Talk:Train driver/Archives/2020

Requested move 14 March 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved to train driver While we usually WP:RETAIN old titles, there is rough consensus that the move will minimize ambiguity which outweighs the benefit of retaining old titles. — Wug·a·po·des​ 21:42, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

– The name "railroad engineer" is not used in the article (except in the title) or in the cited sources, while "locomotive engineer" is. The latter also makes more sense, as it concerns the driver of the locomotive. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Railroad engineer → Locomotive engineer
 * Locomotive engineer → Locomotive engineer (disambiguation)


 * Move to Train driver as natural disambiguation. The standalone term "engineer" to refer to the driver is "chiefly US" according to Wiktionary, and a case of WP:ENGVAR: "train driver" is used in the article (and other terms). Per WP:RETAIN, a subsection of ENGVAR, I feel that here "the change reduces ambiguity".
 * This was discussed in 2009 at Talk:Locomotive engineer.
 * "Railroad" is not a good disambiguating phrase. Merriam-Webster's online dictionary defines a "railroad engineer" as a synonym for "railway engineer", i.e. "an engineer whose training or occupation is in railway engineering. OED online (Lexico) doesn't give it a separate entry.
 * I'd also perhaps move the disambiguation page at locomotive engineer over railroad engineer, and add an entry for railway engineering.
 * Confusingly, targets Railroad engineer even though it should either target John A. Hill as a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT per WP:DIFFCAPS, or the disambiguation page. 94.21.219.87 (talk) 02:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Move to Train driver. A locomotive engineer, in many Commonwealth countries, is no less confusing that railroad engineer, given that it's the name of someone who builds, designs, and/or repairs locomotives. It's worth noting that in the article, the term "railroad engineer" is not mentioned in the lede, not in any of the references, nor in the "further reading" section. The terms "locomotive engineer", "enginemen", "train driver", and "train engineer" seem to be used in the American references and literature, and the term "train driver" seems to be used exclusively outside the US. Given that the term "Train driver" is clearly understood in the US and outside it (which neither railroad engineer not locomotive engineer is), surely it is the logical name for the page. Grutness... wha?   04:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's also quite clear that the driver is in control of the train, not merely the locomotive (if there is one). 94.21.219.87 (talk) 04:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer Train driver, but I'm British. However I think anything which includes the word engineer is misleading. Rathfelder (talk) 15:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Prefer Train driver. Railroad is an Americanism.  Elsewhere we talk of railways.  However a railway engineer is someone who builds railways.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support suggested move, oppose suggested "train driver" per MOS:RETAIN. Nobody in the US would call this position a "train driver", they're an engineer, especially during the periods where this was a relevant occupation (e.g. 1860-1940) and cropped up in literature a lot.  SnowFire (talk) 23:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This is one of the references on the page. Is Bloomburg not American? Grutness... wha?   04:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * And this makes it clear that in the US a railroad engineer is a type of train driver, rather than being synonymous with it. Grutness... wha?   04:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, part of the problem is that there's an overlapping set of jobs afoot here which might be causing the confusion. I'm inclined to think that the current article is intended to be specifically on the engineer position, but possible if you're up for it that some sort of merger to "Railroad positions" or the like might work better.  Also, per above, there's a bit of an issue in that even if, hypothetically, there are people in positions simply known as "train driver" nowadays in the US, this position is incredibly minor compared to the prominence an engineer held in fiction and society from 1850-1950, back when trains were a big deal in the US.  So I'd argue that past sources deserve a disproportionate amount of weight here, when kids aspired to be an engineer as a cool thing to do.  SnowFire (talk) 04:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. The current and proposed titles are both problematic, as WP:RETAIN and WP:ENGVAR obviously apply, but "railroad engineer" can also mean someone who builds and maintains railroads in the US just as "railway engineer" can mean it elsewhere. Whereas "locomotive engineer" can also mean someone who builds and maintains locomotives. Railroad engineer (driver) would be a possibility to specify what we're talking about here. But at the end of the day, "engineer" is an American peculiarity for what elsewhere is called a driver. They don't actually do any engineering. And "railway" is the common term all over the world, whereas "railroad" is more or less restricted to North America. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean, they operate an engine. That's a pretty obvious etymological reason why they're called engineers. Red   Slash  17:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Usually an engineer is a person who maintains or builds things, not operates them. As I said, this is an American peculiarity. Usually, in the English language, a person who operates an engine is called a driver. It's quite obvious that "railroad engineer" is ambiguous, even in America. It's especially ambiguous anywhere else in the world, where it would be understood as someone who builds or maintains railroads (or railways, as the rest of us call them), not drives a locomotive. And "locomotive engineer" is no better, as that would be understood as someone who builds or maintains locomotives rather than operates them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Now leaning support move to Train driver notwithstanding WP:RETAIN and WP:ENGVAR, but per WP:COMMONALITY as this term is understood throughout the English-speaking world, including apparently in North America, whereas "railroad engineer" and "locomotive engineer" are without doubt terms pretty much peculiar to America that are ambiguous even there and doubly so in the rest of the world. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Most of the American biographical articles describe their subject as a Locomotive Engineer, so my impression is that even in the USA Railroad engineer is no longer commonly used. Rathfelder (talk) 10:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as proposed - Locomotive engineer is both the long-standing term[https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=railroad+engineer%2Ctrain+driver%2Ctrain+engineer%2Clocomotive+engineer&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2Crailroad%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Brailroad%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BRailroad%20Engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BRailroad%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BRAILROAD%20ENGINEER%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Ctrain%20driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Btrain%20driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20Driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTRAIN%20DRIVER%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Ctrain%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Btrain%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20Engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Clocomotive%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Blocomotive%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BLocomotive%20Engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BLOCOMOTIVE%20ENGINEER%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BLocomotive%20engineer%3B%2Cc0#t4%3B%2Crailroad%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Brailroad%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BRailroad%20Engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BRailroad%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BRAILROAD%20ENGINEER%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Ctrain%20driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Btrain%20driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20Driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20driver%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTRAIN%20DRIVER%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Ctrain%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Btrain%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20Engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BTrain%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Clocomotive%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Blocomotive%20engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BLocomotive%20Engineer%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BLOCOMOTIVE%20ENGINEER%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BLocomotive%20engineer%3B%2Cc0], and remains the modern industry term for this position on a train. It is a clear and WP:RECOGNIZABLE title for this article about operators of locomotives. We do not currently have an article about "engineers who design trains/railways", so the claims of any confusion are weak.  A "train driver" seems to be a different occupation which is related to subways trains, not locomotives per se, so I think voters proposing it are making that case incorrectly (in addition to their own admitted violation of WP:ENGVAR). -- Netoholic @ 04:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 *  Requesting a review/overview - of separation of usages rather than a one size fits all conversation... What has happened to wikipedia? some years ago there was an accepted and well practised and very distinct separation of usages for US, UK, European (and even further breakdowns into other regional usages) train/railroad/railway terminology.  This conversation suggest that we have collectively forgotten or somehow regressed horribly into bickering about a one size fits all.  It never does, surely we can go back to separate usages as a means of separating railroad and railway and identifying the difference.  I cannot believe there are not editors who have been around long enough who were involved in separating the variations and usages to offer some reflections on the issue.  If there are not, we are truly bound for chaos. JarrahTree 05:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There still is have a distinct separation of railroad/railway/rail. Each term is fully understood worldwide,a nd it is just a matter of local usage. With this case, however, we have railroad engineer, which is a completely different thing from a rail/railway engineer. And the term train/locomotive engineer is just as confusing. For that reason we need something that avoids that confusion by moving away from the term engineer to something which is understood as the same thing worldwide. Hence the suggestion of Train driver, which can only possibly mean one thing and is a term used, albeit in a minority, in the US as well as in the Commonwealth. Grutness... wha?   06:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * A "train driver" seems to be a different occupation which is related to subways trains, not locomotives per se, so I think voters proposing it are making that case incorrectly... Nope, "train driver" refers to any operator of a train in most of the world. "Engineer" is only used in this context in North America and that is the only place where it is the industry standard, or indeed recognisable or clear. Elsewhere it would be interpreted as something quite different. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This article began with its current title back in 2005, so it began by using American (U.S.) and Canadian English for its title and content. That is where it should stay. It would be insupportable to change to the British form, such as "train driver", after nearly fifteen years of using American English. We don't change title and content in British English articles, so we should not convert to British English here. "Railroad engineer" is just fine as an article title about the operator of a locomotive that can pull a train. It is a long-used and -respected title for a train operator in both the United States and Canada. Nor do I see any good reason to change the title to "locomotive engineer", since that is synonymous with "railroad engineer". Perhaps something like Engineer (railroad) is acceptable; however, the present title is the better form of natural disambiguation of the term "engineer" as it pertains to the operator of a railroad engine and train.  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 02:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * My rationale above implies the Manual of Style guideline at MOS:RETAIN, so I thought I'd make that explicit and clear... This is Wikipedia's answer to editors who have shown a preference to change this article title from one English language variety to another.  P.I. Ellsworth    ed.  put'r there 07:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Prefer train engineer as the most natural solution, but strong oppose any title with "driver" - it's an operator of a locomotive engine, it's an engineer. The proposed title is acceptable. I do get the ambiguity of the current title, but I accept the status quo as well. Red   Slash  17:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced that Americans all call these people railroad engineers and more. When I worked through the category  about half the American articles were about civil engineers.  Rathfelder (talk) 19:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably incorrect to assume that "all" Americans do anything in common, . The common and age-old name for the operator of a train in the United States is "engineer", and that's because the common names for the car that usually pulls all the other cars are "engine" and "locomotive". "Railroad", "locomotive" and such are just natural disambiguators.  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 16:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sure they dont. But the point is that the title is now misleading.  A fair proportion of Americans clearly thought it meant people who built railroads. Rathfelder (talk) 16:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The title is by no means misleading, so your assertion is doubtful. People other than Americans might think the term means something else; however, as I've said above, this article is written in American and Canadian English, and what this article is about is well-explained in the lead. Calling the train operator an "engineer" is key. That's what people in the United States call the operator – an "engineer".  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 16:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * *Move to Train driver. One needs a diploma in a relevant field to be called an engineer. Mikus (talk) 19:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Move to Train driver per the above comments. Although normally I'd support a WP:RETAIN argument even for US titles, as I know that convention works well and minimises conflict. However, here it seems to me that the exception mentioned: "when a topic has strong national ties or the change reduces ambiguity" is satisfied. To a UK reader, the term "railroad engineer" doesn't match the term of this page at all. I would assume on seeing this title that it referred to someone involved in construction or maintenance of the tracks. The term "train driver" on the other hand, is very clear in what it refers to, even to a US reader who may not routinely use that term. And also, as noted above, many US sources do use the term "train driver". Altogether, the pros of the proposed move significantly outweigh the cons. Thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Move to Train driver This would appear to fall under the "the change reduces ambiguity" element of MOS:RETAIN. Either of the titles including the word engineer suggests (at least to British people) someone who works on building/repairing tracks or engines. Contrary to the claim above "train driver" is not limited to people driving subway trains (in the UK, trains are driven by train drivers, the subway is driven by tube drivers). Also, from Ngrams, it would appear that despite the possible duplication of the engineer roles, train drivers has recently pipped them both as the most common description in books. Number   5  7  21:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment to, , , , , , : Please consider that "train driver" is a different occupation than the one covered in this article. I think if you are used to this terminology in the UK and elsewhere, its because most of the trains you encounter are subways/metros. Operators of subways/streetcars/metros have a different skill set compared to what this article's topic is related to trains that have locomotives (please follow links to show the different occupation classifications). What you may actually be seeking is a separate and new article instead of renaming this, and I fear this confusion will damage the history of this distinct topic. This is not a RETAIN issue - its an issue of apples vs. oranges - different topics. -- Netoholic @ 19:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Train drivers in the UK drive above-ground trains. The people who operate the London Underground (subway/metro) trains are called "tube drivers". The people who operate trams (streetcars) are called tram drivers. The first sentence of this article even notes that they are called train drivers in Commonwealth countries. Number   5  7  19:33, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If you think they are the same occupation, then your only rationale for "train driver" is based on a violation of WP:RETAIN. -- Netoholic @ 19:46, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * They are the same occupation and my !vote above specifically references a section of WP:RETAIN where it says there are cases where it can be moved. Number   5  7  20:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I am in agreement with Number 57. A "train driver" is, unsurprisingly, a person who drives trains. Of any sort, not just underground or subway. And my !vote is not a violation of RETAIN, because it cites an explicit section of RETAIN which applies in this instance. Thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * My objection to the present title is that it is linked to a misleading categorisation. I worked through all the articles categorised as "Railroad engineer".  About half of them were about engineers who designed and built locomotives, and many of those were American.  My guess is that even in the USA not everyone uses the term Railroad engineer for the drivers these days.    We need a title which is not ambiguous and that overrides the usage in any particular place. We wont find a title which is used everywhere.  Train driver is not perfect, but it is not ambiguous, and nobody seems to have suggested anything better.  Rathfelder (talk) 21:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Please consider that "train driver" is a different occupation than the one covered in this article. I think if you are used to this terminology in the UK and elsewhere, its because most of the trains you encounter are subways/metros. No it isn't, as has already been pointed out multiple times. In the UK and other countries, a train driver is the driver of any train. The term was in use with steam locomotives (which had a driver and a fireman) and is still in use today with electric trains. It was even in use with operators of stationary engines which powered machinery in factories (who were called engine drivers). "Engineer" is an American peculiarity and is not used in other countries. Not sure why you don't seem to be able to grasp this. And I don't know why you think that we're only familiar with subways/metros; we do have a lot of surface railways, you know. In fact, Britain invented the concept! We had the first powered surface railway and the first underground railway. O*NET OnLine, the website you keep citing to back up your claims that this is the standard term, is an American site sponsored by the U.S. Department of Labor, so of course it uses American terminology. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Necrothesp is correct. The term train driver is used in a very similar way on both sides of the Atlantic, and in many other countries, and is, in fact more all-encompassing. The term "engineer", in the rail transport context, is far more confusing, only being used in much of the world for something completely different from the aim of the current category (i.e., an engineer who builds/designs/repairs rail transport), and having two conflicting meanings within the United States. The term "train driver" is used throughout the English-speaking world, including within the United States, so it makes complete sense to rename this category accordingly. Grutness... wha?   04:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.