Template talk:Infobox rail

Help with "no image.png"
Currently about 80 articles that use the Infobox rail calls it with "logo_filename = no image.png". It seems it was used to fix a problem with a large empty logo area in the old versions of this template. This is not needed anymore. Although I have left the code in the template to handle this call. Do not remove that code from this template for now, or we will instead get large empty spaces on those pages that call with "no image.png". I would like that people help out and change "logo_filename = no image.png" to be "logo_filename =" in the railway articles that call this template. When that has been done we can remove the handling code in this template. I have already fixed 29 articles but would like help with the remaining 80.

So if you are in the mood, do this: Go to File:No image.png and scroll down to the "File links" section. Look for railway articles there. Most of the rail articles there use Infobox rail, Infobox Railroad or Infobox SG rail, if they do then change "logo_filename = no image.png" to be "logo_filename =".

Note! If the article is not using any of the boxes I just listed but instead are using a hardcoded infobox then do not remove the "no image.png". You can recognise that it is a hardcoded infobox by it using a wikitable instead and has style="something" stuff in the top. --David Göthberg (talk) 00:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Fixed the rest. I realised that if I turn off image loading in my web browser then I can load and edit pages way faster. (I got a rather old computer.) Why didn't I come up with that idea years ago? Darn.
 * --David Göthberg (talk) 09:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Request
editprotected Please remove "line" from the headings "predecessor line" and "successor line". Most railroads had more than one line. --NE2 11:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I've changed how it is displayed while leaving how it works. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Addition of Corporate Information to Template
As this infobox applies to railroads, which are corporations, I would like to request the following changes. This would allow us to capture pertinent corporate information and bring the infobox in line with Infobox company whilst allowing the preservation of railroad specific data that is obviously also of use.

Add the following data elements:


 * Type
 * Fate
 * Key People
 * Industry (could perhaps default to Rail transport?)
 * Services
 * Market Cap
 * Revenue
 * Operating Income
 * Net Income
 * Assets
 * Equity
 * Owner
 * Number of Employees
 * Parent
 * Divisions
 * Subsidiaries
 * Footnotes

Modify the following data elements:


 * Replace "hq_city" with the following:
 * foundation - Where company was established (initial headquarters)
 * location - Where company is headquartered now

Definitions for each data element can be found on Infobox_Company/doc. Discussion on these requested changes is of course more than welcome. - Richc80 (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm curious where I'd find this information. Let's use the West Texas and Lubbock Railway and Western Rail Road as examples. --NE2 21:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If you can't find it don't worry - the idea is (I think) that if the data can be got then the info box supports it.
 * Some companies do publish more corporate data than others - in the UK the local library can usually help you find out this information from a business directory - If those companies you mention are local to you I'd imagine you can get similar data from a similar source.
 * Some of the data will probably be published in a yearly financial or corporate report - the sort of thing that is of interest to shareholders - I've no idea if these things are 'public domain' - or whether any freedom of infomormation laws (where ever you are) makes it public (by law).
 * Some of the fields will not be applicable in the case of subsidaries?
 * That was exactly the intent, all of these data elements would be optional and some would not apply to subsidiaries. The biggest benefit of these additional data elements will be for the larger railroads, such as Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern Railway or Canadian Pacific Railway, but there is still benefit for those that are smaller (using the West Texas example, the article tells me that it is a subsidiary, its owner is Iowa Pacific Holdings, its parent is Permian Basin Railways and its services would be Rail Freight). - Richc80 (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Totally Agree - making the infobox effectively a speciailised sub-set of the infobox company is absolutely the right thing to do.FengRail (talk) 21:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also see 'Template:Infobox rail company' which also should have the same thing done to it.


 * At the same time I'd like to suggest the addition of further subheadings:
 * Passenger kilometers
 * Passenger years
 * Ton kilometers
 * ie those describe at Units of transportation measurement


 * Comment' It the suggestion of further subheadings in adopted, then there should also be the imperial equivalents. Mjroots (talk) 06:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Passenger miles
 * Ton miles
 * Seems perfectly reasonable - (if there is a way to combine both.. I can't think how)FengRail (talk) 15:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * As there have been no major objections to any of the suggestions above I am making the formal request for these changes to be made. Thanks! Richc80 (talk) 13:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Could I suggest that you put your desired code in the sandbox? I might also suggest that you use the meta template Infobox. If you need help with it, please let me know. When it's ready just drop a note on my talk or place the editprotected again. Cheers, &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Support -- very much in favor of these improvements to the infobox. The discussion dates back to February and I see no objections... can someone go ahead and make the changes, then? —BMRR (talk) 05:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Anyone? —BMRR (talk) 01:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Fix
Please replace with. --NE2 14:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Additional parameters
Please add the following optional parameters which already exist in some form on Template:Infobox rail line and Template:BS-daten: Incline, minimum radius and Rack (if any) as well as change electrification to electrification. Peter Horn 17:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Fix electrification
Why doed the electrification data not show? Peter Horn 02:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ditto. Peter Horn 02:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Rhaetian Railway, The | electrification  = problem is still there and in both boxes at that. Peter Horn 16:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Because the template does not support that parameter currently, along with some others, e.g. old_gauge. It doesn't seem to have supported them for a long time, if ever. Perhaps the documentation was created as a kind of wish list, rather than to reflect reality :) I'll have a go at incorporating them into the template, but it might take a few days. While we're here, are there any other parameters that would be useful? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * old_gauge is unnecessary here, since it's part of infobox SG rail that partially overrides the default gauge. --NE2 21:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * See Template:Infobox rail line. Peter Horn 18:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have just added the info box of the Bern-Lötschberg-Simplon railway where the electrificarion does not show up either! Peter Horn 21:48, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I have a version in the sandbox which now includes electrification and old_gauge, i.e. all the parameters which are advertised on the documentation. Perhaps someone could test it? There is a testcase on Template:Infobox rail/testcases. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyone? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:24, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. Let me know if there are any problems. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:30, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Horay!! Electrification now shows in all samples that I submitted. Thanks guys. Peter Horn 00:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Fix website
Why does the website not show? Peter Horn 02:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Reporting mark
Please remove the "s" after reporting mark; the term is singular. --NE2 23:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've done it ... but is it not possible that two marks be specified? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It's possible, but rare. It's also possible, for instance, that two predecessors are given. --NE2 17:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Additional parameters
Please add the following optional parameters which already exist in some form on Template:Infobox rail line and Template:BS-daten: Incline, minimum radius and Rack (if any) as well as change electrification to electrification. Peter Horn 16:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

This box: view • talk
Why do we have this in the lower right corner? It's a small convenience for an editor who might want to know about the infobox, but suggests to the average user that it offers detail and discussion about the contents of the infobox. It also appears in the wrong infobox if one is embedded, see Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad.. . . . Jim. . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 14:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm inclined to get rid of it. &mdash;Mulad (talk) 19:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Turns out that it's a result of converting to using Template:Infobox as a higher-level template. Standard Infoboxes have it.  Not really sure why.  I've added a query at Template_talk:Infobox. &mdash;Mulad (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It appears now to be gone; it is no longer at Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad, which I cited above, and IIRC, it was present in all the boxes to the right here, as well. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs)  12:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Rail gauge to Track gauge
Please change the link Rail gauge to Track gauge. Article has been renamed. TrackConnect (talk) 11:13, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Request: livery colors
Could some sort of feature be worked out to display the livery colors (i.e. the identifying paint schemes for locomotive and passenger cars) [for those railways with constant liveries], similar to the way the University infobox allows the analogous display of "school colors"? This would be particularly useful for those of us who deal with historic railroads, where such was a major part of the corporate identity.Morgan Riley (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Peter Horn, 17 July 2011
Change Electrification to Electrification

Peter Horn User talk 21:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Peter Horn User talk 19:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 November 2011
Please add a major commodities section to the infobox between "Length" and "Headquarters". Some railways specialize in a certain item.

Fairly OddParents Freak 02:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Could I ask you to discuss this proposal on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains to see if their is support for a new parameter? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Change to "Locale" Field
Hi folks. Could we please consider changing the fieldname "locale" to the more internationally recognised and more accurate "location" or "locality". "Country" would also work since that's what we seem to enter here. I believe "locale" is very much American vernacular for "locality", but it is rare in Europe and elsewhere. Also, according to the international Oxford Dictionary of English, "locale" is strictly "a place where something happens" or "has particular events associated with it" i.e. it's more like a "venue", whereas the other two terms are just used for the place, position or site of something. Thanks. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

TfD
Please tag this template with:



As I've just nominated it for discussion. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:35, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 22:21, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Again additional parameters
Add: from Template:Infobox rail line. Peter Horn User talk 18:56, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * lgauge       =
 * minradius    =
 * racksystem   =
 * and others,
 * Disagree. These templates are not the same. A rail line requires those paramaters, this is for the company and none of those apply. Secondarywaltz (talk) 04:24, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh please, the same could be said of:
 * |gauge            =
 * |old_gauge        =
 * |electrification  =
 * |length           =
 * which are already included and used. According to the above reasoning Manitou and Pike's Peak Railway would require two templates. Peter Horn User talk 15:45, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Peter Horn User talk 16:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with you on some individual usage, but then why don't you just merge the Infoboxes if they would mostly have the same parameters? What is the difference, as you see it? Rather than patching up the problem, how can we fix this? Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge only if it can be done without creating chaos, since both templates are used un innumerable articles. To complicate things, there are Template:Infobox rail and Template:Infobox SG rail thase would be the ones to be retained and Template:Infobox rail line would become the "redirect". Have fun. Peter Horn User talk 00:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that this merger has already been considered back in July and rejected. See at the top of this talk page. Peter Horn User talk 01:12, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Or go directly to Templates for discussion/Log/2013 July 27 Peter Horn User talk 01:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Add ridership to template
Could a ridership parameter identical to that on infobox rail line be added? There are a number of systems - take for example MBTA Commuter Rail or Amtrak - where daily (or as an option, annual) ridership would be reasonable to add. Ridership is not a technical parameter that should be restricted to lines; it's an important consideration for systems as a whole. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:19, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Qed237&#160;(talk) 21:33, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Whoops, didn't realize that wasn't to be added until after consensus. My bad. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:21, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 27 September 2017
Hi there. I was hoping to request that a map field is added to this template, so that maps or route diagram templates can bee added. For example, I have created CG Railway, and I wish to display it inline with the infobox instead of a standalone navbox on the CG Railway article. A similar edit was made to Infobox hiking trail, the edit which you can see here, and the result you can ee at Beltline Trail. Thanks! -- Natural  R X 15:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Please do this in Template:Infobox rail/sandbox and test it in Template:Infobox rail/testcases then re-enable the after ensure it works properly.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  05:28, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit stuck, I managed to add what is already in Infobox rail line but it is duplicating the template, as can be seen in Template:Infobox rail/testcases. Anyone know what's going on? -- Natural  R X 13:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Which bit is duplicated? -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 20:03, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The routemap I am trying to insert (CG Railway/inline). If you look on Template:Infobox rail/testcases, it is displaying as it should at the bottom of the infobox. But it is also inserting at the top of the infobox for some reason, and it's doing it for the current state of the infobox, and the sandbox version. So I figure it's either something to do with the language in Routemap or the current infobox. Either way it's beyond my abilities to figure out. But It seems fixable to me if it can be done in similar infoboxes. One thing to point out: Infobox rail line does use Lua and that's where I stole the code from, so that may have something to do with it as well. -- Natural  R X 20:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. In, you added code for a map parameter - it's the  - but the template already had some code as follows:   This means that there are two different uses for the map parameter, so you need to pick something else that does not duplicate parameters already in use. Since the template is not written in Lua, it's easy to do - just search for all occurrences of triple opening braces   and whatever comes after those, up to (but not including) the next pipe or triple closing braces, is a parameter name. This is not at all easy to do for templates written in Lua. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 22:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I changed it to line_map per the code in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CG_Railway&oldid=806893600 CG Railway] and since map was already taken. or, we could use routemap per infobox heritage railway. or, we could change all the articles using map to use a different parameter name for map images?  Frietjes (talk) 15:50, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * after the tracking category filled up, I found zero articles using map correctly: (1) Kita-Osaka Kyuko Railway was using both map and system_map, and (2) Edinburgh and Northern Railway is passing a route map. so, I think we can safely repurpose this parameter for route maps.  I have put some code in the sandbox.  comments?  problems? objections? Frietjes (talk) 16:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * okay, now updated to allow routemap or map for compatibility with infobox heritage railway and infobox rail line. Frietjes (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Just in case anyone is interested, Template:CG Railway/inline is being discussed for deletion here. Since it doesn't appear to be used anywhere that doesn't seem problematic. Mujinga (talk) 05:24, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 4 March 2018
Please add, per a nomination by. &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 15:45, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
 * added. Frietjes (talk) 15:50, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 12 March 2018
Please remove the Tfm/dated per the TfD outcome. Thanks. Nihlus 07:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Caption problem
Thanks for fixing the parameter checking. Could you or do something with caption. It appears that this para is displayed under both the logo and image. See Heathrow Express for an example. Infobox company solved this by using image_caption and logo_caption. I'm not sure if it is best to assume caption is most likely for the image, but probably so. Probably would need some interim tracking to get to a final resolution of this conflict. MB 20:46, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed (with a workaround until someone wants to take on a giant cleanup task on 2,400 pages). – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

other_name no longer supported
Why was support for other_name removed? This was previously present in Template:Infobox rail company and is now leading to edits like by, that should not be necessary. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 17:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, logo_width, as with by ; and some other parameters. I can see that I may need to go through the merge and review all of the removals. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I was cleaning up errors in Category:Pages using infobox rail with unknown parameters. There were only dozens and they are all gone now, so I see no need to support alternates for image_size or logo_size. No comment on other_name. MB 17:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll be honest, I missed it. If I had to guess it's because I didn't notice there was a param under the caption, but now I've re-added it. Primefac (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I also merged other_name just now (and have tidied up after my duplicated edit with Primefac), though it does not appear to have any uses. I think I "fixed" two of them that I will now revert if I can find them. Hold on a sec... Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Minimum radius
Would it be possible to add the field "| minradius =" which appears in Template:Infobox rail line  to cover the minimum railway curve radius ? It would be useful for the Yakima Valley Transportation Company Peter Horn User talk 21:47, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello every one. Nobody choose to answer this. Peter Horn User talk 22:52, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, it's a niche use-case and wouldn't be relevant in most cases. Mackensen (talk) 23:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * This relevant information is almost consistently available from Jane's World Railways as is grade. Peter Horn User talk 23:17, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

USA RR Class listing Suggestion
Is there a standardized place in the Infobox to put the railroad's "class" (i.e., for USA RR as defined by STB)? Casey (talk) 16:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Bold
Display of the previous_gauge parameter should not be bolded. Ponydepression (talk) 22:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Parameter error checking
In this version, the template had no value and with a value. The parameter checking did not display any error, yet the article was in Category:Pages using infobox rail with unknown parameters - even though there were no unknown parameters. Fixed now by removing logo_filename=, but it would have been a lot easier to find with better checks/errors. ? MB 02:44, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * This is the code in Template:Infobox rail:  It's designed to detect the presence of certain combinations of mutually-exclusive parameter pairs. Of the six tests here, the first two are violated since we have NI Railways with railroad_name and Ni railways logo.svg with logo_filename, even though the second one is blank in both cases. If we substitute in the values from the old version, we find   and the ifeq tests then reduce to   and so the page is categorised as you describe. The important thng to remember here is that code like   tests as the blank value because railroad_name is blank: the enclosed   is ignored. Blank values are still values. The fix is to remove the unused railroad_name and logo_filename from NI Railways. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 08:32, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but this is difficult to fix. Other templates have better handling of conflicting parameters. See infobox person for an example. It gives: "Preview warning: Using more than one of the following parameters in Infobox person:,  " for example which eliminates hunting for the problem. MB 15:36, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Then we need something like this instead:  -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Frietjes has added the clobbered para check to several high-use templates. It really helps. This template only has ~2800 transclusions, which is reasonable large but not among the biggest ones. If you or someone adds it here, it may eventually save more work in fixing articles that it takes to update the template. <b style="color:#034503">MB</b> 18:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I, including several other pairs not previously tested. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 21:06, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * nice work, now added to the main template. Frietjes (talk) 15:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 18 February 2023
Please change link to Railway electrification system to be a link to Railway electrification (per WP:DOFIXIT), as I've recently moved that page via WP:RMT. ---  Tbf69   P •&#32;T 19:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'er there 02:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Key people
I propose that this infobox implement a key_people parameter similar to. Railroad officers vary among companies and countries but at least in the United States the President and CEO would be obvious people to include, and possibly the board chairman. Mackensen (talk) 02:51, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I added two parameters to the sandbox, key_people and founders. The Amtrak testcase at Template:Infobox rail/testcases shows the key_people parameter with a . Mackensen (talk) 03:02, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Has this been implemented or even looked at yet? I admit that I am the one with an interest in this being done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeanC01 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @DeanC01 I've implemented it. Mackensen (talk) 02:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright!
 * Thanks! DeanC01 (talk) 02:47, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

✅ by Mackensen

Date range spacing
Where either start_year or end_year contains a space, the dash separating them should be spaced; e.g. at Portsdown and Horndean Light Railway we should see "March 2, 1903 – January 9, 1935". See MOS:DATERANGE. Really the parameters should be called start_date and end_date. Hairy Dude (talk) 12:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)