Template talk:WikiProject Trains/Archive 1

Abridged template proposal
This template is, I think, too big compared to some other project membership templates that I've seen recently. I'd like to propose shortening it to something like the following:

We could, while we're at it, follow the lead of and integrate the portal DYK date template to display something like:

but I'm not as keen on that. I'm more partial to the first option shown here, unless we can come up with something that looks better... Slambo (Speak) 13:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I actually like the template in its present form. Check out Template:WPMILHIST for another "take" on message box templates for talk pages.--Lordkinbote 17:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

So, if we reduce the size of the image and the amount of text to look more like that one, then add in the "missing" items we get something like this...

If the optional parameters are not used on a specific page, it would look like this...

It's still smaller, but the other items are available if they're needed. I like the assessment aspect (which is also included in the Chemistry banner) and think it would be helpful here, but I worry a little about the size of the associated categories getting a bit large (just take a look at the number of articles identified so far on the recent changes monitor list). Slambo (Speak) 18:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Looking through some of the other assessment categories, I see lists that are one page long (the FA-class categories) up to as many as 27 pages long (the unassessed categories), so this shouldn't be a concern for us. So, are there any objections to implementing the third/fourth examples shown here? Slambo (Speak)  11:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I like them!--Lordkinbote 15:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've got a mockup with the optional parameters to make it behave like is shown here at User:Slambo/Template test 4, with sample output testing on User:Slambo/Template usage test. Is there anything else that should be included?  Slambo (Speak)  19:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Testing complete, reusing that testing location for another template. Slambo (Speak)  13:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I am a new joinee on this project and could not find this template anywhere on the project page or the talk page till very recently. I like the fourth listed option the best. It gives sufficient yet succinct info to enthusiasts and they can get more info from the links. -- Lost 04:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, so it's now implemented with the class and portaldykdate parameters. See WikiProject Trains/Assessment for more on the class parameter. I'll be adding a usage statement here soon. Slambo (Speak) 15:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I just want to confirm whether I should use the subst prefix before the template or not, while adding this to the various talk pages? -- Lost 17:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

While I was writing this comment, Slambo was writing the answer on the project page :) -- Lost 17:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Further enhancements, subprojects
There are a number of subprojects of WikiProject Trains. Looking around again, I see that the Military History project incorporates this information into their project banner through the taskforce parameter. We could easily do similar here, and I've got a sample working copy at my template test page and template output test page.

I know that the Trains in Japan project already built a banner, so I've tried to integrate it into my test template. It would be switched here through the use of the Primary parameter. Specifying  produces something very similar to Trains in Japan, but also enables all of the rating and DYK parameters so they can be displayed there too. The advantage here is that we would have only one template to maintain, and the main portion of the template output would list the appropriate text for the specific project, and we don't have to setup and monitor a second set of ratings categories and still only display one project banner on the articles' talk pages.

Thoughts? Slambo (Speak) 18:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * A minor clarification, just to note what might be a potential issue here: the military history template (WPMILHIST) links to "task forces" of the WikiProject proper rather than "subprojects". It's a rather subtle difference, admittedly (and I'm not sure what the exact relationship among the various rail projects is, so it may be more or less of a problem); but the essential distinction is that the task forces, while somewhat autonomous in function, are fundamentally an integral part of the overall project, and are therefore bound to its project-wide internal policies.  There is thus no question of different task forces using, for example, varying interpretations of the various rating classes (which might become a more significant issue if/when you introduce importance ratings).
 * (In general, it might be worthwhile to consider if such an organizational model might not be something which the rail projects might find worthwhile; but that's an issue rather broader in scope than the question of template modifications.) Kirill Lokshin 18:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * They don't have to change. Going through a few Australian rail articles, I discovered WP Australia.  They include the main Australia WikiProject as the primary but list "This article is supported by WikiProject FOO" for whatever subproject is appropriate (see Talk:Epping railway line, Melbourne for an example).  So, any objections to implementing a similar tactic with the rail subprojects? Slambo (Speak)  20:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Smaller size soon to be available...
I've been following the discussions at Mini Talkpage Template pretty closely. The proposal has now reached a consensus that talk page templates like this one should implement  as an optional parameter; if it's set to , then it should display in a smaller format like can be seen on Talk:Leonardo da Vinci. I expect to implement this parameter here by this weekend (although with my obligations to display NTrak modules at Trainfest this weekend, don't hold me to a specific deadline date). Slambo (Speak) 14:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Done. Adding   will make the template use a smaller display format similar to the others described above. Slambo (Speak)  17:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The small size is now being used on Talk:TGV. As you can see there, we need to work out shorter text for a few of the parameter outputs. Any suggestions? Slambo (Speak)  12:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Redundant category
Can someone please remove Category:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation articles from this template? Everything in it is also placed in a sub-category. --NE2 06:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * done. Slambo (Speak) 11:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

New image for UK use
Please could an editor with sufficient privileges modify this template to use the image:  in place of the current one, for the option selected by parameter UK=yes, as discussed at talk:WikiProject UK Railways regards, Lynbarn
 * Done. Slambo (Speak)  09:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

New subproject
Can someone please incorporate the WikiProject Metros of the former Soviet Union into this template, so the Soviet Metro and the Trains WikiProjects can share a template. Any objections? —dima/s-ko/ 19:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * (catching up on replies here...) The  parameter will do this. Slambo (Speak)  11:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject London Transport
Could you please remove the WP:LT tag from this template and replace it on WP:LT articles with our full template - WP London Transport - please? Unisouth 15:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

List-Class assessments
I've recently rated most of the Rapid transit lists as list-class. They show as list-class, but also as unassessed. Might that be changed in the template, please? I added the list-class parameter in the WPRT template, but this one seems to be overriding it somehow. Guess I've reached my limits on comprehension of esoteric syntax. If there's a reason for list-class articles to also show as unassessed, though, could that be explained on the main template page, please? Thanks, and later, folks. -Ebyabe 14:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm looking into this... Slambo (Speak) 18:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Slambo (Speak) 18:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Danke! That's made the unassessed gone below 200. :) -Ebyabe 20:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Category:Needed-Class rail transport articles
I'm noticing a similar situation to the list-class issue with this category of articles. Or non-articles, really, as the articles are redlinks. Maybe that could be changed/corrected too, por favor? :) -Ebyabe 14:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you look back through the TWP archives, you'll see some discussion on this. The solution that was implemented, the WikiProject Trains/New article notes page, is fairly under-utilized right now.  We could remove the Needed-Class category from the template quickly, but I'm a little hesitant to do that until the category is empty. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak)  18:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * TWP? What's Television Without Pity got to do with trains? ;)
 * Oh, no, I wasn't suggesting anything like that. I just thought Needed-Class articles shouldn't show as unassessed. Since they don't exist yet, there's nothing to assess, doncha know. I thought actually creating a Needed-Class category for them all to reside in might be a better idea, like you did for List-Class. Just like the idea of only real unassessed articles showing up as unassessed.
 * But never mind me. I'm just breezing thru various WikiProjects and assessing articles, and y'all are one of the latest whistlestops. Cheers, and thanks for your help! :) -Ebyabe 20:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, you already have the needed-class category. Doh! -Ebyabe 20:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * (Aside) TWP is the Trains WikiProject. WP:TWP redirects there while TWP redirects to this template. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 14:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Now I see the real issue. I'll look into fixing it later today. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak)  14:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Add Nesting Option?
Could you change the very first line from: {| to: {| class=""

This will add the "nesting" option that's being used by WikiProjectBannerShell. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 20:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 01:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * 10Q very much! to see it in action :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  01:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

adopt an article
Can we add something here so we can type whos adopted the article, as WP:UKT has an adopt an article scheme? i dont know what pic to use... <b style="font-family:Segoe UI;"> AC Best  My Contributions  Autograph Book </b>
 * We could, but would it be better to use maintained instead? With that template, we don't have to worry so much about multiproject collaborations (i.e. Wisconsin and Southern Railroad being maintained by members of both WikiProject Trains and WikiProject Wisconsin). Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak)  19:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not particularly comfortable with the adopt an article concept and have explained this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways where I would welcome others opinions on this issue. Adambro 20:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've disabled the editprotected request while discussion continues. Cheers. --MZMcBride 20:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure, i dont mind slambo's idea, i'll do that then. Thanks! <b style="font-family:Segoe UI;"> AC Best  My Contributions  Autograph Book </b> 07:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Update ready for rollout
editprotected I need an admin to update the template to a new version (I'm using my unprivileged account on a public wireless access point right now). The code to be copied is at User:Slambo/TWP test. Copy that code over the code on this template, but please ensure that the noinclude section here is preserved. Thanks. Slambo 42 12:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * done. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 18:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

SVG version of Image:Kanji railway icon transparent.png now available
There is now an SVG version of Image:Kanji railway icon transparent.png available so if someone with the power to change the image in the template (see here for an example of the image in use) would do so, it would be greatly appreciated. -Nameneko 21:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 22:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Edit Please
Please remove the former monorails task force from this template.--MrFishGo Fish 17:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Coming up... Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 17:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 18:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Category correction
editprotected

If a page with UK=yes is classed as NA, could it please be placed in the category Category:Non-article UK Railways pages, rather than the unassessed category? --Jorvik 18:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅. Did I do it right? <small style="background:#fff;border:#ccc 1px solid;color:#000;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap">east<big style="color:#090">. 718 at 21:04, 11/4/2007


 * Almost yes, however an article tagged as NA still appears in the unknown importance category. To prevent this happening, I think |NA|NA= needs to be added to this list:


 * }|

Thanks, --Jorvik 21:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅. You might also want to use the "purge" action on a page to test it out immediately. <small style="background:#fff;border:#8b0000 1px solid;color:#000;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap">east<big style="color:#090">. 718 at 21:26, 11/4/2007

Importance not getting suppressed when it should be
I probably missed a  somewhere, but the importance rating isn't getting suppressed for NA or Category class pages like it should; the importance used to be suppressed for list class as well, but after discussions on the 1.0 project pages, we now do want importance ratings for lists (this part is working correctly). I plan to take a closer look at it this weekend (in my test area), but if someone else wants to jump in and find the problem first, just leave a note here. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 22:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Updated
I've just installed an update that I've been working on for this template. I tried to solicit comments from members of the project, and integrated all the feedback I got. This update was developed at User:Slambo/TWP test 1, and subtemplates User:Slambo/TWP test 1/portalbox, User:Slambo/TWP test 1/associated and User:Slambo/TWP test 1/tasks. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 11:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Convert to Template:WPBannerMeta
Someone should convert this template to Template:WPBannerMeta. Gary King ( talk ) 01:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Nesting problem
When used within, the [hide]/[show] link in has a layout problem. When in the collapsed form, [show] is right-justified just like all other [hide]/[show] (regardless of state) for all the banners. However, when in the expanded form, [hide] shifts left, a behavior different from other banners (and surprising that a toggle-switch moves when being toggled:). It appears to be grouped/positioned with the text, which is all to the left of the Trains Portal box. See Talk:Canton Viaduct for demo. Not sure if it's a misuse/misapplication of here. However I note that the TWP template appears to have subst'ed WPBM or cut'n'pasted some other attempt at nesting features rather than transcluding it (nonstandard vs other banners that I spot-checked). DMacks (talk) 05:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Another new subproject
Would someone kindly incorporate WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica into this template. You might like to use the flag icon from Template:WikiProject Caribbean. Many thanks. -Arb. (talk) 00:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Aliases for Wikiproject London Transport parameters
Would it be possible to create aliases for the following parameters which invoke the Wikiproject London Transport sub-section? As the project covers more than just the London Underground, they would be better named as indicated. The existing parameters would need to remain to avoid breaking the banners that use the current parameter names.

--DavidCane (talk) 23:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Conversion of banner to using WPBannerMeta
I've been working on a new version of the project banner which uses WPBannerMeta. You can see the current version of this in the sandbox. There is also the current and sandbox version on the testcases page so that they can be compared.

There are a few of small issues with some of the category names which will mean that some categories would need to be renamed if the sandbox version was to be used:


 * For Rapid transit assessment categories, the quality ones have a capital R and the importance ones have a lower case r. One set will need renaming to make them consistent, so I've chosen the importance ones to be renamed.
 * For WikiProject Transport in Scotland:
 * Items currently in Category:WikiProject Transport in Scotland categories would move to Category:Category-Class Scotland Transport articles
 * Items currently in Category:WikiProject Transport in Scotland templates would move to Category:Template-Class Scotland Transport articles
 * (as these are currently split anyway, it makes sense to consolodate them into one location)
 * For New Zealand Railways (NZR) assessment categories, the quality ones use "New Zealand Railways" and the importance ones use "NZR". One set will need renaming to make them consistent, so I've chosen the importance ones to be renamed.

There's still a bit more testing and tweaking to do but any comments are welcome. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I've also added the requests in the two sections above to the sandbox banner as well. -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * WikiProject Transport in Scotland has a wider scope than TrainsWikiProject, in that it also includes other forms of transport, such as roads, motorways, buses, ferries, bridges, etc. So, not all of WikiProject Transport in Scotland's "articles" are TrainsWikiProject's articles (and obviously - vica versa). I've no idea whether it has any impact on your proposals, but I'm highlighting it anyway. Pyrotec (talk) 19:12, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm aware that WikiProject Transport in Scotland has their own banner (WPTIS, which is already using WPBannerMeta) and the changes to the TrainsWikiProject won't affect that apart from the issue with the categories that I've already mentioned above and that is on the TrainsWikiProject side anyway. -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Another user notified me of this discussion today and requested my input. This conversion is something that I've been thinking we need to do in order to make the banner more accessible to the banner standardization efforts and to make it easier for banner programmers who are familiar with what has become standard template code for banners. I just haven't had time to delve into this part of the project.

One aspect of the update that should also be taken into consideration regards the parameter names. I've tried to migrate the parameters that don't relate to a specific country or region (i.e. passenger, subway, etc) to use only lower-case parameter names rather than proper-case (Passenger, Subway, etc), and migrate those that do relate to a specific country to use the standard 2-character country code for the parameter name (UK, DE, etc) instead of longer or non-standard names (Japan, NZR, etc). Mostly what needs to be done is that the parameter needs to be updated and then a bot needs to go around all of the template calls and make the update.

For me, one of the most important aspects of the banner is that it shows when and how an article was used on Portal:Trains (the portaldykdate and portalSAweek parameters especially), which has been my main focus of editing for some time now. The portalSIweek parameter has not been used as much because the pictures that appear as the Selected picture are generally on Commons and not copied locally to en. When I added these parameters to the banner, showing them in the portalbox section seemed the best option, and I'm happy to see that functionality retained in the new test environment. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 11:37, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. I'm going to request an admin to copy the sandbox version over now. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Can the sandbox version be copyed over to live. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've done it. This is the first time the size of the template has increased on conversion, which suggests that the previous version was coded quite efficiently! I'm not satisfied with the use of TrainsWikiProject/portalbox because it is interrupting the flow of text in the banner. Could this possibly be fixed? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The reason that this size has grown is because most of the content was in two subtemplates (TrainsWikiProject/tasks & TrainsWikiProject/associated) . Do you have any suggestions for the portalbox part, as it's not possible to use the builtin portal features of WPBannerMeta. Also, I've missed off HOOK_NESTED, so that's something I've got to fix. -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

editprotected Can the sandbox version be copyed over to live. This implements the showing of taskforce names when the banner is nested. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 23:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Image details blanked
I see that the new template is the standard now. Unfortunatley it blanks out the image details parameter. DanTD (talk) 02:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, that was a mistake on my part. I had used rather than . I've fixed it in the sandbox. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Can the sandbox version be copyed over to live. This fixes the image details parameter issue above.. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅. I've also changed the portal box until we can sort that out. Unfortunately I have no idea how to fix it though. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The portalbox looks fine if you don't have the navbar display set. -- WOSlinker (talk) 11:40, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh really? Could we test it on a selection of browsers just to make sure? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:39, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Similar issue on both Firefox & IE. TrainsWikiProject/portalbox and Portal templates contain similar code for styling and classes. Adding a option just before the Navbar in WPBannerMeta/core would all the issue to be resolved as I could then put the portal code against that hook. There may be other ways to fix it with styles but that's not something I could easily work out. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Additional problems since migration
In updating the portal today, I noticed there are still a few issues with the new template code. On Talk:Paveletsky Rail Terminal, the template call is:

The problems I see are: Thanks. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 11:33, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The infobox task is not shown in the banner display (whoops, this was my misspelling in the template call)
 * The unref parameter is not sorting this article into the correct categories; the article is currently sorted into both Category:Unreferenced New York City public transportation articles and Category:Unreferenced Scotland Transport articles but not Category:Unreferenced rail transport articles
 * The portal usage date is not displayed in the portal box. I see a note above about other work on the portalbox, so I'm guessing that someone is looking into this part already.


 * Talk:Paveletsky Rail Terminal is actually in Category:Unreferenced rail transport articles but it is just that it is a hidden category. You need to enable "Show hidden categories" on the appearances section of your preferences in order to see hidden categories or edit Category:Unreferenced rail transport articles and remove  . As to the portal issue, MSGJ disabled it when the other changes were copied over. Hopefully he will re-enable it soon. -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but as the article is about a station in Russia, adding it to the New York and Scotland categories is illogical and incorrect. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 11:41, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I misread your comment. I've spotted where the problem was, an extra } that shouldn't have been there. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Can the sandbox version be copyed over to live. This fixes the category issue above. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:46, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

General edit request: This page is maintained by XXX
Many of the options to this template produce text along the lines of
 * This page is maintained by WikiProject FOOBAR.

which sounds uncomfortably as if the WikiProject in question pretends to own the article. I have often had to remove |Stations=yes| or |Metro=yes| from articles that have had no edits at all from members of the specified WikiProject, and thus where that project cannot meaningfully be said ever to have "maintained" it in a meaningful sense. Several times I myself has been the only substantial contributor to an article before somebody comes along and edits the talk page (only!) with a tag that seems to assign all credit for the article to somebody else.

Could the wording be changed to something less exclusive, such as
 * This page is within the scope of WikiProject FOOBAR.

please? –Henning Makholm 16:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak) 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. –Henning Makholm 00:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Have found the reason for that. yes and yes are unrecognised; if these had been entered as yes and yes the relevant teams would have noticed them. I have added a note to the documentation stressing the importance of parameter name capitalisation. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:19, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

New sub-project
Can someone add a new sub-project, something like railway_engineering,. This would be good for articles like Voith and Siemens subsidiary Siemens Transportation Systems (look at their "Wegberg-Wildenrath Test Center" for an example of the scope of work they do) - who are involved in either the major infrastructures, or the manufacture of rail-specific projects. I know you have the locos sub-project, but that doesn't really cover the full scope of what Siemens Transportation Systems, Voith, and other similar companies offer. Kind regards. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 08:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you discuss this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Stations parameter
Regarding - see WP:BOTREQ. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Train2104, 3 November 2010
becomes

Since WP:NYCPT is a combination of a banner and 2 taskforces on other projects, I am creating a category to contain all pages so Article Alerts can be set up when they resume.&mdash; Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 23:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

imageneeded cat
Currently some requests are duplicated in Category:UK rail transport articles needing images or Category:New York City public transportation articles needing images and in the parent Category:Rail transport articles needing images. The parent category needs to contain less article image requests so that tools such as image search can easily be used on it. Template:WikiProject Trains/sandbox has been updated to edit required. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:30, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ❌ That is not a simple template. You will to get a working version in Template:WikiProject Trains/sandbox, and then request a change.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 01:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * What is not working in the sandbox version? Test I have made looked fine? --Traveler100 (talk) 05:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sorry, late night, there was a load of other edit requests without a sandbox version, thought this was similar.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 18:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request
Add the category Category:WikiProject Stations articles to the syntax for when the banner has the |stations=yes parameter.  Rcsprinter  (talkin' to me?)  20:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable, ✅. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

image requests
Starting to split Category:Rail transport articles needing images into more manageable chunks of data. First stage of edits made in sandbox.--Traveler100 (talk) 09:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Before making this live, I've tweaked it a little so that the legacy parameters Locos and Stations (which are both still in use on several talk pages) are treated similarly to the recommended parameters locos and stations - how's that? -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:36, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * thanks for the corrections, I will be more careful of legacy variants in future. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done The cats are already populating. Before I began, each of the three had exactly one page, due to . -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:20, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

case sensitivity
I attempted to add  to the template which is what is prescribed at WikiProject Trains/Passenger trains task force. Apparently, this switch is case sensitive, so in order for an article to be added to this task force, this must be changed to  (lower case 'p'). I notice in the code for this template that provisions seems to have been taken with respect to this for the Locomotives task force. Perhaps this could be implemented for all task forces so that all articles are directed appropriately irrespective of case. __meco (talk) 11:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, I'm trying to move the other direction to use only lower case parameter names for task forces where the word isn't a proper noun or country abbreviation. I've been updating the template usage as I find it manually; I'm not as experienced in bot writing and maintenance to perform this task automatically.  The template was originally coded with capitalized parameter names, but conventions have moved toward using lower case parameter names in other standard templates (i.e. the various citation templates).  Switching the parameter name to only lower case simplifies the code and retains consistency with other templates.  Slambo <small style="color:black;">(Speak)  11:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I sympathize with yout reasoning. My only concern is that many articles may not be assigned correctly because of this. If a bot could go through all instances of this template and make the necessary adjustment that would suffice (see Bot requests). And of course, all task forces must give the correct instructions. __meco (talk) 12:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

A simple replacement of with  or  is all that is needed. --NE2 12:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Revived discussion December 2012

 * The fix would be simple and it would comply with the spelling of the proper name of the task force. The task force is known as the WikiProject Trains/Passenger trains task force, and the text substituted into the banner appears as "This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force." that is, with an upper case P on the word Passenger.  The distinction between proper and improper (generic) nouns does not explain why   and   are treated equivalently but   is meaningless and   is the only parameter officially recognized.  It also does not explain the acceptance of both   and   or the other [ Mm ] ap and [ Ii ] mage related parameters.  Nor does it adequately explain why   and   are both acceptable (the term is not even a word, it is a pluralized abbreviation of the generic word locomotive).  It remains a further mystery that Slambo used the   non-parameter when making edits such as this, this, this, this, this, or in fact dozens (possibly hundreds) of similar banner parameter edits.  Allowing the parameter to reflect the name of the task force seems like it would align with people's expectation of this template's behavior, including the apparent expectation of Slambo.  Pedro Xing (talk) 05:44, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The parameters which are case-insensitive on first letter (such as imageneeded, locos and mapneeded) are in the minority. Nevertheless, I have set up Passenger to be an alias for passenger, . It's done in such a way that existing uses of passenger are unaffected; and if the page has both forms, Passenger will be ignored. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Redrose64. In the Category:Passenger trains task force articles there are now 1,661 articles, whereas just a couple of days ago there were only 1,071.  Hence close to 590 articles were added to that category, and the task force's responsibility list, by the template change you've made.  I think Meco's concerns were well founded and this should put the matter to rest. Pedro Xing (talk) 04:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Feature brainstorm for Module:WikiProjectBanner
I'm in the early stages of developing a Lua-based replacement for WPBannerMeta, and I would appreciate peoples ideas for features. If there is anything that you have wanted to do with your WikiProject template, but haven't been able to due to limitations in the meta-template, I would be very interested to hear it. The discussion is over at Template talk:WPBannerMeta. — <span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 12:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

name of image request categories
Can anyone see an issue with changing the category names for articles needing images to match the reqphoto format? This will allow people to use the TrainWikiProject template parameters or reqphoto with the result ending up in the same place. Traveler100 (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Category:Rail transport articles needing images to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of rail transport
 * Category:New York City public transportation articles needing images to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of New York City public transportation
 * Category:UK rail transport articles needing images to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of UK rail transport


 * I'd like to revive this with one tweak; Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of rail transport in the United Kingdom would match the current scheme better than Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of UK rail transport. I've updated the sandbox with the new categories, which I've also created as soft redirects. Any images categorized by the template would be automatically recategorized; any images manually categorized (which shouldn't have happened) can be fixed. I'll volunteer for that; those articles probably need extra attention anyway. Thoughts? Mackensen (talk) 02:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Seems like a good idea to me.Thryduulf (talk) 13:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Implemented. It'll probably take a while for images to migrate. Mackensen (talk) 21:42, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

As a note, all the images did re-categorize and I've redirected the original categories. Mackensen (talk) 02:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Trams portal
Below tf2 Streetcars please add "|TF_2_PORTAL =Trams" to link the newly created portal to the relevant articles. -- ELEKHHT 02:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: This WikiProject banner doesn't handle portals in the usual way. Instead, it has a subtemplate Template:WikiProject Trains/portalbox; you can see the appearance of that if you examine a banner where yes yes or yes is set, such as Talk:East Croydon station which has all three. -- Red rose64 (talk) 07:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh I see. Than both templates need to be changed so that when "streetcars=yes" is added to this one a link to portal trams appears. -- ELEKHHT 07:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, two templates to change. The portal box would change (see demo at right) and Template:WikiProject Trains would need one line adding, . -- Red rose64 (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for figuring out how it works. Can we implement it? -- ELEKHHT 08:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Have a look at Talk:East Croydon station now... -- Red rose64 (talk) 08:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The design of this banner is a bit cluttered, but is ok for now. -- ELEKHHT 08:48, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Change photo requests to image requests
As part of a nearly-completed shift to distinguish requests for photos from requests for images in general, it is requested that this template be modified to place talk pages in "Wikipedia requested images of..." categories, rather than the old "Wikipedia requested photographs of..." categories. As such, please supplement all references to "photo(s) of..." and "photograph(s) of..." with "image(s) of..." in both the template and its documentation, while maintaining backwards compatibility for the old "photo" parameters. In particular, change "photograph or picture" to simply "image". Note that the "Wikipedia requested images of..." categories have already been created. Thank you! — s w p b T 15:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Mock-up in sandbox. — s w p b T 14:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅. Next time please explicitly refresh the sandbox first before adding your changes so that they're visible in isolation. Mackensen (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 2 October 2017
If possible, can a corresponding subcategory in Category:Stations articles by quality please be trancluded if both yes and class are defined? The only way now for articles to show up in those categories is if WikiProject Stations is invoked, while I'd say that a combination of WikiProject Trains and yes is equivalent. --HyperGaruda (talk) 19:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please spell this out in more detail, or just code it yourself in Template:WikiProject Trains/sandbox and test it in Template:WikiProject Trains/testcases. It's not entirely clear what you want here. Disabling the edit protected request pending some clarification.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  02:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I am trying to get something similar to what is now the case for streetcars and subway. For example, directly adds the page to both Category:Stub-Class rail transport articles and Category:Stub-Class Rapid transit articles. If  is transcluded, I'd like to see the page sorted into Category:Stub-Class rail transport articles and Category:Stub-Class Stations articles. I think I have copied the relevant parameters in Special:Diff/803552018, but to test this, I would need a test case which includes category sorting. It is probably easier for a template editor to check this in a preview page with the real deal (e.g. Talk:Maastricht Noord railway station). --HyperGaruda (talk) 06:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * So to double check this, you want Category:Stations articles by quality added iff yes yes and <x>? Ideally I'd like to see this sandboxed, but if the answer to my question is "yes" then I can probably implement that. Primefac (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Why yes? -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 08:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, typo. Was meant to say stations. Amended above. Primefac (talk) 02:21, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Excuse me for getting back to this so late. The short answer is yes. The diff provided earlier is the sandboxed version you wanted, I just don't have the proper means to test it. --HyperGaruda (talk) 17:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You test it in Template:WikiProject Trains/testcases.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  04:50, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * What I have been trying to tell all along is that transcluding the sandbox template in Template:WikiProject Trains or any of its subpages (like Template:WikiProject Trains/testcases) cannot be checked for proper categorisation due to some sort of category suppression. However, I have found a workaround: I'll transclude it to its talk page. I'll get back to you once I've established a diff. --HyperGaruda (talk) 17:31, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

here's a working testcase, where a quality-assessed category appears for both WP-Trains and WP-Stations. The current sandbox revision is also the one most up to date with the real template, with thanks to Redrose64. --HyperGaruda (talk) 17:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ &gt;ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ&lt;  20:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Categorisation as "unreferenced"
In Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_141, an issue has emerged over the syntax that adds articles to the category Category:Unreferenced rail transport articles if the parameter  is set to "yes". The word "unreferenced" conflicts with the vaguer wording in the template documentation, "lacks references"; more so with that in the category description, "that lack references and/or adequate inline citations"; and most of all with the wording in the project banner, "This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations". We could remove this category link or we could change the associated category to a new one, perhaps Category:Insufficiently referenced rail transport articles. Over 22,000 articles are affected. Are there any comments please? <b style="color:seagreen">Noyster</b> (talk),  12:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm probably the editor who has applied yes to the vast majority of articles in my 14 years of editing. I was thinking about this a little more this week, and thought that unref still has value for articles with no references, but the project would be better served by adding something like refimprove that would then add articles to its own tracking category.  Rather than the category name you suggested, I think Category:Rail transport articles needing additional references as a subcategory of Category:All articles needing additional references would be a better answer. Slambo <small style="color: black;">(Speak)  14:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I have a test version in Template:WikiProject Trains/sandbox. It could be improved further by checking if both yes and yes are set and then either throwing an error or displaying only one of the two (my first thought would be to go with refimprove for the priority). Slambo <small style="color: black;">(Speak)  11:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I have seen no objections to this strategy after four days so I plan to make this live this weekend. Slambo <small style="color: black;">(Speak) 11:21, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Works for me; I can assist with source review. Mackensen (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

The change is live. I suspect that the majority of articles that are currently marked with yes should be updated to yes. Slambo <small style="color: black;">(Speak) 14:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I've gone through the first batch of articles (those beginning with a number) to recategorize them as appropriate. I see that at least one other editor started at the other end of the alphabet.  So far, it looks pretty straightforward and I haven't seen any issues with this process.  If you edit to recategorize, please note that there still are many articles that should keep yes, as you can see from the first batch still in the unreferenced category.  Thanks! Slambo <small style="color: black;">(Speak)  16:27, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for edit to template sub-page
The name of Portal:London Transport has been changed to change the capital "T" to a lowercase "t".

In WikiProject Trains/portalbox, please change  to   to avoid redirects. --DavidCane (talk) 16:00, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:34, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks--DavidCane (talk) 16:43, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Jamaica subproject
This template contains parameters for WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica, added per the request at. The WikiProject never really got off the ground (see deletion discussion) and is inactive—the project's creator and sole member has been inactive since 2015. Currently, only seven pages are marked using this parameter, and all of them are also tagged separately with. Is there really any ongoing need to retain this parameter? -- Black Falcon (talk) 17:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Ping. The project is currently userfied at User:Arb/WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica, but these parameters continue to populate Category:WikiProject Rail transport in Jamaica. Does the project wish to retain this parameter, or is it fine to remove it? If it should be removed, I can perform the necessary updates and minor associated cleanup. -- Black Falcon (talk) 15:04, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it's probably fine to remove it. Mackensen (talk) 15:23, 1 August 2018 (UTC)