User talk:Mjdestroyerofworlds/Archive 1

Hello,, and Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful: Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page How to write a great article Manual of Style

If you are interested in beer and brewery related matters, you may want to check out the Beer Portal. If you are interested in contributing more to beer related articles you may want to join WikiProject Beer. You may also want to add User WikiprojectBeer to your userpage to show others your interest in beer related articles. You may even want to add these pages to your watchlist.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ). If you need help, please see the help pages. Or type Help me on this page and someone will come along.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  08:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Providing edit summaries
Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks!

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Heron's Head Park


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Heron's Head Park requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Iago Qnsi (talk) 19:26, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Novato–San Marin/Atherton (SMART station)


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Novato–San Marin/Atherton (SMART station) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 2602:306:3357:BA0:DE:C292:C155:FA93 (talk) 00:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Status and Advice

 * As reviewing administrator, I did not delete the article--it specifies perfectly well what it is .   But please add a reference.  DGG ( talk ) 00:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Bay Area Rapid Transit into History of the Bay Area Rapid Transit. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 19:01, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:BSicon uexdSTR-L.svg
Thanks for uploading File:BSicon uexdSTR-L.svg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 05:05, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Waggie (talk) 03:51, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

List of current systems for electric rail traction
You recently added content that was false and wrong. The Muni Metro and E Embarcadero and F Market & Wharves lines are NOT third rail systems but overhead line systems. If you continue to add false information to articles, then I shall report you on the Admins page and seek to have you permanently blocked from editing. If you do not understand what you are editing in an article, then please think twice before making that edit and re-check your facts. KirksKeyKard (talk) 08:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:MBTA Winter Street Concourse
I really don't think there is a need for MBTA Winter Street Concourse. The concourse is just a hallway connecting two stations; a well-made map might be a useful illustration for the article, but the RDT doesn't add value for the reader. The geometry of the whole thing is also misleading. The concourse is over the Red Line, not to the side, and the Silver Line loops a full block to the south. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:25, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Placentia station for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Placentia station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Placentia station until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. James (talk/contribs) 03:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Pittsburg/Bay Point
What you insist on reverting to makes absolutely no sense. The same connection is shown with: which all mean pretty much the same thing. If it's that complex an arrangement, it's best to explain it in the ‎Pittsburg/Bay Point station article, rather than having a confusing mash-up of icons. Useddenim (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * an INTerchange icon
 * Cross-Platform InterChange
 * a HUB

Besides, if it's necessary to go inside the station (building), then how can it be a cross-platform interchange? Useddenim (talk) 00:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * it is explained on the relevent wiki page - has been for a while. sucks that BART gave us a fucked up design. intra-station transfer to a c-pi Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 00:39, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The article isn't clear: is there going to be a double stop? One long continuous platform or two separate ones? The platform diagram appear to show a 4-track arrangement, side by side. Useddenim (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * it is one station with two stops. the eBART platform isn't accessable without riding on the mainline, and thus the eBART system isn;t really hooked up to the system without an intra-station ride. Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 02:11, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (El Paso Streetcar) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating El Paso Streetcar, Mjdestroyerofworlds!

Wikipedia editor Teblick just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"This is a well-written, well-sourced article. My only suggestion is that you be sure to update it as progress continues."

To reply, leave a comment on Teblick's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Eddie Blick (talk) 16:37, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:N Judah
Hi -- I reverted the edits you made on Template:N Judah because the route map in the infobox at N Judah was broken and reverting your changes to the infobox fixed that. I don't know enough about the route map syntax to fix the issue so I just reverted, but it's probably better to have it in the new syntax, so it would be great if you could fix whatever (probably minor) bug was causing the problem in your newer version. Cheers! CapitalSasha ~ talk 00:05, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:California High-Speed Rail
I noticed you changed many icons to. How can there be in-use interchanges on a yet-to-be-opened line? Useddenim (talk) 00:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

the facilities already exist as functioning passenger rail stations. Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 00:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Not exactly standard RDT design. Useddenim (talk) 10:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

BSicons
Hi, please upload new BSicons (and other freely-licensed images) to Wikimedia Commons to save others time from having to transfer them. (Additionally, it helps to use a text editor for editing BSicons as the resulting files are more compact.) Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 16:24, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve 16th and Noe
Hi, I'm Boleyn. Mjdestroyerofworlds, thanks for creating 16th and Noe!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. It has been tagged as needing more references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 10:40, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve 9th and Larkin
Hi, I'm Boleyn. Mjdestroyerofworlds, thanks for creating 9th and Larkin!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. It has been tagged as needing more references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 10:40, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve Haight and Gough
Hi, I'm Boleyn. Mjdestroyerofworlds, thanks for creating Haight and Gough!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This needs more references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 10:54, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Future network expansion section in Streetcars in New Orleans
I see you have put a "This section needs to be updated" message into the Future network expansion section of Streetcars in New Orleans. I have reviewed it, and I am not aware of any further updates needed. I have not included every wild idea floated in New Orleans, but I am not aware of any serious proposal that is missing. If you have something particular in mind, I would appreciate a mention of it here. Thank you.

HGFriedman (talk) 21:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * No response from you in a week. I have added text on the new outer terminal of the Canal-Cemeteries line, now under construction.  I don't know what else you might have had in mind.  I have deleted the update-section notice.


 * HGFriedman (talk) 13:05, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

well, the newest source was written three years ago - and some of them six. i'd hardly call that recent. nothing's happened since then? Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, no. The last significant change to the streetcar system in N. O.  was the opening of the Rampart-St. Claude line, until the construction started on the new outer terminal of Canal-Cemeteries.  They have big plans, little money.  HGFriedman (talk) 21:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 23:31, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * A citation for a negative fact? I don't think so.  HGFriedman (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Edit Summaries or select the "Minor Edit: button.
I see that you have made edits to various RTD Denver articles without providing edit summaries. I also note that you have been warned before. If you continue to edit without leaving a summary, then I shall start to undo your edits. Capisce? - Morphenniel (talk) 09:59, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

California Zephyr pre-1970 route
FYI, The pre 1970 California zephyr did not use the same depots as the modern Zephyr in most of California and Nevada. For example, in Sacramento, the Western Pacific Depot was on the corner of 19th and J street, and is now an Old Spaghetti Factory restaurant. That's why the infobox linked to the town of Sacramento and not what is the modern train depot for all Amtrak trains, as the original CZ did not use that depot. Similarly in Oakland, the WP depot was on 3rd and Washington and the original CZ never used any of what we know as train depots today. All this is discussed on the talk page. Please discuss there. Dave (talk) 16:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Addition of Unsourced Content to "Chase Arena"
Thank you for helping to revert the edits of user Fireball111! I am currently sending out warnings to that user. I still have a warning and final warning to give, but if this user continues his/her behavior after a final warning, I will report and hopefully an admin will get this user blocked. Academic Ninja (talk) 07:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Template:Altamont Corridor Express
Why do you think it's necessary to include the ACEforward line on this diagram, when it has its own template? Useddenim (talk) 01:44, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
 * stuff is being actively implemented to Merced. the line through Livermore is unfunded at this time; indicating the complete diagram is misleading and does not accurately represent the planned service route.Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 01:51, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Former services on SMART stations
I notice you've been re-adding the former services to SMART stations, which I've commented out. I'm fine with you re-adding the Redwood, as that was the last service on the line. But I don't think that including one random local train from the 1915 schedule is very useful. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:43, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * two trips to Geyserville, four to Cloverdale, six to Santa Rosa (seven on Sunday) with service as far as Sausalito is not "one random train" - it was the service. especially at Windsor, which didn't see Redwood Service.Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 19:56, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * By "random" I mean why is the 1915 schedule necessarily representative? It's a bit confusing to have a 1958-ended intercity service and a 1915 local service/station succession next to each other. Perhaps you can use the notemid parameter to clarify? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority history into Clayton County commuter rail. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * oops - have a beer.Mjdestroyerofworlds (talk) 20:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Module:Adjacent stations/Dallas Area Rapid Transit
I've updated Module:Adjacent stations/Dallas Area Rapid Transit to show Silver Line for the Cotton Belt. Best, Mackensen (talk) 11:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of 2028 in rail transport for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2028 in rail transport is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/2028 in rail transport until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 15:55, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

"Marysville station" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Marysville station. Since you had some involvement with the Marysville station redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Zerach (talk) 02:24, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

"Gerber station" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gerber station. Since you had some involvement with the Gerber station redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Zerach (talk) 02:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Categorization
Hey, I noticed your recent edits to change categories from "Railway stations opened in [X year]" to subcategories. While your edits are much appreciated, I think you can do it much faster with the Cat-a-lot gadget rather than HotCat. The script is here if you're interested. epicgenius (talk) 17:40, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Railway stations in the United States opened in 1964


A tag has been placed on Category:Railway stations in the United States opened in 1964 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Railway stations scheduled to open in 2028


A tag has been placed on Category:Railway stations scheduled to open in 2028 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Mjdestroyerofworlds

Thank you for creating Monterey Branch Line.

User:Whiteguru, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Whiteguru (talk) 06:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Central Business District
Your attention is called to the addition of this display to the article on the Central Business District, Los Angeles (1880s-1890s). Do you have any feelings, for or against? Discussion should take place on that article's Talk page. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey there!
Hello,

I noticed you've done some good work with train/transit articles, namely TEXRail, which I helped to write a good chunk of, and based off your recent contributions/edits on LA-related transit articles, I thought you would be a great person to provide another set of eyes and even perhaps some additional editing with D2 Subway, which I just published. It's still in its infancy, I'd like to add more to the history section, as well as add some paragraphs about funding and perhaps some more content on the need of the line since currently all 4 DART lines converge on one single corridor in downtown Dallas. And also definitely a map. Definitely would love to hear your feedback!

Thank you!

Baseball Watcher 06:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Streetcars in New Orleans: Future Network Expansion
You have tagged this section that it needs updating. I wrote this section, but I am not aware of any new information about this. If you know something relevant to this topic, please point me toward that information. Thanks. HGFriedman (talk) 01:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

The Pacific Electric M-Dash Crusade
Dear MJ, I noticed you're giving the PE line pages long needed love, however I wonder what your source is for replacing N-dashes (-) with M-dashes (–) in the article names? I don't see and can't find any source references to support that change. (e.g. this 1931 example uses N dash exclusively). Are you using something else? Lexlex (talk) 05:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hyphens and dashes "En dash ("–", MOS:ENDASH) are slightly longer than hyphens and are used...to join two names in a phrase, such as the Michelson–Morley experiment." and my nomenclature is off - i'm replacing hyphens with n-dashes. "oops." -MJDestroyerOfWorlds -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 05:12, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * also worth noting: it's this way on other rail services. see Berryessa/North San José–Richmond line, Newark–World Trade Center, others. -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 05:17, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * info is at Manual of Style -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 05:28, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah OK, I think the issue is that in the Wikipedia font (to me anyway), the en-dash and em-dash look essentially the same length (– —). One is supposed to be the width of an "N" and the other the width of an "M", but yes you're right: An en-dash should be used in article titles. I was incorrectly entering a hyphen (-) as instead of an en-Dash (–). I forgot there are three dash lengths. (-, –, and —). Carry on! Lexlex (talk) 09:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Pacific Electric
Funny coincidence, I’ve just gotten interested in the Pacific Electric today, and I was gonna create the stations module. To assist with formatting, I’ve added an infobox at the Subway Terminal article.  Cards   84664   18:25, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I've sort of been piecing it together. -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 18:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes I saw, thank you. I’ll leave the services at the Subway Terminal to you, I was previously only aware of two services in the tunnel. (The official railway guide of 1940 only mentions the Glendale-Burbank and the San Fernando being in the tunnel)

 Cards   84664   18:54, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add services to the module - it's a little daunting trying to keep all of the services straight. so many things got truncated and renamed in later years it gets confusing and sort of hard to figure out where to mention things. thanks for contributing! -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If you're working on a module, I got inspired to create standardized vector dash graphics for each line using historical exmples. These could be added to a module similar to Template:LACMTA icon for use in maps, etc. See Western and Franklin Avenue Line for the first example and to see the naming format used. Not sure where the best place would be to post this discussion. Any ideas? Lexlex (talk) 19:37, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Those could work in a bulleted list, but size might be an issue at that scale. Looks great on Western and Franklin though.  Cards   84664   17:49, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Since they're vector they seem to scale down to 50 px pretty well. For example in situations where there are multiple services on one line (e.g. NYC's IND Eighth Avenue Line) the icons are 50 px - likewise all of the PE dash signs could ride at the top of a multi-service line infobox in the same way at 50 px. I will have several more completed tomorrow and we can see what works. One odd issue: PE flipped the dash signs when the service reversed to show the ultimate destination, so should every line display at least two? (e.g. Subway Terminal AND the other end?). Not sure, thoughts? Lexlex (talk) 19:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you clarify what you mean by flipped dash signs with an example article?  Cards   84664   19:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, for example on Glendale–Burbank Line outbound trains would have a dash sign for "Glendale" and on inbound the dash sign would read "Subway Terminal" - These are metal signs which hung on the front of the cars to indicate the service. The conductor would turn them around at the terminus for the return trip. There would be no way of telling where an inbound train was coming from when multiple services shared the same line. In this example, a passenger would not know (or care) that the Los Angeles bound train came from Hollywood or Glendale. So since there will be a dash sign for "Subway Terminal" that would have appeared on inbound trains, should it also appear on the Glendale–Burbank Line page? I guess we'll see what works as they get completed. Lexlex (talk) 19:46, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It would be easier to just start with the line names and test the inbound signs afterwards.  Cards   84664   19:51, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I also like the general look, but i'm not sure how practical it is to to treat the line calls in the adjacent stations template exactly like roll signs. (i think that's what's being described?) And, despite how the customer ever saw or cared about their inbound trains, those trains had a definite point of origin that showed up on schedules - they were very real from PE's perspective. I think one "sign", e.g. Pomona Line, more than adequately describes both Los Angeles–Pomona and Pomona–Los Angeles services. -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, North San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 14:36, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Shafter Subdivision
Regarding this edit. FYI, the Shafter Subdivision already has it's own article, (though admittedly it's a stub). So IMHO, that's where the navbox should go, not the article for the Feather River Route. The standard adopted by the U.S. Roads Wikiproject is that while it's more than ok to talk about historical alignments in the history and similar sections, any route descriptions, diagrams, exit lists, etc. should reflect the road in it's current alignment. I know this is not a USRD article, but that standard was developed for a reason, and I can see why. And using that standard as a guide, as the Shafter Subdivision is no longer part of the Feather River Route, but the Central Corridor (Union Pacific Railroad), that's where that content should go. Just my $.02. Cheers! Dave (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2020 (UTC)


 * i sort of feel that it's ok for it to be both, at least until someone or maybe myself makes a FRR template of its own – 2/3 of the article deals from a historic perspective, and each subdivision represented did indeed form a portion of the route. The intent is to follow the line of the RDT's (Lakeside Subdivision linking to the Lucin Cutoff isn't perfect, but that's the next one to be made, and will take us, presumably, past Promontory and to SLC as described in the aricle). Each subdivision could get their own article made eventually, rendering them redundant here by that measure – there's definitely enough written to make an article about the Sacramento Sub – but by that time the individual subdivison RDT's will be laid out and it'll be pretty easy to weave them together into that new Template:Feather River Route. good eye though – and good to know what the Roads folks think about such content. MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 19:45, 9 November 2020 (UTC)


 * never mind - scratch all of that – i forgot this is the WP not the UP. where's my coffee? MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 20:07, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * That's one of the challenges the rail project has that the roads project does not. While both have to deal with 100 year old transportation arteries with a super complex history of being split, combined, realigned, spun off, rebuilt, and repurposed; at least most roads stay in the public sector. Very few roads have gone back and forth between private owners. Even those usually had state supervision, so the road's project has a the state DOT's website as a "one stop official source" they can turn to "an official definition". Rail lines by and large don't have that luxury.
 * I created the redirect from the Lakeside Subdivision to the Lucin Cutoff and that was only because an article for the BNSF subdivision of the same name has existed for a while, and several articles were linking to the wrong subdivision article. It was a quick fix. I agree, eventually that one will probably have its own article. However, while I can see splitting off a separate article for the Sacramento Subdivision (especially given its ROW is used for light rail and other purposes), I can't see having separate articles for the Canyon and Winnemucca subdivisions. One is a seamless continuation of the other with identical history. So I can't see how we could create two articles that wouldn't be redundant to each other. But that will all play out with time. Cheers! Dave (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 79th Avenue/I-10 Park-and-Ride


The article 79th Avenue/I-10 Park-and-Ride has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable bus stop. Fails WP:GNG."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Railway services discontinued in 1935


A tag has been placed on Category:Railway services discontinued in 1935 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 16:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)