwide perspective. I've also expanded the number of entries from countries other than the U.S., though as I've noted before, the list already represented at least 17 nations on four continents. However, I must add that while many countries have contributed to the genre, all sources I've found support the view that train songs are predominantly a U.S. phenomena. Just the same, I will continue searching for additional sources and entries in keeping with a global view.


 * Article Size - My plan is to keep the list at around 1,000 entries, though adding and sourcing artists will no doubt add to this over time. Currently, the article includes about 300,000 characters (counted in Word), a quarter to a third of which are related to citations. While Wikipedia guidelines suggest 200kb as a maximum, they explicitly do not preclude larger articles. The main issues in WP:Article size pertain to usability/performance tied to internet connections, PCs, smartphones and related technical considerations. All of these have improved significantly for most users in recent years. For example, my load time on a 5-year-old-plus laptop with standard DSL is under 5 seconds, even less on a smartphone. Meanwhile, no satisfactory ideas have been presented for splitting the article, since division could only be made along alphabetical lines, something I believe would impede usability even more than load times.

I am posting notifications on the Talk pages of the two editors who added the templates and would appreciate feedback from other editors as well. Allreet (talk) 16:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The article loads in about 3 seconds on my ancient Mac. I do have a fast connection nowadays, but I was able to load and edit 300kB+ pages even when I had dial-up. (Occasionally it took a couple of attempts, but I was never unable to do it.) I never use my phone to look at Wikipedia, but I just did, and now I can't say that anymore. The article loaded in 12 seconds and was then easily navigable. In the absence of well-documented problems with the size, my preference would be to keep it as a single page. Splitting it into two pages would actually be more cumbersome and might even increase total rendering time, at least for anyone whose interests aren't clustered in just one half of the alphabet. If it grows much past 350kB—roughly 15% over the current size—the question should be revisited.


 * In terms of broadening it to a global perspective, I think that every reasonable measure has been taken to achieve that end. If there is a shortage of non-American train songs listed, most probably it's either because relatively few such songs exist or because the sources are obscure. Rivertorch (talk) 07:38, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Need help! - lost train song
Here is the refrain and a verse (2nd?) from a pop song that I presume was late 80s or early-to-mid 90s. I've tried searching the internet for it to find out the title/artist, but to no avail. Does anyone remember this song? If so, we can add to the list! (and you'd be doing me a big favour because it's killing me)

refrain:

if you're dream breaks down you can call me but I won't be hanging around your little corner of life \ don't waste my time I gotta go \ I ride first light tomorrow \ (on the) morning train

verse (probably 2nd):

you are kissing ass with high society \ now you move in some circles I just can't believe \ is it true you buy into their hypocrisy \ are you through with your oldest friends including me 'cause when I see how much you've changed \ it just makes me want to run away \ because it will never be the same

Note: the "morning train" lyric gets repeated a lot, so while it seems incidental as listed above, it could even possibly be the name of the song (that or "corner of life" would be my best guesses, but as noted above, I can't find either).

99.245.251.245 (talk) 00:38, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

"Engine 143"
Is "Engine 143" the same song as "Engine One-Forty-Three": both traditional, both recorded by Carter and Cash.? ("Get on Board, Little Children" is just another name for "Gospel Train" - the phrase "Get on Board Little Children" forms the chorus of "Gospel Train", the verses are the same.) Mannanan51 (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

What is missing is a whole, virtual "library catalog" of African American songs and compositions with the theme "railroad", and "train"; this is criminal in fact, and bespeaks the terminal slide of "culture" that racism, and "selective" White Supremacism has wrought, to this point in Western history (for white racism has indeed proven itself to be the literal "death" of advanced popular, and absolutely aesthetic culture, over the past one-hundred and thirty years, to date!

Among but a few of the composition with "railroad", and "train" as a theme are: "RAILROAD MAN", by BILL WITHERS; "BACK UP TRAIN", by AL GREEN; "ENGINE #9", by WILSON PICKETT, and... (to be expanded)! --184.207.8.123 (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Veryverser

St Agnes & the Burning Train
Sting has an instrumental track on his "Soul Cages" album, named "St Agnes & the Burning Train." Not sure if it counts as a "train song" but I think it's worth listing here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nahum (talk • contribs) 10:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

"The Ghost of Hope" by The Residents
The new Residents record is a concept album about train wrecks. I think all seven songs belong on this article (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPw0Xcecx94) Munich hilton (talk) 07:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of train songs. 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:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5do5jqDA4?url=http://www.stompintom.com/discography/dominion.html to http://www.stompintom.com/discography/dominion.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131109204635/http://www.countrymusictreasures.com/storybehindthesong/freight-train-blues.html to http://www.countrymusictreasures.com/storybehindthesong/freight-train-blues.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101209090006/http://www.blueridgeinstitute.org/ballads/old97.html to http://www.blueridgeinstitute.org/ballads/old97.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111207234232/http://levysheetmusic.mse.jhu.edu/otcgi/llscgi60 to http://levysheetmusic.mse.jhu.edu/otcgi/llscgi60
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111220005531/http://www.nashvillesongwritersfoundation.com/d-g/vernon-dalhart.aspx to http://www.nashvillesongwritersfoundation.com/d-g/vernon-dalhart.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521035304/http://www.gogolbordello.com/music/ to http://www.gogolbordello.com/music/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:54, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Notability regarding inclusion of songs
I recently removed 20 or so songs by James Coffey, an artist who specializes in children's songs. The justification I used was one that's been followed for the 10 years I've been working on this article: that to be included, the artist should have a wikilink. Given that there are probably more than 50,000 train songs, some criteria is needed. Otherwise, the article - which already covers 1,000 songs, 10,000+ artists, and nearly 900 citations - will become both overly trivial and far too long (witness the numerous templates that have been attached over the years regarding length).

My edit was undone by Trekphiler who protested "since when is removing cited material just because the artist is redlinked okay?" in the Edit Summary. The question was partially answered by the fact that a stub was started on James Coffey to justify the inclusions. The only source for the article was AllMusic. I have no doubt there are other sources available on Coffey, but I question whether there are enough to fulfill the criteria under Notability (music) that artists be the "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works." The fact is that all of Coffey's albums have been either self-released or released by a label on par with K-tel, IOW, commercial schlock. One indication of this is that none of the "original" songs added under his name have been recorded by anyone else. No other artist in the list has as many such "orphans", including Boxcar Willie, who has probably written and recorded more train songs than anyone on the planet (he has only 10 original songs in the list but his notablity is unquestioned).

In any case, more stringent standards are called for, not just here but in many Wikipedia articles where all kinds of trivia gets added, something that generally serves few interests other than editors'. I would greatly appreciate feedback from others, because I could be on the wrong track (no pun intended) and only want to improve the article. Allreet (talk) 17:57, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I created the Coffey page to clear the redlink issue, not realizing he may not actually deserve a page. (There are plenty of drag racers who don't have a page & should, so...) I wouldn't say self-release disqualifies him, since WP relies on self-published works as sources; how the albums are sold, be it retail, online, or infomercial, really doesn't govern popularity (or notability), AFAIK. If Coffey, despite appearances on TV, & despite album sales, doesn't qualify, his page will be deleted, & so will his inclusion here. I'm fine with that, in the course of events.  TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura  19:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

"By"
It seems as though in many/most of the entries in the list, the song is said to be "by" the performer. While readers can probably figure it out, this is misleading &mdash; a song should be said to be "by" the person or persons who wrote it (in some cases, of course, this is the same person). I suggest changing most of the "by" entries to "performed by". --Trovatore (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Pardon the late reply. I'm certain this is correct usage. For example, if you use AllMusic's search box to look for a song, each song found will be listed in this form: "Wabash Cannonball" by Mac Wiseman or "Orange Blossom Special" by Bill Monroe. "By" is used in this context all the time, by deejays, for example, as in "And here's 'She Loves You' by the Beatles" or in literature, "1984 by George Orwell". All that said, I understand how the usage may have seemed incorrect. Allreet (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Is "13 Station of MRT-3" a train song? I'm not sure
The song is created by me but I not sure if it a train song or not. The 13 Station of MRT-3 is the song that 13 stations in the MRT-3 in Metro Manila with the background song of The 12 Day of Christmas. I don't sure if it a train song or not because I was minor and I compose many ​LRT/MRT songs in Metro Manila.

I not sure for that if it a train song or not. The song is now available by searching on Google.JustinLRT (talk) 02:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, : I apologize for taking nearly a year to respond, especially since your inquiry deserves an answer. Since there are tens of thousands of train songs, considerable effort was made here to focus on the most significant or notable. That means multiple reliable sources refer to the songs and also the fact that either multiple artists have covered the songs or prominent artists have written and performed them. In both cases, "John Henry" and its offshoots would be the most significant of all train songs. Songs that have few references and/or few covers are generally not included.
 * The other issue is whether your song qualifies as a train song. The answer is "yes". Subways are trains, and you'll find many references to that fact in various WP articles, including Metropolitan (train), Metropolitan line, and Rapid transit. Thanks for your inquiry. I hope that helps. Allreet (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

5:15
Townshend's 5:15 has nothing to do with Bowie's 5:15. Joey Lenovo (talk) 01:09, 9 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Joey. I don't recall what either song is about, but I should have chalked up the titles as coincidental as opposed to, heaven forbid, either the Who covering Bowie or vice versa. I can't imagine. Allreet (talk) 03:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Train songs
Add:

K-4 Pacific, Gerry Mulligan from the LP Age of Steam. 2600:6C5A:143F:54B4:10F9:47FE:9108:998F (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria
How is inclusion and sourcing supposed to work on this page? How do we verify that a song is a train song? Is a train song a specific type of folk music, or just any song that references trains in some way? Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 22:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Train songs are not genre specific, nor a subgenre - more a category unto itself. As railroads became ubiquitous during the 1800s, trains came to be used as the subject of all types of songs: gospel, blues, bluegrass, folk, jazz, etc., and eventually rock 'n roll. In answer to your last question, for a song to qualify, trains should be central as either the theme or subject. For example, Steve Goodman's "City of New Orleans" and Lead Belly's "Midnight Special" are about trains, while in Johnny Cash's "Folsom Prison Blues" and Bob Dylan's "It Takes a Lot to Laugh, It Takes a Train to Cry", trains are prominent subjects. Actually, IMO Dylan's song is somewhat marginal as a train song, but sources indicate otherwise.
 * The appearance of a few references to trains in the lyrics doesn't satisfy the criteria. A song like Gordon Lightfoot's "Early Morning Rain" is sometimes posted here, but it only mentions trains twice and is actually about planes. It's often misidentified as a train song in sources for the same reason, that is, not quite understanding what makes a train song a train song.
 * In regards to your first two questions, the main sources used, for example, Norm Cohen's Long Steel Rail and California State University, Fresno's Traditional Ballad Index, specifically identify hundreds of songs as train songs, their authors being experts. Website lists, articles and the like are also used. See the References section for examples. In many cases, however, citations reference lyrics or simply the fact that trains/railroads are mentioned in titles, which borders on WP:OR. That said, all songs have been vettedl In any case, more sources are needed along with minor maintenance, since weblinks become dated over time. Allreet (talk) 09:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)