User talk:Mjroots/Archive/Railways

Headcorn & Maidstone Junction Light Railway
Okay i've had a go. It was missing e.g. . BS3 or similar must be inserted at the start plus extra lines so that the line can be positioned and that. BS3 is a good one to use as most things can be experimented with this. You must also use the preview button to check if you are doing the right things. For further help in these template, see WP:RDT. I hope this is useful. Simply south 19:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Btw, i hope the help i provided here wasn't too complicated. Simply south 19:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Chemin de Fer de la Baie de Somme (CFBS)
Well, the use of those icons is certainly creative and could work. A problem is, how are you going to (if this is needed) show a closed section of both standard gauge and dual guage...? Simply south (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Fortunately I won't need to in this case. Expect I'd use the dotted tunnel symbols if I had to! Mjroots (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Producing new railway symbols is a trivial task, see Talk:Wealdway for "some that I did earlier"!

ClemRutter (talk) 13:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

''You replaced my external link with an interwiki link, and now there is no link to the French article showing! Do you know how to make the link work or should I revert to an external link? Mjroots (talk) 09:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)''
 * The interwiki link is shown at the left in your browser window (in the Languages box below the toolbox). Interwiki links are precisely used to link articles on the same subject from the different wikipedias (here, Chemin de Fer de la Baie de Somme and fr:Chemin de fer de la baie de Somme. In the french wikipedia I have also replaced the external link by the interwiki link.
 * Regards, Chphe (talk) 10:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for fixing the link. I think the article is great and informative (from another rail fan)....good work. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

CFBS DYK
I corrected the hook and moved it to the 6th ... it should "go" in about 2-8 hours from now Victuallers (talk) 23:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It's now in the queue to be on the main page, in about 6-8 hours. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Railway templates
I've knocked off a couple, but couldn't understand what you meant on the others, so to aid understanding. If you say I want a template to blah blah: This will be a mixture of BSicon_tKRZ and BSicon_tpot, but using the pink used in BSicon_Barbie, then I can go straight to it and it is a five minute task.

To do it yourself is easy. 20px File:BSicon tKRZo.svg
 * 1) Download Inkscape and install it.
 * 2) In wiki- find the icons you are about to use. Double click on the file names. The files will open in separate inkscapes. Save as to  directory sandbox.
 * 3) Goto the first file. Choose icon object ungroup. Select the bit you wish to delete using top arrow on left icon bar- (can be a bit funny-if it wont choose the second arrow- now goback and select with the first). Grab it and move it to the side- now use delete key.
 * 4) File Import- Sandbox/second file. It will place itself on the workspace. Select, move to side, ungroup, and delete bits- move in the bits you want.

There's no mystery. But do say what you need. ClemRutter (talk) 15:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

ClemRutter (talk) 17:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Cromer sta
See reply. Simply south (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hundred of Hoo Railway
I've noticed your fantastic work on this line, creating pages for all the stations and rectifying errors in the article. I will need to check in my copy of Branch Lines to Allhallows to see if a date is mentioned for the closure of Grain Crossing Halt - Subterranea Britannica and Kent Rail  give different dates. I've also got two more images to add, perhaps I might try and see if some can be found for the stations you've added. Ravenseft (talk) 20:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm happy to leave it as stands, but for the sake of completeness there is some indication that passenger services at Grain temporarily ceased between early June and September 1951. In the Branch Lines book it is said that "the halt ceased to be used after 6th June 1951", and here refers to a "temp closure" as far as Port Victoria. On another note, one thing that has been bothering me is whether there was an interchange at Gravesend Central for the Gravesend West line, or whether the route map should be amended to show that line as passing straight over (?) the Hoo line? Ravenseft (talk) 19:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I suppose I should get around to "inling" this article, seems that it may have potential one day to become a FA or GA. My priority at the moment is to plug the gaps in terms of missing former lines and stations in the south-east. On that note, does Itchingfield Junction ring a bell at all? I've put together a route map (here) but am not at all happy with the way the triangular south-facing junction is shown. Ravenseft (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Steyning Line
Interesting, I had never heard of the line being referred to as such. I took the "Steyning Line" from James Buckman's excellent book of the same name published in 2002. With regard to Itchingfield Junction, I think you have put your finger on the problem?: the spur to the Cranleigh Line which should in fact be a triangular junction allowing through running to the south. I'll try and tweak it somehow. Ravenseft (talk) 19:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

East Kent Light Railway Diagram Template
My first thought when you changed the BS7-2 diagram back to the template was that you were suggesting that the template be used. Now I realise that possibly you don't like the new layout with the stations on separate sides of the diagram. Personally I think any change that separates stations in this way is an improvement but I'm not always right so by all means come to my talk page and tell me what you think. Britmax (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Disused Railways template
Just wondering if you have a particular view on the route template to be used for disused lines, there are some who prefer to use the (in my view) awful US template "historical railways" when talking about what we mean by "disused railways", see the discussion here - if you want to add your ha'penny worth. I noticed you used "disused" for the Hoo stations. Ravenseft (talk) 09:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've put it up for discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways. Ravenseft (talk) 21:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

IOM railway templates
Hi, thanks for correcting the Foxdale line template - I can't believe I showed the junction like that! I have amended the Ramsey and Peel line templates accordingly. Best Witchwooder (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for drawing the Manx Northern Railway article to my attention. I'll continue the discussion there. Best Witchwooder (talk) 08:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

List of UK railfan Jargon
Hi Mjroots. In truth, all of the ones that currently don't have reference need them. The unsourced tag at the top of the page is intended to tell editors this, without having to go through and tag each item in the list individually, which would be tedious. There are a number of entries that should be easy enough to find references for - Super Gronk, Flying Banana and Gricer are all examples and there are plenty more. The rest are going to be hard to find reliable sources for, I think and I will likely remove them after the end of the month.

So in short, the citation needed tag is somewhat redundant, though there's no particular harm in adding it if you want. Best, Gwernol 16:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a good plan. Best, Gwernol 18:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I would not consider that a reliable source. I'm sure the article is in fact a direct copy of an earlier version of the Wikipedia article - I'm sure we could comb through the history to find the exact same text on Wikipedia. Its quite common to find modified versions of Wikipedia articles republished on the web - in this case the text is intact but the formatting has changed. Obviously we can't source an article from a copy of the article :-) Gwernol 14:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * With reference to your comments on my talk page, I am also replying here. A reference to a professionally published magazine would be excellent. I apologise if you feel i have been too hasty in my actions, but the links provided werent really satisfactory as per WP:REFB, and I did give reasoning for the deletion. I think that deletion of the links and asking for new references is better than deleting the articles in question. Deckchair (talk) 14:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding source, I don't think we can use it. Its a personal website, not an independent, published source. The verifiability policy is clear that "...self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable" as sources (my emphasis). The problem is anyone could put up a personal website saying anything. If we could use that as a source it would be trivially easy for any person to get any incorrect fact sourced and inserted into Wikipedia. To avoid this we insist on reliable sources: "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Best, Gwernol 12:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Higham Station
Yes, but aren't the route boxes limited to public stations? Ravenseft (talk) 16:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Ireland Railways Wikiproject
I saw your discussion about the coverage of the UK rail wikiproject and the ensuing debate which concluded that Ireland should be kept separate. I wanted to let you know that I came across another user particularly interested in Ireland's railways and I recommended that, provided there is sufficient interest, he put together a wikiproject for Ireland's railways. He's now floated a proposal here. Ravenseft (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

French railways
Hi off hand that looks like a great article of which I can see you've put a lot of work into, Congrats. Thanks for the welcome again, somebody has complained at me already but I removed their message. I'll give it a read later or tomorrow, off hand though it looks like there are way too many images, and might need some extra references but looks great!! Hope you are well ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦       $1,000,000? 22:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OMGGGGG!!! I didn't realise it was a brand new article!!!!!!! Friggin 'eck amigo thats a brilliant new article!!!!! It looks like it is an article that is at least a year old not just a few hours!! I'm very impresssed!  ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦       $1,000,000? 22:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Well they are particularly great images I have to admit. These are the "real encyclopedia" articles I am always talking about that are missing and they are many thousands like this that could be written. Perhaps you could organize the images one left, one right etc so it looks more balanced perhaps. Perhaps you wouldn't mind if I can try to organize the pictures a bit? I won't remove any yet. Keep up the great work.   ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦       $1,000,000? 22:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks OK now I think. I see it is a featured article on french wikipedia. I am amazed that this article didn't exist, even a stub. It just shows you how many important articles are missing which are fully developed on other wikipedias. I see very few articles being started like this translated from other wikipedias. I'd imagine you will propose it for a DYK   ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦       $1,000,000? 22:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Chemin de Fer de Côtes du Nord
I'm not a railway specialist but a spent a few time to read your article and the french one. I'll try to find some more time to re-read these articles this week-end. Yves-Laurent (talk) 23:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The name of the french article is Chemin de fer de Côtes du Nord and not Chemin de Fer de Côtes du Nord. I think you should rename the article.
 * The exact french term is voies ferrées d'intérêt local and not just intérêt local : voies ferrées d'intérêt local is the term who whas used to described this kind of lines in some french law-> I change this in the article.
 * I did not know the english acronym for CF.
 * I haven't got a knowledge of the use of voies ferrées d'intérêt local. It's seem to appear like this in some french law. But in french we often reduce some sentence in every day use. So, it possible that this sentence is reduced to d'intérêt local for the french railway expert. If english book use d'intérêt local, you should do this too.
 * Yves-Laurent (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Mjroots, nice job on the Chemin de Fer de Côtes du Nord article. I haven't gone through the GA/FA process myself, although I've contributed to several articles that have. So I'm probably not the best person to ask about this. You might ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains as they've helped several articles though the process. I made a couple of minor edits to the article, and I have a couple of books on French minor railways which I might be able to use to add more sourced information. Let me know if I can be of further help. Best, Gwernol 22:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I saw your help request on the French "Portail Ferrovipédia". As I'm the principal author of the french article, I can perhap's help you but I'm very occuped so I can't say you when I will do this... Fibo.cdn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.236.136.63 (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Peterborough East station
I saw your fingerprints on the Peterborough East article. I've just reorganised the potentially excellent article into some sort of order and wikified it abit. I was wondering, on the off chance, if perhaps you had sufficient knowledge of the station to add in the missing routeboxes? I ask because I think it's a station with an interesting history and with potentially several routes having run through it. Ravenseft (talk) 22:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Herford East Branch Line
Okay thanks. Actually, the link to Hertford North was not separate, but the line was severed beyond Hertford East. I will correct the template to show this. Simply south (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I only took this from what i found on the Discover Hertford website and Multimap. I wish i had that book. Simply south (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you just check if the former station was on the former line, or when the station was relocated, did the former line branch off before the former site? Simply south (talk) 23:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Was it...


 * or was it

Simply south (talk) 23:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks good. According to here, the line did join the Hertford Loop Line but it seems in the direction of Hertford North, not Stapleford. But then again it could have been on a junction in both ways, with an interchange at Hertford North. Simply south (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for pointing that out as i misread the article. I have corrected the information now. I have also added your original template to the main one and tweaked it slightly. Is it about right?


 * Something keeps bugging me. I think i read somewhere that the original name for Hertford East station was County School. Simply south (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

GA
Did you have any particular line in mind or just wanted a railway line? I could see what i could suggest or help with otherwise. Simply south (talk) 11:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure about it but i can still give some general pointers on some things missing. I've never done a proper GA review. I'll see what i can do.


 * Here thing's to start off which certainly need sorting out:


 * All or most paragraphs must have references. These can either be cited using templates or (what i find best using) Harvard. So where you got the information from needs to link to maybe pages in the books, brochures etc. Most of the material i see on the article is unreferenced and need to link to the sources you have provided.


 * There are huge white spaces in the article, there needs to be some rearranging of pictures and information to sort this out.


 * Possibly, just my opinion, some of the setences are too long and could be split up a bit.


 * There needs to be an expansion on World War II and the line today. Are there any future uses? It seems the article focusses a lot on the history but does not give much weight on the rest.

I hope this helps. Simply south (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * See reply i am about to leave on the talk page. Simply south (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I just moved a couple more. How does it look now? Simply south (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

African Railways
Sure, I have a go. But where exactly do you want the centre rails-- I have a tape measure if you want to send me on a site visit.ClemRutter (talk) 12:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

expense!? Lend me your white van, we'll load up on duty free on the way back and we'll make a profit. I took some photos of the Aire de la Baie de Somme and it's windmill in 2003- its a regular overnighting stop each July.ClemRutter (talk) 12:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Richboro Port railway station
Okay, this one's weird. The article got moved from Richboro Port railway station to Richborough Port railway station, then to Richboro Port Railway station. At this point, Richborough Port railway station and Richboro Port railway station were deleted, then Richboro Port Railway station got moved back to Richboro Port railway station. The talk page also appears to have survived the trip. There's no significant deleted history anywhere, so I think everything's all right? Let me know if I'm reading this wrong and anything needs fixing. east. 718 at 17:10, March 14, 2008

I had to log in with my admin account to see the edit you mention, but it appears my involvement was to revert the blanking of the page. I'd still hold that a double-redirect is better than an empty page (which wouldn't be deleted normally, see WP:CSD), though obviously just fixing the redirect until the move is repaired would have sufficed. Sadly, simply blanking the page isn't enough to allow you to move pages over redirects. I ramble! Sorry for the misunderstanding, and if you ever do need help with this sort of thing again, please feel free to leave a note on my logged-in user talkpage. Ciao, and thanks for the note! 207.145.133.34 (talk) 13:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Swinden Quarry railway station
Hi Mjroots. Proposed deletions don't show up on the AfD page. All that happens when you add a prod tag to a page is that the page gets tagged. No other pages are effected. After 5 days if the proposed deletion is unchallenged the page will be reviewed by an admin and either deleted or the prod tag will be removed. Best, Gwernol 13:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, Prod is designed for "non-controversial" deletions, where the article is obviously in breach of our policies and guidelines and doesn't require further discussion. AfD is for articles where there discussion is needed to decide if it should be deleted or not. If anyone removes the Prod tag, for any reason, that indicates that the proposed deletion is disputed, so an AfD discussion is required. Best, Gwernol 14:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Isle of Wight
Thanks for the comments and well spotted on Ashey Quarry. I've used ENDE as I think DST (or the terminal version) is too heavy for a few quarry sidings. What do you think? Britmax (talk) 12:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Engerth locomotives
Hi Mjroots. Thanks for the link - I haven't seen that before, very nice. I have a book somewhere that has a good section on the Engerth locomotives. Now, if I could just find it... Nice work on the article too. Best, Gwernol 21:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Railways in Morbihan / Chemins de Fer en Morbihan
Bonjour,

J'ai une carte du réseau du Morbihan. Je n'ai pas à ce jour de cartes d'autres départements, mais j'y travaille. fr:User:Sardon 16:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hundred of Hoo Railway
I'll have to double check this point this evening, although I'm 90% sure that I would not have included it in the article without having read it in a reliable source. In any event, I think the edit still counts as "vandalism" as the user removed a chunk of text without any explanation. Ravenseft (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Having looked again at the original material, it seems that electrification was indeed proposed for the whole line except the branch to Allhallows, but it was decided to leave the whole line out of the Kent Coast programme. I've now amended the text accordingly. Ravenseft (talk) 19:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry about not explaining my edit to the Hundred of Hoo entry. I hit the submit before putting in my reason for the edit, as it was not made clear that an explanantion was mandatory, perhaps you should add that for newbies like me. I was trying to think of a justification for the edit but could not think of one as you cannot justify a negative, so in the end I just submitted it to see what happens next. I had assumed that it would be moderated and checked before appearing on Wiki. I could have left the error there for all to read. Next time I will make sure say why I am editing something, even if it's difficult to prove. I have been studying this line for over 20 years, so it's obvious to me that it was never electrified, without checking any references. JohnERussell (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

lb/in²
The MOSNUM discussion seems to have got side-tracked. I'd prefer an "f" but it was the "psi"-"lb(f)/in²" question not the "lb"-"lbf" question that was bugging me. On that I can't see any consensus. Try, , , etc. J Ѧ ρ 07:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Engerth locomotive
I didn't say it was impossible, just that it was unlikely :) Thanks for the follow-up. Gatoclass (talk) 04:00, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

CFDF
Sorry, my mistake. I guess my is even weaker than I thought. The MOSNUM post brought me in to see the article and I couldn't pass it up. In any case, the kg isn't a unit of pressure, so I'd suggest you may want to ask yourself how reliable the source is. And their three digit accuracy in a boiler pressure rating is hilarious. They're lucky to know one significant digit given the variations in rivets, welds, rust, and so on. Good luck.LeadSongDog (talk) 20:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Got a ref that says that's how to read between the lines?LeadSongDog (talk) 21:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * See if you can find "The Last Steam Locomotives of Western Europe" in a library near you. LeadSongDog (talk) 22:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Levisham railway station
Following your suggestion I have changed the references to this article to inline citations/references (and added a few more); I would appreciate your feedback on the result.

Whilst on the subject I feel there is a need for one or possibly two citation templates tailored to citing from minute books, with fields for minute number(s) and date(s) plus one for The (UK) Nation Archives piece reference number. It may be that this needs to be a nested template to deal separately with minute books and TNA refs. (Unless you can point me at a suitable existing template of course)

BTW my interest in Levisham station might have something to do with being its volunteer Station Master from 1974 until poor health caused me to stand down in the early 1990's (could no longer do my turns as signalman). XTOV (talk) 00:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: De Dion Bouton
Heh, yeah. I like to go through and make quick improvement updates like that while I work through the assessments. One of the tenets that my Boy Scout troop followed was to always leave a campsite in a better state than it was when we arrived, so I keep up with that practice where I can.

It still seems like there are way too many places calling the same reference pages (multiple times within the same sentence, for example, seems a little excessive), and while the refs listed are good, there could be more from other sources. Slambo (Speak) 15:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Hastings Line
Re your recent revert (which I have left untouched), please see the talk page of the article for a possible solution to any accusation of linkspam. Mjroots (talk) 10:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Your solution is a good idea, if I get a chance I will develop the citation templates for the other Quail atlases, so there can be used here and in other articles as appropriate. --Stewart (talk) 10:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I have created the citation template for Vol 5 Quail - - using WorldCat to verify the ISBN and OCLC numbers. As a result I have placed the route map into a template and checked it against my version of Quail (first edition) and Jowett. By representing the sources within the references section, both Jowett and Quail are listed. This is process that I am following as I work around the Scottish rail network. I do not intend to work on english and welsh lines for the time being. Hope this helps. --Stewart (talk) 18:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: DYK nom of Bolton and Leigh Railway
I have suggested an alternative hook. Espresso Addict (talk) 11:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to go with this now, but it's probably necessary to wait a few hours before selecting to ensure that all the regulars are happy with the new hook. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply
The point I was making was that a halt is not the same as a railway station. But if that is Wiki policy.......

How do I join these WikiProjects? Btline (talk) 18:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:Upper Douglas Cable Tramway
Ah yes... I thought I had removed that, but it must have slipped through! It is definitely Dumbells, but AWB has that down as a typo.

I'm going to fix it now!

Chemin de Fer du Cambrésis
I have found a time table of the Chemin de Fer du Cambrésis from 1914 and so now I think I have all the stations, including the situation in Saint-Aubert. I have found a couple of new stations such as Le Jeune-Bois. Only point missing is the industrial branches (no passenger service), in various document I have found that there were some in Catillon, in Lesdins, in Caudry (branch called "La Folie") etc. So the plan is ok for passenger service but incomplete for freight. Hektor (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Barnstar. This is my first one, I really appreciate. I will now update the French language article. I have seen that you have added back Lourches. I can confirm that there is no Lourches station in the 1914 timetable I got, only Vieux-Lourches. Hektor (talk) 17:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well. Digging deeper, I have now two time tables, one dated May 1914 and the other one June 1958. Neither of both has a Lourches station, both of them have a Vieux-Lourches station. The only difference between both tables, between Denain and Caudry, is that the three Saint-Aubert stations are down to just one. Remarkably consistent over 44 years. Hektor (talk) 17:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Southampton Corporation Tramways
Thanks for your comment on my discussion page Hethurs (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC) I wasn't aware that we had a page on Southampton Corporation Tramways, so your note is helpful. To be honest, I've only given the trams a thought today because I stumbled on that photo. I'm glad its caught somebody's attention so quickly. Great Aunt Mabel would be very pleased ! Trams aren't my thing really, but history is so I will see what additional information I can ferret out about the trams and I will do what I can to improve the article. Thanks again and please bear with me Hethurs (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Steinbrück locomotive
Hi there,

I was wonder if you know anything about the previous locomotive since I do not find anything in Wikipedia. Not that I am interested too much in the topic, but there should be an article dedicated to the oldest Austrian locomotive somewhere, maybe I just can not find it ...

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Dover Tramway
Hey Mjroots,

I'll give it a look over soon. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but i'll have a delve around my archives and the archives at Crich.

Thanks,

 B G  7even   16:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Jersey Railway
Hello. Thanks for the message. In the absence of author info, I think use of the picture would be problematic. Man vyi (talk) 14:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Haddiscoe High Level
Thanks! I think it's fixed now. Lamberhurst (talk) 19:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Railway articles and TSW
The Sentinel articles were copied last night. However, TSW folk can't be everywhere, so do feel at perfect liberty to join the rescue bids when an article is in danger. Just didn't seem approproate to add this in the AfD. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

BS icons
Hi Mjroots,

you discovered the 4th dimension? File:BSicon tKRZo.svg ... a tunnel track leading over a surface track! You must tell me how that works ;-) Axpde (talk) 15:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I had a go, and dropped one suggestion into the K&ESR template. File:BSicon WindPump.svg.
 * There are three problems here.
 * One the lack of size means it blurrs.
 * I am not sure whether the tank helps in all cases- Water and Wind shows a shot of the tankfree pump at Tenterden.
 * Occasionally inkscape svg fails to render correctly at Commons- this time it swallowed a circle, but I done finfd that too important.

Any suggestion? Does it do the job? --ClemRutter (talk) 17:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What do you want me to call each one- can you leave it as a red link, and I will work to that. I can do with or without tank or both if I have names to work to. The design limitation is that the icon is square- and wind pumps tend not to be! --ClemRutter (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Call the one with tank Windpump, the one without Wpump, prefix with x for light grey versions. Mjroots (talk) 22:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Followed the ex convention (colour #aaaaaaff), tweaked the icon to add a tail fin, and loaded onto K&ES Template. I will give you the pleasure of categorising and adding them to all the documentation pages. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Réseau des Bains de Mer
You're welcome. But as my Babel stated, I know no foreign languages other than English and Russian, I'm not helpful in writing/translating the French article. If you're asking for help in improving the route diagram, I will try my best to interpret the French or their syntax. Which FR diagram you're making? The hand-drawn map in Réseau des Bains de Mer? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 09:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have the idea what causes the route diagram in FR WP to break apart. And this "disaster" also occurs in many other FR route map. It's because the lack of railway line header. I am transplanting one to FR fr:Modèle:Railway line header but there's a warning and immediately hide my diagram. You should check it out: fr:Utilisateur:Sameboat/sandbox -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Removed the collapse call of railway line header and the problem solved. The remaining task is moving the fr:Modèle:Railway line header to a French title and solving the break apart disaster of other FR route map... -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry about causing trouble in French Wikipedia because I was aggressively adding {Railway line header} to most FR rail infobox. While I didn't realize that the route map break apart issue doesn't happen in other browser (by far the Firefox) while they do look bad in MS IE based browsers without the Railway line header. I have checked the discussion in fr:Discussion Projet:Ferrovipédia and understand (using online translator) that they're upset by my edits but I don't know how to explain to them. But I'm trying my best to adjust the fr:template:BS-données (testing in my sandbox: fr:user:sameboat/x2, fr:user:sameboat/sandbox.) Hoping it would look agreeable in both browsers. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 15:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This may be too late but my French is pretty good, especially if the translation is from French to English (don't ask me to do it the other way). If this is still active, throw it my way. SimonTrew (talk) 02:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Tornado
Hey, thanks for your input on the talk page, have made a further contribution myself to try to encourage the three parties involved to calm down a bit, otherwise I can see it heading down the path you described.... Thanks for wading in though! :o) ColourSarge (talk) 17:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with your further comments on my talk page, and I am getting very weary of the somewhat childish position taken by all three of them that "their position is correct, everything else is bobbins" to the exclusion of any reasoned argument. It seems to me that they are failing to realise that taking contrary positions and quoting sources at each other is not the way to reach consensus, but that they need to find areas of common ground to build upon and then agree to disagree where they can't reconcile their POVs.  I also see that my appeal for them to take a step back has fallen on deaf ears, but being somewhat inexperienced in conflict resolution I am not entirely sure what the next logical step is - although it does seem to me that perhaps we need some further neutral editor input on this one.  I'd hate to think what a new editor would make of this if that happens to be the first talk page they happen across... I'll maybe do some digging through and see if the (RFC was it?) is appropriate and submit a report if they have not calmed down by tomorrow evening. :o) ColourSarge (talk) 00:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mj, as per your conv with Elkman below, are you requesting admin assistance with this one? I checked the Request for Comment last night and there has been no interest (which a user on the RFC talk page says is not uncommon and suggests raising the issue at the relevant project talk pages. As you know I have already done this at UK Railways, but may now do so at Trains as well just for completeness.  However this morning there appears to be yet another aggressive posting from one of the users involved - something needs to be done about this, I'm just unsure where to go with it! ColourSarge (talk) 08:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I've left a note here and notified via the article talk page, with yet another appeal to the editors involved to take a step back from the article and remain civil on the talk page.  If you need any support in taking this further, please let me know as I too feel that the situation has gone on too long. ColourSarge (talk) 08:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind, I've added a note to WP:AN/I adding my support to your statement. ColourSarge (talk) 08:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please modify your AN/I post. If you look again at both the formal mediation page and the mediation cabal page, and possibly the article talk or his talk, I did not refuse to formally meditate. Biscuittin basically has a very poor understanding of the wiki DR process. First I had to start the Rfc for him, then, before it had run the recommended 30 days, he initiated two mediations simultaneously, in the cabal and the committee. I must have explained this error and that they are two separate things about 5 times, he was having none of it. The cabal page is actually theoretically active, so there was no need to join the formal mediation page. His formal mediation page was out of process, and then abandoned by him, not me. MickMacNee (talk) 14:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

LNER Peppercorn Class A1
Could you get another admin to look into the problems at LNER Peppercorn Class A1 and keep a watch on it? I don't think I'm very suitable at the moment for addressing the user conduct issues in this article. In fact, I'm having a problem with my own conduct right now -- on and off Wikipedia -- and I'm convinced I shouldn't try to mediate a dispute. It would be rather hypocritical of me right now. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 00:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the LNER Peppercorn Class A1

I am trying to be civil, believe me, and trying to fully establish a case there. I'm not quite finished yet, but I believe that, and I are in general agreement.

I have summarised the main points at User:Tony May/A1, and am willing to compromise on some issues. I have sought external advice on this matter, and will try to provide you with more information shortly. Presently the article is a proper mess. The list of locomotives also does not match any sources.

I believe I am being significantly less aggressive than the other participant who is trying to WP:OWN the article.

And to clarify, please is not my sockpuppet, I really don't have a clue who he is. You can check if you really need to. Tony May (talk) 22:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Peppercorn A1
Thank you for your message. I have replied on my talk page. Biscuittin (talk) 11:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Kent and East Sussex Railway Diagram
Re you request concerning Robertsbridge station on another talk page, I've just looked on Google Earth and the preservation area there is separated by a car park from the current Network Rail station although there seems to be a bay platform. Is it the case that the KESR formerly ran into its own platform in the main station and the current preserved line runs into the former goods yard, as it seems? Britmax (talk) 23:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Six Mile Bottom railway station
Woohoo I got Six Mile Bottom railway station to stub class! is that good?!

I am quite pleased with it considering really it is my first article. At least I got all the infoboxes done OK and worked out how to use Wikimedia Commons to get the pictures in. It's very much a stub but, oddly, after creating it there were a few things already on "what links here" (i.e. what were redlinks, I guess).

So I am quite chuffed really. Thanks. SimonTrew (talk) 21:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh I edited some other articles along the way to tie them together, e.g. the village itself, and the infobox, and fixed links to Eastern Counties Railway in other articles, etc. It kinda started at that article and spread out, I guess that's quite normal. I have edited for about 6 months now but this is the first time I have created an article from scratch. SimonTrew (talk) 21:25, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you prefer replies on your own page or where you put the previous message.


 * Nah I am chuffed with it being assessed at all. Looking at some of the other station stubs in Cambridgeshire I thought actually I did quite well. Actually Six Mile Bottom is pretty tiny so there's not a lot to say about it anyway, it wouldn't grow very much.


 * Yeah I am pretty sure it followed the line of the "Old A11". Because of its short existence I guess you would have to get an OS map for the given years (or a reproduction in a specialised railway book). I might nip round to the second-hand shop here see if they have anything on it. It would be nice to add info on Balsham road and Fulbourn too. I am pretty sure I know where Fulbourn station was (52.1882°N, 0.1228°W) but haven't much more info on it. I can only really guess where Balsham road was.


 * I can have a go at the line diagram, do I need any special software? I am sure it would take me 18 times as long as you but we all have to start somewhere. It's a pity you can't kinda build this up like a jigsaw puzzle within the wiki page itself. However I guess there would be surprisingly many different "pieces".


 * Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 13:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

SimonTrew (talk) 13:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately the remaindered bookshop didn't have anything, though they did have one for some of the Fen lines which was £1-- I'd pick it up if I thought it would be at all handy but it is mostly photos not a lot of info in it. Seems like a library job, amazingly here in the centre of Cambridge we have been without a library for about 3 years while they have been rebuilding it. No doubt they will have it in the expensive bookshops but I can't afford to pay £10 or £15 just to research one small article. SimonTrew (talk) 16:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

[Dup from my talk page:]
 * Actually the diagram has already been done by Rich257. But I think he has got it a bit wrong-- the line from Six Mile Bottom to Newmarket is the Ipswich Ely line. So I will have a go at editing it!


 * I did see after I posted well yeah it is like a big jigsaw puzzle really. Scary too many pieces. SimonTrew (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I just wanted to say thanks for all your help with the Six Mile Bottom and Newmarket-Chesterford Railway articles. I know they are still essentially stubs but they scrubbed up quite nice to being, for the former, nonexistent a few days ago, and for the latter, just a boring paragraph. And as I've spread out into the other areas, lots of other things have got fixed too (not all railway related)&mdash; amazing what a little backwater branch line can do! So, thanks again. SimonTrew (talk) 20:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:Kent and East Sussex Railway
Just noticed your change to the route diagram at Headcorn station. I had previously altered it to agree with the RCH map on the main article page, and the diagram in "A Complete Atlas of Railway Station Names". Where did you get your information? (i.e. Is there another, more definitive, book that I can put on my birthday wish list? :-) ) Efficacy (talk) 19:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

SKLR
Hi,

I've moved the route diagram you added to the Bowaters Railway and SKLR pages to a template - Template:Bowaters_line - so that it only needs to be edited in one place. (Hopefully NOT as the line closes:) regards, Lynbarn (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Snowplow
Please see Talk:Snowplow. Peter Horn 15:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Roots, Please see Talk:Snowplow again. Peter Horn User talk 00:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Paddock Wood railway station
Hey there, the kent rus says the medway valley line services will be extended to Tonbridge, but will remain 1tph Mister sparky (talk) 18:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Newmarket railway station
Thanks for the note on my talk page. Unfortunately it seems essentially unsourced except for the comment "Entirely my own work" by the original uploadeder. Not a lot we can do with this one, I think.

The N&CR railway diagram seems to have changed (Newmarket and High Level are no longer linked) yet I can't find the change. It's been placed in a template (ok that is kinda standard form but was perhaps over the top considering it's only used on one article)but I don't think that the change was made then. I've looked through the page history but can't find it. The bottom but to the West Anglia line seems to have changed too. SimonTrew (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your fixes to the N&CR template. I still think this is not quite right.


 * I dislike the southern end at Chesterford though it is topologically correct, I just think the way we had it with the West Anglian Main Line going across as an inverse T was nicer both visually and in terms of its prominence. But that's a side point.


 * There's still something fishy at Newmarket station (Warren hill, high level). I remember you trying to get a connexion symbol where one was open and one closed. That's gone and now we have Newmarket THEN wh/high level. Surely the whole point is they are the same station but changed names?


 * Unfortunately I've not heard anything back from Newmarket Racecourses for permission to use their picture-postcards.


 * Very minor last point: there's another level crossing at Six Mile Bottom, in fact the one pictured at Six Mile Bottom. This is on the branch the Ipswich/Ely Line so I didn't know if or how to depict it.


 * Our friendly template constructor seems also to have removed the dates (edit summary "removed unused fourth column). Again, I am all quite happy to do this fixup myself but I'd like a second opinion, I don't mind if you or I do it.


 * Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 13:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * OK those fixes will do.


 * Hehehe today I thought hmm he's probably Dutch the MJ threw me, thinking what language that would come from. The only Dutch I know is "Roeken is dodelijk" from the back of a fag packet and "Geen Gezeur (a.u.b.)" which I had prined on T-shirts cos a good Dutch friend of mine always takes the mick, he split his sides when he first saw it. SimonTrew (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

SR Merchant Navy class page move.
Thank you for your posting on my talk page. Whilst I attempted to move the page via the method stated, Wikipedia would not let me do it as the page I wished to move the article to already existed, hence the copy and paste quick-fix edit I did last night. Is it possible to for an administrator to suggest that there be a quicker way of reverting pages back to old titles without going through this inconvenience? Thank you. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 09:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Once again, thanks for your prompt reply, and hopefully the issue will be resolved soon. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 09:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

SECR K and SR K1 classes
I presume you generally mean the background section? The rest of it is pretty much referenced to FA standard (mind you, I've had the eye off the ball whilst the SECR N class is going through the FA process. Have a look at it if you like). Regardless, its only now that I have noticed how poorly referenced the Background section is, so thanks for the timely reminder... Regards, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 16:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Bluebell Railway van
With regards to your question on my talk page, the simple answer is I don't know. If there's nothing else that looks like it could have that number, I'd say it probably was, but perhaps leave a comment on the Talk Page saying you aren't sure? Bluebellnutter (talk) 11:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Standard 4 No 80100.jpg
I'm puzzled by your deletions here and have undone them.

Please see Andy Dingley (talk) 11:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I've declined the speedy request, as it doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria specified in WP:CSD (I'm willing to assume it wasn't a deliberate attempt to mislead). It could go to WP:FFD, or possibly restored with a suitable caption (e.g. "an impression of what the loco may look like when restored.") —  Tivedshambo   (t/c) 12:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Having looked at user:Mjroots' further comments, I can't see any way to look at this other than deliberate vandalism and WP:CSD material. There's no need for an "artist's impression", it's almost certainly just 80151 with the numbers changed. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * My mistake - I was thinking of this photo in terms of an article specifically about 80100, rather than the class of locos. —  Tivedshambo   (t/c) 14:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Waterbeach
Ahah! I see you seized the day and fitted in Waterbeach into the Ely to Ipswich Line after nearly a three month wait, now that I have rejigged the branching around Cambridge so the branch is on the vertical. Actually that is quite nice as it splits up quite a long empty vertical. Of course these maps are not meant to be geographically accurate but it is nice to have SOME sense of how far away things are from each other

So I was kinda pleased to have separated the two branches out which were a bit of a muddle some from this branch some from that. I am quite pleased with having got the Cambridge-Mildenhall railway in there too, well as far as Fordham, as it fit quite snugly in the middle and it seemed silly to have two continuity arrows which really just join to each other. My first try I didn't put in any intermediate stations (which of course I copied from the Cambridge to Mildenhall Railway article and to have finally got the River Cam the right side of the junction. I don't think those stations really merit "big blob" status but that's what's on the main diagram-- that being said our Newmarket and Chesterford Railway rightly has more detail than is shown on this diagram, one doesn't want to show every small level crossing etc on a larger-range diagram such as this. Opinion?

I really should have noticed I'd missed Waterbeach as I used to use it quite a lot. I noticed you changed it and checking the user talk saw that you'd mentioned it back in April. I assume this was when the branch to Ely was horizontal and there was no way to fit it in without widening the diagram. For a similar reason I would like really to put the Cambridge branch station names on the left and could then compact the branch more, but it would make the diagram wider.

Best wishes and thanks for noticing that. SimonTrew (talk) 20:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * By the way I assume you reaise the bad left-arrows where right-arrows should be are down to this pestilent ChrisBot that apparently is changing things that don't need changing. I am a great believer in incremental editing, as you probably saw if you checked the history when you looked at the changes before inserting Waterbeach, but I assure you (barring mistakes) EVERY SAVED CHANGE I MADE STILL MADE A GOOD VERSION. I don't understand this philosophy of one step backward for two forward, who knows when the article will be looked at, it has to make sense WHENEVER it is viewed. So I go in baby steps but each baby step makes a small improvement (barring mistakes) not takes it backwards. I hope it gets fixed soon but I can't see the point of fixing it manually while it is doing its evil deeds. It seems I am not the only one to have complained about it. SimonTrew (talk) 20:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Disused railway (Newmarket /Chesterford)- on OS map
For an unconnected reason, I was looking at the area around Balsham and the Ordnance Survey maps on the Internet (I have lent my copies and they never return) and there is a "Disused Railway" marked at TL530529. This, I imagine, was the "branch" from Six Mile Bottom to Great Chesterford. Maybe have a look see what you think? You probably have better references than me. I can go and walk it and check it if you want, I will be around there on Friday. SimonTrew (talk) 21:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah I checked the OS maps I could find on the Internet, including Geograph, unfortunately for fairly obvious reasons (i.e. copyright) they cover a fairly small area and at a resolution that cannot be copied well, though they do seem to have more detail than are on the Landranger series. In doing so I think I spotted an error in the heights given at Gog Magog Downs &mdash; I think the author has taken the contour lines as being in feet, but they are in metres. The article I am creating is at User:SimonTrew/West_Wratting but this is very much a sandbox; no references etc etc and probably too much OR and stuff like that, it is very much a work in progress. I like basically to throw in all the personal knowledge (i.e. OR) THEN go get references and pare it down, and if I am not careful West Wratting will have a longer article than London, but I think it is easier for editors to remove stuff than to add it, and am working on that premiss.


 * I have booked to visit the Cambridgeshire Records Office on Friday where I can find out more and put the nail in the nail in the coffin, I hope. If you want me to look up anything else while I am there, let me know.


 * Best wishes as always SimonTrew (talk) 10:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Viareggio derailent
Ok, I will find an source.--Marcopete87 (talk) 09:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

East Coast Main Line
Hey MJ,

I have been trying to add Digswell Viaduct to the East Coast Main Line diagram and consistently failing to find the viaduct symbol. I know it exists there somewhere just cannot find it. If you know can you help me? SimonTrew (talk) 10:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I did get Brucke with the umlaut (it is tricky for me to find it n KB here) but I just couldn't get it looking how I wanted it. Thanks for doing so. Perhaps the computer was just having a bad day. SimonTrew (talk) 09:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * O I can get it through charmap just when I am in a hurry typing it is not easily got at the keyboard. Ü is U+00DC is is just bloody fiddly to do it in a hurry. I have a much better solution and am planning to write it as a little app so you can type all the common symbols without going through all that palaver, my only worry is that I would neet to get it microsoft certified which is just not worth the bother. SimonTrew (talk) 09:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Groudle Glen Railway
I've copied the references onto the page now as they are basically the same as the bibliography. The fact is that I'm the secretary of this railway and as such the information added is gleaned from being there or knowing the history as an enthusiast. Does this suffice? I can probably cite a few more reference materials and other websites. I already mention our official site in the links. --Gordonastill (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Manx Electric Railway Diagram
Thanks for the update of this, but for some reason you've deleted the stopping places that were all on the list, meaning that the following/preceding station box for each respective article is now inconsistent. Please could you add these back as they represent a complete list of the railway's stopping places and/or crossings and each one has its own article in existence. Cheers. Gordonastill (talk) 08:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Thanks for your help on ECML. I tried brucke but just could not get it right. SimonTrew (talk) 09:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Romney, Hythe & Dymchurch Railway
Talk about "not seeing the wood for the trees"! How did we all manage to go so long without noticing that Station Road NR was missing from the diagram?! Many thanks for adding it.  Timothy Titus Talk To TT  11:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

re:Haulotte Group
Heh, no problem. Gotta love Huggle! -sesu PRIME  12:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Wealden Line
The problem is that I think that the template works quite well as it is, the idea being to highlight the missing link rather than the northern section which features in the Oxted Line template. Based on the map here, it would need the addition of two arrows branching off to the north and south of Uckfield; i.e. one to the west on the template (below the new Uckfield station and above Buxted) and one to the east (just above the Lewes bypass). Lamberhurst (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks correct, but I have one point. To avoid the impression that it is a disused line, should the icons used be blue as per the Headcorn and Maidstone Junction Light Railway or dotted? Lamberhurst (talk) 12:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Railway electrification system
Your accusation towards me of an "edit war" has no basis. I reverted the edit by another user regarding the flag of Korea on the basis of innappropriate language (obscenity) in the edit summary. I reverted the edit ONCE only, as any editor could have seen from the history page. As an Admin, your actions in this matter are highly questionable. I am in private discussions with another Admin over your behaviour and a report is not out of the question. Bhtpbank (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have e-mailed your comments on my talk page to another admin for further review. Suggestions of blocking me over ONE reverted edit are totally over the top. I hyave done nothing to justify such a warning.  As an Admin your tone towards me and extreme escalation of this issue are quite out of character with what is expected from Admins on Wikipedia. This is the equivalent of the police arresting someone for walking on the crack in the sidewalk. I am totally bewildered by the harshness with which you have treated me over such a trivial edit. I am accused of edit warring and then issued with a block warning when I dare to respond and defend my position. Unbelievable! Bhtpbank (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have requested comments here Bhtpbank (talk) 08:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Lößnitzgrundbahn accident
I have looked over as requested and you did a good job, you might want to take it to DYK.

Re:conductor/guard: I was unaware that there seems to be a British vs American English issue here, I wanted to disambig the term guard but probably made it even more ambiguous :(

When I linked the train conductor article, I had the American definition in mind. The German term "Zugbegleiter" (lit. "train escort") describes the railway employee responsible for all passenger-related matters. In such small railways as the Lößnitzgrundbahn, that job boils down to "do everything but actually drive the train". Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re:I'll have a look, it may take me some time. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I found some data about the 99.1789-9, eg here and here. These links include all data needed. However, neither source meets WP:RS, and I found no other source that does, so I did not include any information yet. Please give me a ping if you want me to include the data anyway and leave it unsourced. Also, I need to apologize for my opening comment in this thread - I checked your user page and found out you probably might remotely know about the DYK option... Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 14:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re:That's how I felt about it too. Regards Skäpperöd (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Workington North railway station
Thanks for helping me out with the Workington North railway station article. As you can probably tell, I'm only just getting into editing Wikipedia, although I've used it for years, and seeing how the experienced guys (like yourself) do it is really interesting and I've learnt a lot, even just today! So yeah, thanks very much! :-) Mike1901 (talk) 12:26, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Workington North Railway Station DYK
Could you have a look at T:TDYK? It seems like the article needs an update. Ucucha 20:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK, see reply
See reply at the nomination area.

Also related is a proposed move of the floods article. See Talk:November 2009 Great Britain and Ireland floods if you are interested.

Simply south (talk) 22:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Hawkhurst branch
I think it's definitely possible. I've got enough material to produce a well-referenced article, the only question mark is over images. I'll draw up a wishlist on the article's talk page. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the barnstar, I've still got some refs to add in from Hart and also check if there are any interesting magazine articles which could be used. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Well done on the very thorough job you've done cleaning up the text. I've had a look for the Railway Modeller articles and came across this useful page. Do we need to include track plans in the article given that there's already a pretty comprehensive routemap? I'll try and get hold of a copy of the Railway Magazine article. Lamberhurst (talk) 08:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added the ref requested. The track plans look a lot better than I had imagined possible using the RDTs, but I wonder if it's not overloading the article too much to go into any more detail about the stations? Lamberhurst (talk) 22:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The system of referencing was introduced to me by User:Redrose64 and I've asked him to look into your question. He may also be able to help us get the article into FA shape which I think is definitely achievable before June 2011. By the way, I'm not sure if you noticed but the original Cranbrook and Paddock Wood Railway article seems to have been started by the curator of the Col. Stephens museum. I think I might drop him a line to see if he has any out-of-copyright material that we might use here. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Route map
Please look at this: User:Sameboat/x4. I use the bs5-sc (BS5-startCollapsible) to hide the features except for stations and branchings. Because using the in-map collapsible section will increase 1 more row for the route map, it is justifiable if there're enough materials to be hidden rather than just 1 single section like the siding. Alternatively you may create 2 maps, 1 simplified for including the stations and branching, another 1 for detailed characteristic of the line. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Cudworth locos
I'm trying to get something together at Talk:Hawkhurst Branch Line regarding your recent edits where loco classes are mentioned. Basically: the Cudworth 118 class 2-4-0 and the SER E class 2-4-0 are one and the same. Unfortunately it takes some WP:OR using Bradley's work on SER locos (2nd ed, at least) to work it out, but: on p.15 we have "E - Cudworth standard 2-4-0s" and by eliminating all non-Cudworth locos, the small (ie non-standard) classes and all non-2-4-0 locos, all that is left is the 118 class (pp. 101-112). -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * following sentence moved from User talk:Redrose64 ( Red rose64 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC))
 * If you read the James Cudworth article, you'll see that the locos were rebuilt. Is it possible that the E1 class were the rebuilds of the 118 class? Mjroots (talk) 18:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * end of moved section. (I dislike disjoint conversations, and this page is on my watchlist)

I have problems there. I am assuming that the section you mean is the paragraph beginning "By 1855, Cudworth started to introduce more conventional steam locomotives", since that is the only one to mention (a) the 118 class and (b) the word "rebuilt". First, the only reference given for that paragraph is "" which is somewhat vague. I happen to have a copy (albeit the 1971 paperback reprint), and looking through those ten pages for the classes described, a better citation would be "". Second, the only mention of the 118 Class is in the sentence "Fifty three 0-6-0 goods engines were constructed at Ashford Works between 1855 and 1876, the 118 class". This, and the two sentences which follow, are backed up (Nock pp. 71-72) except that Nock does not mention "118 Class". Checking elsewhere in the chapter, he doesn't mention "118 Class" at all. According to Bradley the 53 goods engines were known as the "Standard Goods", and no. 118 is not listed in the class summary (Bradley p. 98). Turning now to the sentence "In 1857, Cudworth introduced a class of 2-4-0s" and the three which follow it; these are all backed up (Nock p. 72), but it is these engines which Bradley describes both as the "118 Class" (Bradley pp. 101,103) and also as the "standard 2-4-0s" (Bradley p. 103) except that he separates off the first six from E.B. Wilson as a distinct class (Bradley pp. 99-100), giving 68 from Ashford and 42 from contractors - and no. 118 is one of the Ashford engines. Now, to the letter or letter/digit class codes. These are listed as introduced by Stirling in September 1879 (Bradley p. 15), where we find the "Standard Goods" as the I class, the E.B. Wilson 2-4-0s as the D class, and the Cudworth standard 2-4-0s as the E class. Bradley rarely uses these class codes in his text, until Stirling's own classes are mentioned, and does not do so at all for the three classes in question. Nock similarly ignores these codes until dealing with Stirling's classes. I have never come across E1 used to describe anything in that part of the world other than Maunsell's 1919-20 rebuilds of the Wainwright E class 4-4-0. Most of the 118 class were indeed rebuilt, some twice (Bradley pp. 105-106), but the use of the suffix "1" to a Stirling class letter does not seem to come up until the SECR period (B1 rebuilt from B by Wainwright, F1 from F, etc.). -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Ahh, I see where I've gone wrong (I think). the 59 and 118 class were both 2-4-0s. I don't have access to Bradley so perhaps you can expand the article a bit. What class were the 0-4-4s that Cudworth introduced? Mjroots (talk) 06:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I've made a few tweaks to the James Cudworth article. Mjroots (talk) 06:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh dear, more confusion. The 59 class were the three 0-6-0s built at Ashford in 1879, to Mansell's design although incorporating features of Cudworth's standard goods; Stirling allotted them N class (the standard goods were I class). Principal diffs included the driving wheels (5'0" instead of 4'10") and cylinders (17"x24" instead of 16"x24"). (Bradley pp. 156-157)
 * There were several designs of 2-4-0 in the Cudworth period, and Bradley divides them into seven classes, six being small in number.
 * The 0-4-4Ts on the SER fell neatly into three classes:
 * the Cudworth "235 class" (J class) well tanks, 7 locos built 1866 by Brassey & Co; (Bradley pp. 122-123)
 * the Mansell "Gunboats" (M class) side tanks, 9 built Ashford 1877-8; (Bradley pp. 134-136)
 * the Stirling Q class side tanks, 118 built (48 by Ashford; 60 by Neilson, Reid; 10 by Sharp, Stewart) 1881-1897 (Bradley pp. 160-171). Rebuilds of these with H class boilers by Wainwright or Maunsell were Q1 class.
 * Re the Cudworth article: puzzled by your title for chapter VI - it's called "Early Locomotives and Trains" in mine, in which it's chapter X that is called "South Eastern & Chatham" (and not "The South East and Chatham Railway" as you put); removal of the mention of the 118 class is good; the table is a start: I'll see what can be added directly, rather than putting more notes here. Bear in mind that my Bradley page numbers will be (as they are above) those of the second edition, which is much expanded from the first.
 * It's a good idea to get yourself a copy. Looking around second-hand railway book sellers, the first edition is far easier to obtain - I think because the second is always snapped up by those who already have a first, who then dispose of the shorter first ed. Try Geoff Gamble Books in Crawley. I've picked up some real good stuff from them. They'll be at Leatherhead model railway show, 26-27 February 2010. Make sure you ask for "The Locomotive History of the South Eastern Railway, second edition, by D.L. Bradley", because he wrote eleven books covering the SR's locos - Bruce Smetham (who took over Geoff Gamble Books after the death of the founder) will know exactly what you mean, given that sentence. Altogether, Bradley's books in this series were: one each for the SER, LCDR, SECR (1960-1963); two for the LSWR (1965-7); three for the LBSCR (1969-74); two for the SR post grouping classes (1975-6); and one for the Isle of Wight (1982). The SER, LCDR & SECR books all went to a second edition in 1979-1985 (see LCDR R1 class for details), so these are far commoner than the others. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I've corrected the chapter title in the ref. Must've still be half-asleep when I did that! Mjroots (talk) 16:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Re Cudworth's unusual middle name "I'Anson". I've been poking around and have found this website, where we find that it seems to have variant spellings including "Ianson"; see this page. In the same site I have found this page - it doesn't mention our James Cudworth; but note the word "Ashford" in the heading (which suggests a family connection to that town), and much later on, the paragraph beginning "Mary, the sole surviving daughter of William and Mary Ianson, married William Cudworth, grocer and druggist, of Darlington". It's both the right town and the right religion; so do you have anything that gives the names of James I'Anson Cudworth's parents? Would they be William Cudworth and Mary I'Anson by any chance? -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Bingo! See James Cudworth (engineer). -- Red rose64 (talk) 23:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Regarding your text "2-4-0s for the Hastings Line. These engines were known as the 59 class.[8]"; all that ref. 8 says is "Woodlands class Designed by Alfred Kitching in 1848 ... Nos. 58 Woodlands, 59 Hallgarth ... John Kitching claimed that the design was copied by James Cudworth for the 59 class used on SER Hastings trains.". Looking at Bradley p. 88 we have the "Hastings" class, which it says 'appear to have been influenced by the 1848 "Woodland" class long-boiler 2-4-0s of the Stockton & Darlington Railway' Nowhere in Bradley is "59 class" mentioned in connection with these engines, whose numbers were 157-170.
 * Considering other possible SER locos numbered 59:
 * Watkin built an 0-6-0 no. 59 in 1879, which was of his "59 class".
 * Right back at the dawn of SER history, there was no no. 59 until 1844. Some 2-2-2s were built by Sharp, Roberts in 1841 for the London & Brighton Railway, one of which was L&B no. 20. On formation of the Brighton, Croydon & Dover Joint Committee in 1844, this loco was renumbered 59; on the dissolution of the joint committee a year later, it passed to the SER but retained its number. (Bradley pp. 35, 37, 39)
 * Now, we have "No. 59 which had been rebuilt as a 2-4-0 in 1855" (Bradley p. 50) and we also find that several Sharps 2-2-2s, including no. 59, had been rebuilt as 2-4-0s by Cudworth at around the same time (Bradley pp. 38-39); but none of these rebuilds are described as "59 class". No. 59 itself was withdrawn in 1879, which leaves no space in between the old L&B engine and the Watkin 0-6-0 in which to put a Cudworth 2-4-0 - unless the 1855 rebuild be the one; but I don't think that a rebuild could produce a copy of an existing design on another railway. However, a new design, such as the "Hastings" class, could well be a copy. I think that the steamindex page has mixed its sources. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, you've got Bradley, so if you think the 59 class is wrong I'll not object to it being changed. The table coud probably do with some wikilinks once all the classes have been sorted out. Mjroots (talk) 14:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK nom
Don't know if you've noticed, but I left a comment at Template talk:Did you know, because I expanded that part of James Cudworth which is directly related to the DYK sentence. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've not finished the table of loco classes - at least as far as the section "Cudworth rebuilds of pre-1845 locomotives" is concerned. However, the section "Locomotives built new to Cudworth's order" has all the rows which it should have. I've removed the "under construction" tag, also added notability to the lede, items to the infobox, a succession box at the bottom (see below re Watkin) and reset the paragraph on the coal burning firebox. Here's a of this morning's work. nb Watkin's name pops up as a redlink in several articles, with almost no consistency - I have seen Alfred Mellor Watkin, Alfred Meller Watkin, Alfred M. Watkin, Alfred Watkin, A.M. Watkin. One of these redirects to Edward Watkin.  -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I see that Cudworth is now at Template:Did you know/Queue. Any idea of typical timescales by which time any tweaks to the article must be completed? -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have the 1971 reprint, which has a SBN (on the page opposite the contents page). Converting a SBN to an ISBN is dead simple - just stick a "0" at the start. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

dyk hook suggestion
Hi, I am just wondering if you noticed the discussion regarding your dyk hook here. You may want to comment. Regards, — mattisse (Talk) 01:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of James Cudworth
Hello! Your submission of James Cudworth (engineer) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 09:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Is Kings Ferry North Halt the same as Swale North Halt?
You asked this question on my talk page on 18 Nov 2009, and I replied there using info from the only books I have, which suggested that the answer is no. However, User Lamberhurst might have better information in his copy of Colonel Cobbs Atlas.

More recently you stated this again on the talk page for Closed stations Kent, and so far no-one has replied there.

What source of information suggests to you that Kings Ferry North Halt the same as Swale North Halt?

Efficacy (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like to add the information that I have; I shall do so at Template talk:Closed stations Kent. -- Red rose64 (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I've replied on the template's talk page. Mjroots (talk) 06:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (railway incidents)
Just a note to say that whilst I'm battering the guideline, and indeed the idea of the guideline, I'm absolutely not having a go at you, and accept fully that your intentions are the best. Please don't be discouraged. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Milk Tanks
Milk tanks are a peculiar case. They fall into that grey area of rolling stock categorisation which is neither passenger nor freight, and is described in many books as "non-passenger carrying coaching stock" or NPCCS, being stock which doesn't carry passengers, yet is permitted (by reason of wheelbase, brakes, etc.) to run in passenger trains. On annual returns made by railway companies to the Board of Trade, milk tanks were included under the heading "open carriage trucks". This, I believe, stems from around 1927, when the railways started to switch from churns to tanks for the carriage of milk. Despite them being essentially inseparable, for many years (right down to the end of milk transport by rail in the early 1980s I think) the rail chassis was owned by the railway, and the tank itself by the dairy. Thus, since the railway was not responsible for the tank, it saw no reason for a special classification - so they remained under the "open carriage truck" heading. Details of SR no. 4430 (Diagram 3157, HOO no. 768, Lancing September 1933), which carried a UD tank, may be found in which contains the interesting text "No. 4430 was obtained by the Bluebell railway in August 1981 following its withdrawal in 1980. The actual tank was donated by St. Ivel, but the underframe, being BR property, had to be bought by the Bluebell!" So, I don't really agree with your. Sorry. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wagons may only run in passenger trains if they meet certain specifications. Most apparent "wagons" used in passenger trains were actually NPCCS, such as fish vans, fresh meat vans and parcels vans - the common factor being that the items that they carried were penalised by delays, either because they were perishable, or because there was a promised delivery time. This meant that they needed to be conveyed as quickly as possible, so virtually all suitable vehicles were built to passenger train requirements. Since milk tanks carried perishable goods, they are NPCCS and not freight stock. Petrol tanks on the other hand, carried materials which were non-perishable, did not attract a penalty if delayed; and because of the inherent dangers, were expressly forbidden from being formed in passenger trains. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That looks better, thanks -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Invicta
Yes, there are plans but I can't find a reference for the Transport Trust gifting the locomotive to Whitstable museum (which makes no sense, as it would be to Canterbury City Council, owners of the museum).

But for the moving to Whitstable museum, the following reference (just a few days old). Whitstable Gazette, Page 4, March 25:

City council spokesman Steve James said: "Invicta is at Museum of Canterbury and it is council policy for it to go to Whitstable Museum when space is made available as part of the development."

Nothing to show ownership has been transferred from the Transport Trust, though.

Thanks GTD 15:34, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Signal Icons
You posted about some railway image requests, so I'm here to post. I'm not exactly sure from your description if this is correct, so please tell me where it can be improved:



Equally, when you say you want it to be rotated 180 degrees, does that mean you want to have the signal upside down on the opposite side, or simply reflected, so that it is still facing upwards, but inwards, on the other side?

NikNaks93 (talk) 10:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * How's that? I've made it look a little more 3D, as well. NikNaks93 (talk) 11:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, now that I know what it's being used for, I suggest a change in tack. It is very difficult to render a thin shape like the signal on such a small scale, so instead, it may make more sense to simply use the arm on the appropriate size.  I have mocked up what this would look like on the other filespace you set aside in your request (I know it's on the wrong side, but I'm doing it for comparison), and I think it works quite well.  However, you're the expert here, so if you feel it will create confusion, I'm happy to hear other suggestions.

I don't want to clog up your talk page with more images, so I've just edited the example diagram on my talk page. You can see the signal variation above the new alternative arm-only one. NikNaks93 (talk) 13:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Further to that, I've put up another alternative with a much fatter signal. NikNaks93 (talk) 13:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm still concerned with how difficult it is to tell what it is on such a small scale, and something more stylised would be best, to fit with the existing plans. However, if you feel it's alright, we'll move on.  I've replaced the third alternative file with the new one.  NikNaks93 (talk) 14:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I, unfortunately, did forget about this, although I have discovered what the problem with rendering was, and I've made a couple of changes that make both alternatives look better. However, when you asked me to email, I don't remember you leaving me an address to do so by!  Anyhow, if you still need my help, drop me a message on my talk page, which is, again, where the new variations can be found. Nik Naks  talk - gallery - commons 17:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

RE: Icon request 0417
Since I received your msg just before I go to sleep. I give you 1 more option, use the t (tunneled) set, to represent the 3rd gauge length. This can help the color-blind reader to distinguish different gauges in the map. If you still think the green CONT set is irreplaceable, let me know which color you exactly need or offer the icons of that same color. I will create them tomorrow. You're welcome. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Alright, I have uploaded the rest of the green CONT set . Most of the other icons of set green were originally created / altered by Russian users for Russian metro maps. It's quite complete so you have the thickened choice for your map. commons:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set green. But there's one more concern. Your map includes the info of milage but not applying them in the 4th text column, though I can see that you don't prefer it to be right-aligned. There's a simple trick to line them left-aligned on the right hand side tidily like in the table. See Wikipedia_talk:RDT. Happy editing. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Pretoria runaway
Happy to be of assistance. (How do you think I've gotten my edit count where it is? ;-) )

Glad to see an article on the subject; I half-considered starting one myself at the time. Excellent work, and happy editing! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 07:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I quite agree. I just happen to have a lot of time on my hands. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 08:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

LB&SCR A1 class
Hi. Sorry if this is in the wrong place, but you seem to be more informed about what to do on this here website (I'm still trying to work out where you put the coal). Basically, I've been doing some work on LB&SCR A1 class and I'd like to try and nominate it for peer review to hopefully bump it up the quality scale, however I haven't the foggiest how to do it. I tried looking at Template:TrainsWikiProject as per WikiProject Trains/Peer review, but nothing that appears there appears on the page. Any chance you could point us in the right direction?

Cheers. Bluebellnutter (talk) 00:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Got the answer elsewhere, but cheers anyway. Bluebellnutter (talk) 15:12, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Falls of Cruachan derailment
Falls of Cruachan derailment ...crap like this makes me wonder why Wikipedia still has any good contributors like you left. :/ Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 18:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out WP:STICK in the Falls of Cruachan derailment discussion! It and the related articles gave me some great laughs - it's good to remind ourselves not to take things too seriously! Hyperman 42 (talk) 20:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Billard
I've translated Billard and placed it there (it was a redirect for misspelling of Billiards. As with all these things, my translation may not be the best; I only got back to you here via "what links here" (our paths, or perhaps railway lines, do seem to cross sometimes) so I thought I'd let you know. I've also translated voie ferrées d'intérêt local; I don't know of a good English version of that title: "Secondary railways of France" "Railways of Local Interest", or "French Local Interest Railways" spring to mind, but none seems entirely satisfactory, as there is no topic Secondary railways (Branch line may come close but these were more networks than branches).

I hope I've translated the jargon language reasonably accurately but have probably strayed with some other bad translations. Any help you might give in scrubbing those articles up, I would much appreciate it. But more than anything I just wanted to let you know of its existence in case it helps your own editing at all.

I've still to go through and fix some of the links to railway companies and lines. I don't really know why so commonly the capitalisation or pluralisation of these changes from French to English (I could understand if it was consistent, but it's not at all, and since these are generally proper names they should be kept faithful, I think).

Best wishes Si Trew (talk) 09:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Old Rouen Tramway
Dear MJ,

As you suggested, I submitted Old Rouen Tramway for review, and it has now been reviewed. The reviewer, User:Jezhotwells has placed it on hold because of a number of POV statements, which I hope I have fixed, but of greater concern is it needs a good copy edit.

I would like to ask you to copy-edit it as an uninvolved editor. Your only involvement was to suggest to me to take it to GAN, which I did, and your interest generally in railway articles, and it would be great if you could do this. I hope this is not seen as canvassing, but of course as rather a backwater (mixing metaphors) no-one else I think could review it impartially as well as you.

The main problem as I see it, and perhaps the reviewer, is the English has sometimes got from under me in translating the French; one slips into French grammar and forgets one's English. I know this happens when my missus translates from Hungarian, and she has copy edited it but even so of course after reading the article oneself time and time again it all makes sense and so one can't see the meat for the potatoes.

So if you have time and don't think this is WP:CANVASS and that you are suitably disinterested, I should be glad for you to give it the once-over. I've not notified the reviewer of my asking you yet (how could I? I've not hit Save yet) but will gladly do so if you think appropriate, or if you do so yourself. I'm new to GA so although I have read the guidelines, etiquette is always learned not taught.

My very best wishes. Si Trew (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the congrats on this article. Can I help at all with the conversion factor? It reminded me, I am really fairly certain that choosing chains to convert into was probably a bad idea. Those are all done with from the metric, so it's not difficult to change it to miles.


 * I hope there's not too many other errors in translation. Si Trew (talk) 13:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I had a go at creating a miles-and-chains convert template, but haven't completely got it working yet (I based it on the ft in template and changed the numbers, but am obviously doing something wrong). One of my peeves with is that, from a maintainer's point of view it is very badly documented; adding a conversion seems a question of adding a subtemplate with a load of single-letter paramaters, and I believe they were named so because in Ancient History there was a greater need to keep templates terse (it reminds me of my Atari BASIC days); but they should be documented somewhere. I'll maybe add a note to your request; it sometimes helps if one demonstrates that the need is not esoteric. Si Trew (talk) 06:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Cuckoo Line
I reverted your edits because, although it could be said that they were made with good intent, were not within policy and showed a possible conflict of interest.

Of course they were within policy, I added the accurate statement that any rebuilding would have to take into account that much of the trackbed has been built upon with houses and a long stretch of road. This would make any rebuilding somewhat doubtful to say the least. Not only that, but given the budget deficit, and the proposed cutbacks of up to 40% in the department for transport, the prospect of any rebuilt lines especially rural ones like the cuckoo would appear extremely unlikely. Perhaps you could show where this supposed conflict of interest is.

'''The Cuckoo Line proper is that stretch of line between Redgate Mill Jn and Polegate. Thus, the stretch of line from Groombridge to Forest Row is covered under the Three Bridges to Tunbridge Wells Central Line article'''

I'm not sure why you are pointing this out to me because if you look at the edit I made, that was the point I was making. You then made the reversion which you are now commenting about.

Rather than edit warring over the issue, maybe you would like to discuss proposed additions on the talk pages of the relevant articles, and link to the source of the proposed addition.

Correct me if Im wrong but you stated that you don't read the talk articles so I am replying here. In any case it is not necessary to add sources to every single statement, especially what is obviously true (as you can see on any aerial map). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.29.240 (talk) 21:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but your edit also introduced material about the Three Bridges - TW Central line, which is outsided the scope of the Cuckoo Line article. Mjroots (talk) 21:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Er no. Im afraid you are simply incorrect, as I was the one who deleted that section twice and i stated as much in my reasons for editing as anyone can verify. It would be helpful if you looked at what i typed vefore you comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.29.240 (talk) 21:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

RE:Bexhill West Branch Line
I'm afraid that I do not possess a copy of this book, however you could try asking User:Lamberhurst, the user who added the citation if s/he has a copy. Cheers, FM [ talk to me  |  show contributions  ]  18:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

South Eastern Railway (UK)
Thanks for the message. I am gradually working through the article to enlarge it, and intend to use the LB&SCR article as a template. Should get round to Accidents in a week or two. --Das48 (talk) 06:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

2010 Little Cornard derailment
Just wanted to say nice work on that. Interesting article. With a bit of work, it could probably make GA status. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   18:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

WP Trains in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Trains for a Signpost article to be published this month. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 19:02, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Listowel & Ballybunion Railway
, so cop hold of this. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Newport rail accident
Re - the thing is, it isn't verified by linked article, because the latter is entirely unrefd (a comment on the talk page along the lines of "it's in an old copy of The Times" fails WP:V). -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

NG Railways
I've seen your "debate" on the trains page, two comments, and no attempt to gain wider input. Not very edifying. --Michael Johnson (talk) 07:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Railway gauge categories
No problem. Meanwhile I'll get on with translating! Regards. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Snowdown engines
See my reply on my own talk page. Best wishes, 8474tim (talk) 16:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Looking again at my photos, I see that there was a third loco, of the same design as the others. Its name is not legible.


 * I forget, after the passage of time, how my enthusiast-friend and I knew about the steam locos at Snowdown, but I suspect that the information may have come from the Newsletter of the Locomotive Club of Great Britain; perhaps they had organised a visit there. The date was 1968-9 or maybe even early 1970.


 * You might also find this site useful: http://www.industrial-loco.org.uk/


 * Good luck and best wishes 8474tim (talk) 17:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Cavell Van
Thanks for your work on it, it really looks great now!

I'm not sure how to get it moved into arcicle space so can you do that or give me some advise on it?

Thanks LameCat (talk) 14:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Cavell Van
Hello! Your submission of Cavell Van at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mikenorton (talk) 22:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

PMV Incubator Article
Talk about talk page stalking...from the above, and via a picture, I ended up at Article Incubator/SE&CR Diagram 960 PMV which you were instrumental in creating.

Things have moved on since the article was started there -- not least the the AI is now intended for articles that have been deleted but rescued (although this definition is under some dispute). The PMV page would now be created under the AFC process (I think). Cutting to the chase, the article is remaining in limbo where it is, as it doesn't appear on search results, and no-one really knows that it's there. There is also no obvious process for getting it out again! However, it might be deleted if no-one works on it.

Not proposing to do anything myself to it (although the History shows I did, once) but thought that you might appreciate a reminder of its existence... -- EdJogg (talk) 23:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Glossary of UK railway terminology
Regarding reliance on Whyte notation to indicate loco type...

I agree that, for someone familiar with railways, '2-6-0' would immediately imply a steam locomotive; however, consider that BR TOPS classes 01 - 14 cover a series of 0-4-0 and 0-6-0 shunters, and that we should be careful what we assume about a user's knowledge or interests, and I didn't think it was unreasonable to add the qualifier 'steam'. I don't think it is particularly redundant, considering the environment we are writing in. (Also, there are several other entries that already mention 'steam locomotive', one of which you edited today!)

EdJogg (talk) 12:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Article updated per your suggestion on my talk page.... -- EdJogg (talk) 00:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Renaming proposals - UK railways
I think it is normal to leave a message on the talk pages of potentially affected articles when discussing renames etc. That hasn't happened yet. Maybe there is a machine that will do this? Sf5xeplus (talk) 12:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The easiest way I think to get this done would be to make a request at WP:BOTREQ asking for a neutral statement to be placed on the talk page of affected articles. I think that any page tagged with the UK railway project template AND with a title including the words "British Rail Class" would get everything (the handful of lists we can do manually). As for the note, how does this sound:
 * This article is currently named in accordance the WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways, where your comments would be welcome.
 * I'd make the request myself, but I want to check the wording of the note is as neutral as I hope it is. Thryduulf (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I mentioned this to User talk:Tivedshambo - they don't think it's necessary.
 * If you want to add a message - a neutral way to say it is "This article falls within the scope of a title renaming proposal and discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways, where you are free to comment contribute blah blah etc etc".Sf5xeplus (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Mjroots commented on my talk page that they think the wording I suggested is fine. I think your suggested wording is less clear (it doesn't make it clear that it's more than that article being considered, nor why it is relevant to that page), so I've made the request with the original wording, but with the addition of a header "Possible change to the title of this article". See WP:BOTREQ. I've asked that the project be notified when the task is done. Thryduulf (talk) 15:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Bridgnorth Cliff Railway
I didn't know that, thanks for the headsup! I shall go and purchase a copy later. Cheers. Thryduulf (talk) 09:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Southern Railway (Great Britain)
I saw your DAB-solve for Portsmouth station. (The is still there, incidentally.) I saw the need for a DAB-solve previously but left it as I didn't know when electrification had been extended to the Harbour station. Is Southsea the correct link? -- EdJogg (talk) 13:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * the was removed by Tim PF at 12:41, 1 April 2011. The line to Portsmouth Harbour was electrified at the same time as the terminal plats at Portsmouth and Southsea: see
 * which makes it clear that improvements for electrification included:
 * the lengthening of the high-level plats at P&S to 820 ft
 * four plats at P. Hbr "were similarly lengthened and new station buildings put in hand"
 * three-aspect colour-light signalling from P&S to P. Hbr (brought into use 20 June 1937)
 * Of the introduction of services we have:
 * Trial runs "right through to Portsmouth Harbour" began 11 April 1937
 * normal trains on Sats & Suns only "to that destination" from Waterloo began 29 May
 * full service "to ... Portsmouth" began 4 July
 * Of the type of service, much detail is given, but may be summarised as two types: slow trains terminated at Portsmouth & Southsea, dividing at Woking (other portion for Alton); and fast trains called at P&S and terminated at Portsmouth Harbour. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I wasn't 100% sure of the Harbour station either. Anyway, looks like it's been solved by Redrose64. Mjroots (talk) 15:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you. When I started typing the message, the 'dn' was still in place, and I thought it made more sense to check the facts before removing it. You just need the right book to look in.
 * I looked at the article on the Harbour station, but it doesn't mention electrification (nor the Class 08 that used to take a tank of diesel from Fratton down to the Harbour every so often -- such a distraction to an engineering student at the Poly......) -- EdJogg (talk) 23:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked at the article on the Harbour station, but it doesn't mention electrification (nor the Class 08 that used to take a tank of diesel from Fratton down to the Harbour every so often -- such a distraction to an engineering student at the Poly......) -- EdJogg (talk) 23:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

$$Insert formula here$$

WikiProject Trains parameters
Hi Mj; please note that template parameter names are case-sensitive, so I've, but haven't been through any others that you might have done like this. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Track gauge related dispute
I would like to resolve our category:track gauge related dispute. TrackConversion (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Alert to Mjroots. A new user with similar intent has appeared. Please see the project talk pages for details. -- EdJogg (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ouse Railway
The heading says "financial reasons" but the text now says "political reasons'''.   FYI.    Tabletop (talk) 13:30, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Railway gauge categories
Am I the only person who is populating the gauge categories that you've created? DanTD (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No. I've done a bit!  Timothy Titus Talk To TT  11:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

15 inch gauge template
Hi. You recently changed the title of the template Template:15 inch gauge railways. I totally agree with you, and with why you did it, and that the output is much better. The only reason I hadn't done this myself is that there are multiple other locations on Wikipedia where the same gauge template is producing the same crazy output, and I've been trying to get the gauge template changed. When I first created the page Template:15 inch gauge railways I incorporated the gauge template and back then it DID produce "15 inch Gauge" rather than the silly "1 foot, 3 inches gauge". If you are in agreement, as you seem to be, perhaps you could add your support to the discussion at: Template talk:RailGauge. Many thanks.  Timothy Titus Talk To TT  11:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject UK Railways in the Signpost
WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject UK Railways for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 16:29, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Gateshead
Is this a disused station? There is no Gateshead station, other than Gateshead Interchange, which is only on the Metro. Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years 20:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No I don't but will update to show it as closed. Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years


 * Oh Intercity! Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years 21:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Seeing as we are here, which way did Fletton and Langford Goods Yards come off the line? Also, do you know the name of the sidings next to Newcastle? I have on Baker (2010) (not Brown) "Forth-CE Plant Dept". Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years 21:32, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, that sorts out one which i will correct at some point unless you've already done so. The sidings at Newcastle need to stay as the Scotswood line is no longer in use beyond them. Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years 21:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

New Category: Standard gauge railways in the United States
Surely the new category Category:Standard gauge railways in the United States should be broken down by state as for Category:Narrow gauge railroads in the United States; it is bound to become a large category. And perhaps call it “Standard gauge railroads …. … “ ? Hugo999 (talk) 14:46, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Quite a lively place
I have put this little piccy and 30 of his mates into Commons:Category:Strood railway station. I will let a real expert add extra cats- and make the executive decision on which image to put in the infobox.--ClemRutter (talk) 19:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Clem - good work - having examined the category, I've chosen the image at left for the infobox, added an aerial view further down (one with strategically placed trains for the purposes of description), and added a . -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Delete category?

 * I have noted Category:Railways lines closed in 1969 for deletion, as it seems to be a typo Hugo999 (talk) 01:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Mid Suffolk Light Railway template
-- Red rose64 (talk) 13:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding your latest expansion of this template, do we really need every level crossing here? Their presence dominates the diagram and it's hard to see where the stations are. Britmax (talk) 17:43, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Dagenham Dock railway station
Hi, can you alter the template so it features Template:Location map Barking and Dagenham in the infoboxes? Cheers. I intend to gradually create all of the London borough templates.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All you need do is ensure that the infobox in the article has Barking and Dagenham -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

2011 Flores rail crash
Have now created a stub article at 2011 Flores rail crash. Do you want to give it a look over and see if I've got it right (and perhaps add the appropriate Stub template?). Never done one of these before! Have reverted the deletion at Template:2011 railway accidents, as the article is now live. Thanks for the head-up! Skinsmoke (talk) 20:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be then. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks fine for a start. Hopefully other sources are available to expand the article with. Mjroots (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ta for the stub head-up: now added. Will check out the BBC article later.  Skinsmoke (talk) 21:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
The Cape gauge move the page thing gets muddier by each post - it is clear the lead para/intro to the article as it stands is insufficiently detailed to offer the insights offered on the talk page since I put the move suggestion up, oh dear SatuSuro 08:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Rail Injuries
Could you tell me if I have made a mess of the number of injuries referenced in Sloterdijk? Simply south...... going on editing sprees for just 6 years (as of 28/03/2006) 18:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

OVV investigation - can you help translate?
The OVV have announced their lines of enquiries. I was wondering if you could translate Dutch, literally. I am trying to add to the Sloterdijk article using Google's machine translation. Whilst most of it is easy to interpret, I seem to be having trouble with this paragraph, particularly the fourth sentence. The rest of it is relatively okay.

"The measures to avoid collisions, start with the planning of the timetable, according to the AAM. A red signal, where the sprinter would be driven through it, is only one of the last 'expedients'. Then there are the signalman and the driver who can intervene. The OVV asks why the train by the driver or the security system is still put. Another question is whether the signal is well visible for the operator."

http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://www.dagboekspoorwegen.nl/blog/&ei=fErHT6XRLsPMhAeH_eClCw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CG4Q7gEwAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwesterpark%2Brail%2Bcrash%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26tbs%3Dqdr:w%26prmd%3Dimvns.

Simply south...... coming and going for just 6 years 11:09, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The original reads De maatregelen om botsingen te voorkomen, beginnen al bij de planning van de dienstregeling, aldus de OVV. Een rood sein, waar de betrokken sprinter doorheen zou zijn gereden, is pas een van de laatste ‘redmiddelen’. Daarna zijn er nog de treindienstleider en de machinist die kunnen ingrijpen. De OVV stelt de vraag waarom de trein niet door de machinist of het beveiligingssysteem is stilgezet. Een andere vraag is of het sein wel goed zichtbaar was voor de machinist.
 * I would say that the word "stilgezet", translated by Google to "still put", actually means "made quiet", or "silenced". The English equivalent for this sentence could be along the lines of "The RAIB asked why the train driver cancelled the AWS [TPWS, ATP, etc.]". -- Red rose64 (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Here is what I've put in the article. Would you say it is correct or close? Simply south...... coming and going for just 6 years 12:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * (ec) The verb in question is "zetten" (to put or to place). The ge- prefix indicates a past participle, and "stil" is from the verb "stillen" (to quieten or to silence). Google translate does give a range of options. Type in Stilgezet and it translates as Still put, but if you hover the pointer over still and left click, it comes up with other options of quietly, quiet, silence and stop. Thus in this case, stilgezet would translate as cancel(led). Will take a good look later. Mjroots (talk) 12:23, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection.
About your offer to semi-protect the Merseyrail and Tyne and Wear Metro articles. Yes I think that would be a good idea, the IP editor is getting very disruptive, and replacing referenced material that he doesn't agree with. The IP in question seems to believe that this American website, which doesn't even make any mention of the T&WM is an adequate reference for his changes. I left a note on the UK railways talk page but I thought I'd leave one here as well. G-13114 (talk) 15:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Drat and moments before I just added it to RPP. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 18:07, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Arbroath and Montrose Railway
I really appreciate your involvement in this article. Your miles and chains are so much more appropriate than my decimal miles and, more importantly, thank you for the much improved map. I was rather proud of myself to have managed a single line with dots and branches! Our paths crossed years ago, that time at sea, on TS Leda where you again helped with a DYK. Many thanks again. Thincat (talk) 17:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, nice to see some good come out of an AFD. Mjroots (talk) 18:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

SE&CR Diagram 960 PMV
I moved SE&CR Diagram 960 PMV from the article incubator into the main space. Regards, Illia Connell (talk) 06:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

RE: 2014 Chemins de Fer de Provence derailment
Fine, go ahead.

ps- I miss that orange bar too...barely read messages now(Lihaas (talk) 07:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)).

Trains in Trouble
Hi, I have a complete set (8 vols) but it took me some time to find in vol. 4. Where a book has no page numbers, it's a good idea to give some other information,. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I've also got all 8. Doing that is going to take absolutely ages. As the pages aren't numbered and the books are not that big, I think my method should suffice. Mjroots (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Besides which, your method requires a separate ref for each incident! Mjroots (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * - just discovered Vol 7. is numbered, and a numbered index is provided for Vols 1-6 in Vol 8. I could convert the book refs to sfn format in the medium term. What do you think? Mjroots (talk) 06:52, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I think that we should give the page numbers where available - and for vols. 1-6, we can get the page numbers from that index. Here are the templates that I prepared some years ago:  Notice that my vol. 1 has 1982 1980 because it's not original. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:05, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * All eight volumes now used and converted to sfn style. Mjroots (talk) 20:02, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Please see Talk:West Midland Railway. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Settle railway station
Hi, wondered if you could revisit the Settle railway station article. I was looking at this change to add the year of the event but looking at the reference it appears not to tie-in with the incident in question. Many thanks. Keith D (talk) 12:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for change. Keith D (talk) 17:16, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Not a WD Austerity
Hi, re : LMS 8247 was a LMS Stanier Class 8F, not a WD Austerity 2-8-0. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Trevena states that it was WD321, on loan to the LMS as 8247. Could 8247 be a typo? Mjroots (talk) 19:24, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, the thing is, the WD had several classes of loco. Nos. 300-449, 500-524, 540-551/3/5-71 and 623 were built to the LMS 8F design, and several of them were loaned to various British railways before being needed overseas - those loaned to the LMS were given LMS numbers in the 8226-8300 block, following on from the LMS-owned locos which were 8000-8225. WD No. 321 was built August 1940; loaned to the LMS between November 1940 and July 1941 during which period it was numbered 8247; it was sent to Persia September 1941; and eventually returned to the UK, becoming BR 48257 in September 1949. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll bow to your superior knowledge. I'm not an expert here by any means. If you feel that the entry should be copied over to the LMS article, please do so. Trevena does seem to have made some errors. I've corrected them where I know they exist (60066 in 1947? I don't think so). Mjroots (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Loco #77195, WD or LMS? Mjroots (talk) 10:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * All the locos in WD stock, whatever their origin, had their numbers increased by 70000 from 5 September 1944, so 77195 was formerly 7195. This was new in September 1943, one of a batch of WD Austerity 2-8-0 numbered 7150-7299 built by North British Locomotive Company (Hyde Park Works), and unusually fitted with armour plating over the boiler. It was originally used on the Melbourne Military Railway in Derbyshire, then sent to the Longmoor Military Railway. Later, the armour plating was removed, and it was sent to Belgium and based at Muysen. Renumbering to 77195 will have taken place at Longmoor. It was returned to the UK after the war, and loaned to the LNER from April 1947. It retained the number 77195 until purchased by British Railways in December 1948, when it became 90172. It was withdrawn in June 1967. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:56, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Bourne End
Either wasn't on the LMS, or it wasn't at Bourne End which being on a GWR branch line didn't get many express trains, and none from the LMS. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa - now fixed. Was the Herts one. Mjroots (talk) 20:14, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Locomotive Boiler Explosions
For Hewison Locomotive Boiler Explosions it's ISBN 0 7153 8305 1. On the copyright page, the last digit is missing, but on the back cover, it's present (and correct) between the blurb and the "Other David Charles Books" advert. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:17, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure where you got the idea that ex-S&D no. 18 Shildon exploded at Sough, Yorkshire. Hewison doesn't say Yorkshire at all; he says "a few hundred yards to the north of Sough Tunnel". There is only one Sough Tunnel, it is on the line between Bolton and Blackburn; and between the tunnel and Darwen is the site of Sough railway station. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * When you get to pages 122-8, the 2-8-0 locos involved were of the USATC S160 Class - it's not clear from the text, but is confirmed by RCTS Locos of the LNER part 6B, pp. 100-1. -- Red rose64 (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Accident at Reading
Hi, re - you added it to the article on the GWR station, but since your source is a book on the SE&CR, did the accident really take place at Reading Southern railway station next door? -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * On a similar note, I suspect that actually occurred at London Waterloo East railway station, which was named Waterloo Junction until 1935. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hastings Line
Hi. I had a look in the rail atlas to remind myself where Wadhurst Tunnel is. Sadly it will be very difficult to photograph, as it's some way down the line in the Stonegate direction and the track curves too much to be visible from Wadhurst platform. I checked a series of pix I took at Wadhurst in 2011, including a long-distance southbound view, and no joy I'm afraid. There is something that looks like a footbridge near the north portal, though, so it might not be a lost cause! Hassocks 5489  (Floreat Hova!) 08:00, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

RHDR
Thanks for your message. I see you are a Kent-based rail enthusiast, so you probably (like me) remember the incident referred to. Perhaps you could help in the search for a reference? As you know, finding on-line references for historic (pre-internet) events is often quite hard. Ta.  Timothy Titus <sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT  12:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have just found this note on a page of the railway's own website. Coincidentally, I think it has been quite recently added there, although that has nothing to do with me. I am a former employee of the company, but not a current one. I hope you find this satisfactory. I shall add it to the article directly. "In 1973, she [engine No 6] was involved in a fatal accident with a stolen car at a level crossing at Dymchurch and sent to Leeds for repair, returning the following year. This accident led to the installation of flashing warning lights being installed at road crossings on the railway."  Timothy Titus <sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT  12:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

HBR accidents
Hello. I see you've been updating lists of accidents eg BR article, and added some more information to Hull and Barnsley Railway. Thank you.

I'm aware of a couple more accidents, probably the most notable was a locomotive boiler explosion caused by lack of maintenance. Might sometimes be referred to as the "Wath Boiler Explosion" if I remember correctly. If this is one you expect to write about in the 'near' future please let me know and I'll cross it off my to do list. It's not a high priority for me (requires some steam engine technical knowledge I lack) and you would probably do a better job.

If you don't have any plans to write about this please carry on as normal.Prof.Haddock (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hastings Line
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hastings Line you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Floydian -- Floydian (talk) 17:20, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Shower train
Can you find anything more on this? Seems quite interesting, as trains go anyway :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hastings Line
The article Hastings Line you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hastings Line for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Floydian -- Floydian (talk) 02:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Rafz
Thanks for taking over. One question though ... the sources I read say the S-Bahn ran into the side of the express ("T-boned" it as car drivers say). Is that called a rear-end collision, or do you see different accounts of the angles? Yngvadottir (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * looking at the damage and position of the trains, it appears that the collision was near a set of points where two tracks converge, thus a sidelong collision. Will need to go through the sources and run the foreign ones through Google translate to get a better picture. Mjroots (talk) 16:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, German sources say sidelong collision. That was the term I wasn't sure of. eine seitliche Kollision (Neue Zürcher Zeitung), "[eine] seitlich[e] Kollision – ein[e] sogenannt[e] 'Flankenfahrt'" in this tabloid article I decided not to cite. The express was passing the station on the outside track; the S-Bahn started up and tried to enter the same track before the express was clear. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I found a French source that said the same. Agree with avoiding tabloid sources where possible. There should be plenty of sources available that meet RS. Mjroots (talk) 17:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you please provide a properly cited source for your addition to the article for List of rail accidents (2010–present)? I've marked it as "citation needed" until it is added.  --Allamericanbear (talk) 12:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * - It doesn't need one, as there is a linked article. Mjroots (talk) 12:46, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you explain where that's permissible? I've looked at nearly all the different dates (with links to articles) and have seen citations following each one.  Citing_sources doesn't quickly tell me anything regarding it.  --Allamericanbear (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It's an accepted practice with lists, but if it makes you happy I'll add a ref. Might be worthy of wider discussion either on the talk page or at Wikiproject level if you want further input. Mjroots (talk) 13:12, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

SR West Country and Battle of Britain classes
Hello. In July last year, you added the reference Bishop 1984 to the above article, but there is no Bishop listed in the bibliography. Could you add it? Thanks, DrKiernan (talk) 17:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Level crossing accidents CFD
As the last participant in the Category:Level crossing accidents in the United States CFD, I suggested that it be renamed to Category:Railroad crossing accidents in the United States instead of the proposed Category:Grade crossing accidents in the United States. An admin closed the proposal as "move to Grade crossing...", but he also noted that another CFD regarding my proposal would be a valid option, so I've nominated Grade crossing accidents in the USA for renaming to Railroad crossing accidents in the USA. Please visit Categories for discussion/Log/2015 March 5 and offer your opinion, if you have one. Nyttend (talk) 02:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Vietnamese train crash
Very good work on the article about the Vietnamese train accident. I found your comment on my Talk Page very amusing, thanks! Perhaps you could work with me on 2015 Galena train derailment. I was trying to give the original articles creator time to work on it, but he seems to have lost interest. Let me know what you think. It was a significant train accident, but the article is incomplete. Thanks for any help. Juneau Mike (talk) 15:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

2015 Uttar Pradesh train accident
I just saw this new article, 2015 Uttar Pradesh train accident. Certainly notable, if the death and injury toll is accurate. I added the "newpage" template to prevent any hyperactive AfD listings, and I also created the Talk Page there. I have to work in about half an hour. But perhaps the three of us (You, the articles creator, and I) can collaborate on this. Thanks! Juneau Mike (talk) 16:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * BTW, I've noticed a lot of parameter info is missing from this articles references. I'll look back on this later today. Thanks again. Juneau Mike (talk) 16:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The article looks FANTASTIC now! Thanks for all your hard work! Rosie, Mjroots is another Wiki Admin. I have worked with him on several train accident articles lately. Should you need an expert on the matter, Mjroots is your guy! Truly top-notch editor! :) Juneau Mike (talk) 23:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the introduction,, and nice to meet you, Mj. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:57, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Waverley Line
Just want to point you to the fact of this (diff: ) edit. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 10:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This is canvassing. You'd better stop. RGloucester  — ☎ 13:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Waverley Line - substantial edit - seeking advice
As per Canvassing points 1 and 4.2, I am seeking advice on this substantial edit on Waverley Line. Discussion at Talk:Waverley Line please.--KlausFoehl (talk) 15:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Australian and Thai train incidents
While I don't believe this incident rises to the level of creating a new article, I thought this might interest you: http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/03/31/09/46/freight-train-collision-blocks-level-crossings-in-adelaide

This one might be notable enough for an article, there were numerous deaths and injuries: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3013646/Pictured-Mangled-wreckage-train-collision-Thailand-injured-22-killed-country-s-latest-transport-disaster.html Let me know if you want to start an article, I'll be glad to help.

The last article (another editor) began was 2015 Los Angeles train crash, which injured nearly 2 dozen and created long transportation delays. I've helped out on that one after it was created. Juneau Mike (talk) 00:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * - 2015 Phachi collision created. Daily Mail is not the most reliable of sources, which is why I haven't used it. Mjroots (talk) 04:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

South Eastern Main Line
Hi, I see that you have started using the outdated / technique at South Eastern Main Line. Have you considered /? You can see these in use at e.g. LB&SCR A1X Class W8 Freshwater, AI Mk. IV radar, List of The Goon Show episodes, Arsenal tube station. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - nope, not considered it. It seems that as fast as one learns a system, another comes along to replace it. As long as it works, what does it matter?
 * Seems to be a lot of "facts" not supported by the claimed sources in that article. On the other hand, I'm learning of some good contemporary sources which can be used - e.g. Illustrated London News (available online). Will keep plugging away until the article is bashed into shape. Mjroots (talk) 20:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * is compatible with the "" gadget, whereas is not; also,  generates its own note labels in alphabetic sequence whereas with / you need to add your own note labels, and if you move annotated text around, you need to check both the  and the  to make sure that the label sequence is still correct. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - I'm finished with the article for tonight. How about you change the system and I take a look in the morning? Mjroots (talk) 21:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, done, see and  with a net saving of 54 bytes. One obvious difference is that two notes are displayed whereas three notes were previously shown; this is because the annotated text is commented out by the use of <!-- ></!-->.  -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident
I greatly enjoyed your 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident article, truly! Great job! I have been busy lately also. The last article I created was just in the past few days, Capital City Fire and Rescue, about the Alaska state capitals fire department. CCFR serves the second largest Alaskan city by population. I hope you enjoy it! Thanks again for letting know about your great article! Juneau Mike (talk) 01:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Macedonia train accident
I thought this might be of interest to you. 14 hikers/migrants killed. Juneau Mike (talk) 13:55, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

First Great Western article name
FYI, based on additional information received that the First Great Western franchise will be rebranded as Great Western Railway, not the abbreviated GWR as previously suggested, I have amended the discussion at Talk:First Great Western to reflect. This may or may not influence your previously given preference on this matter. D47817 (talk) 02:54, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

2015 Tennessee train derailment
Hi, amigo! Could you look at this page? 2015 Tennessee train derailment. I believe it's notable, but the article needs help. It's way too short. I'm tempted to go back into Wiki-break because of my work schedule, so I cannot give this article the attention it needs. Thanks! Juneau Mike (talk) 14:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Chemin de fer Yverdon–Ste Croix change of name
I have responded to your question on my talk page. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 15:19, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Hastings line reviews
Just a thought - have you considered posting requests for reviews on WP:KENT and WP:Sussex, as the article is in their projects as well as WP:UKT? If you're just asking for reviews rather than supports, I don't think this would count as WP:CANVASSING. &mdash; An  optimist on the run! (logged on as Pek the Penguin) 11:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Good idea, WPs notified, although I'm not sure they are that active. Mjroots (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I do mean to look at Hastings Line, and also get Marshlink Line to GA if I can find the right book sources, but I've always thought FAC to be just a little beyond my skillset, preferring a lot of GAs to a smaller amount of FAs. I have updated a few things on WikiProject Kent largely through getting some town articles through GA in the last year, but that seems to be about it. Kick-starting projects generally is a big problem. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  10:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * - The Marshlink Line article needs some work. For a start it is lacking an "accidents and incidents" section. As for books, a major source of info will be "Hastings to Ashford" by Mitchell & Smith, which also covers the New Romney branch. Do you have Beecroft's book? Other than that, it's a question of trawling through Hansard and old newspapers. Mjroots (talk) 13:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't have any books, but I'll definitely need some to do further work on this. I'm popping into the library over the weekend. As for accidents - perhaps there aren't any notable ones. I had a look around some other railway articles and the "Accidents" section seem to be bland lists, which didn't look particularly inspiring. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  13:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * There's been at least one moderately severe accident at Appledore that I know of. A trawl through the Railways Archive may produce more, then there's newspaper sources. Mjroots (talk) 13:51, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I've just seen this  on the Hastings Line FAC.  It has no time stamp, so I'm unsure when or in fact who posted this.  In answer to it anyway, assuming you/someone posted after my support, no I haven't forgotten it; I supported as I think you've been diligent and through in your fixes and there was nothing else left for me to quibble about. I think it's a tremendous article!   Cassianto <sup style="font-family:Papyrus;">Talk   13:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I posted that, along with other comments elsewhere at the same time. Would you be so kind as to state explicitly that you support the FAC? Just need to get over Crisco 1492's objection re the station section and we're done. Mjroots (talk) 14:37, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see that as necessary. I'm sure,  and  will be able to draw their own conclusions from a simple support. This has been the practise at FAC for many years now. If you feel that strongly though, who am I to question such clarity. Now done.   Cassianto <sup style="font-family:Papyrus;">Talk   14:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Hastings Line
I reverted your tweak to the diagram solely for the sake of consistency: Ashford shouldn't be straight-on from Hastings but off to the right from Tonbridge. Useddenim (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Better would be Tonbridge on a horizontal line with Redhill-Ashford running across and the line to London going up, which is more representative of the actual position. Mjroots (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Better now? Useddenim (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Marshlink Line RDT
bing maps seems to show a tunnel under the Maidstone East Line to the north of Ashford International, and a flyover south, over the Ashford to Ramsgate (via Canterbury West) Line for High Speed 1. Useddenim (talk) 01:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are correct. The OS maps also show this. Other RDTs will also need altering if you've not already done them. Mjroots (talk) 05:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * BTW, the link from Ashford station to HS1 should be before the tunnel, not after. Mjroots (talk) 05:40, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Consisting of
A thing doesn't just "consist", it consists of. Are you confusing "consisting" with "comprising", which does not require "of"? Brianboulton (talk) 22:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Image thought
I don't really want to wade in and derail [sic] the FAC any more than it already has been by discussing it there, so commenting here. On the Hastings article, would it make sense to use multiple image to have the images in some parts display at two-per-line, which would go some way to reducing the "cascading" effect and images pushing other images into the wrong sections? See Opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway (and the "Controversy" section immediately below it) for examples of what I mean, or the treatment of the two paintings at Victorian painting for how it would look with wide images. (Or see the current first section on my talkpage, immediately below the TOC, for how it looks using multiple image to combine four images into a single collage.)

There are disadvantages to doing it this way—the markup code is almost incomprehensible to casual editors, and if the images have very different aspect ratios it gives the wider of them undue weight because it forces the images to the same height—but it would certainly be a way to preserve both sides of the ticket image, and the loco and carriages in the "planned electrification" section, without looking excessively cluttered on wider monitors. – iridescent 08:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * - I've been mulling this over and have come to the conclusion that a composite of the two images in a vertical format would be better. Mjroots (talk) 06:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Bexhill branch
Thank you for your message. I've put a pdf version of the article at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kbQyEEQ606MndaNDlLaTQyRlk/view?usp=sharing. I don't think the article needs much more adding to it, but do so if you wish. I could probably improve the photos, but presumably they're still copyright, so I'm only sharing this link with you.Johnragla (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

It already exists
Harda twin train derailment already exists on that subject. Thanks Supdiop ( Talk 🔹 Contribs ) 10:27, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

What should we do about that? I proposed to merge, do you agree with that proposal? Supdiop ( Talk 🔹 Contribs ) 13:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've got no objection. I appreciate you created your article first but the article I created is in better shape. Suggest that any info not in the Harda article is added to the Kudwara article, then the Harda article can be converted into a redirect. This will, I think, be easier than doing it the other way around. Mjroots (talk) 13:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If you compare both articles, my article has more content. Only difference is that Kudawa article has an image and sections, which can easily be added with one edit. "Harda twin train derailment" name is more notable. 80 percent of the sources say Harda not Kudawa. I created my article first and it's not fair to just delete the contents and make it a redirect. I will change my stance if you give some good reasons. Thank you. Supdiop ( Talk 🔹 Contribs ) 14:10, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with you adding in detail from the article I created to the one you created. No big deal as long as content isn't lost either way. Mjroots (talk) 14:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your approval --Supdiop ( Talk 🔹 Contribs ) 14:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hastings Line tickets
Hi – I've just got back from holiday but will comment at the Deletion Discussion today. Cheers, <font face="Helvetica"><font color="#00BFFF">Hassocks <font color="#228B22">5489 <font color="#C71585"> (Floreat Hova!) 10:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Been a lot happening while you were away. Many UK railway tickets were nominated for deletion. Thread at COM:ANU. Also, there a request at WT:SUSSEX that you may be able to assist with, but don't worry if you can't get the picture. Mjroots (talk) 10:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Hasting Line - Tonbridge/Tunbridge
Hi mjroots. Your comments appreciated but it's by no means clear to a casual user that you are using historical spellings. Maybe an idea to add 'later Tonbridge' after the first occurrence? Hostkvall (talk) 14:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

railway template diagram (for israel)
Hi Mjroots,

over at WP:RFD a couple of needless redirects were up for discussion by author and speedily deleted per WP:G7, these are for the Template:Railway line Israel Hod HaSharon Be'er Sheva. That author has done sterling work in making this, but I think we should have a couple of right arrows at the junctions. You're the one who taught me how to do them, for the branch of the Ipswich to Ely Line, and I will have a go but always will cock it up, so can you please put your expert eyes over it after I I cock it up?

Thanks

Si Trew (talk) 07:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


 * - I've already done it. Quite easy really, but needed extra width in the diagram to accommodate the arrows. Mjroots (talk) 07:37, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you for the Hastings Line, precious again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

French train derailment
This just happened. 5 dead, 7 injured. Notable enough for an article? I hope you are well. Juneau Mike (talk) 15:41, 14 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Update: Another editor has created the article. I haven't been involved yet. Eckwersheim train crash. Juneau Mike (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

2015 Cary train crash
Hello! Just getting started on a new train crash article, 2015 Cary train crash. I have a lot of work to do. I have read reference after reference, and have so far not found the trains operator. I would appreciate any help you can provide. Thanks! Juneau Mike (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

London, Midland and Scottish Railway accidents
Hi, re - what are the page numbers for Upney (30 November 1926) and Coppenhall Junction (17 November 1937)? There is a clash with being used twice. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * - do you want those refs converted to sfn? Mjroots (talk) 07:43, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't mind, but I would like the ambiguity to be eliminated, in order to clear off the big red error message in the refs section. -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Template:Bayerische Oberlandbahn RDT
How do you figure that this change adds ”better conversion of height”? Useddenim (talk) 11:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * because height above sea level is measured in feet, not yards. Mjroots (talk) 11:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, that makes sense. And the length of the Großhesselohe Bridge? Useddenim (talk) 23:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, tricky. Not clear that it's a length. Possibly could be expressed either way. No objection to a revert there if you feel that yards is better. Mjroots (talk) 07:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Dalfsen train crash for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dalfsen train crash 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/Dalfsen train crash 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. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 17:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hastings Line DEMUs
Hi – I've put some info and comments at the project talk page. Let me know if there's anything of use there and I can help with the proposed new article. <font face="Helvetica"><font color="#00BFFF">Hassocks <font color="#228B22">5489 <font color="#C71585"> (Floreat Hova!) 20:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Rail accidents
Hey roots. I spent a few hours trying to reference the rail accident in Philadelphia. On the second attempt I uploaded  scanned original documentation from the railroad. I read the section for beginners, and could not see why my references don't count. How can you beat raw, original material. Rather than just taking my post down, why not work with what I have an fix it. Redcoat (talk) 03:15, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I presume you are referring to this edit from June 2014? That was added at a time when I was culling unreferenced entries from the various lists, per the policy on verification. The entry is currently in the article, but I would ask that it be removed. Thousands of trackworkers worldwide are killed. Tragic though this is, it is almost always a non-notable event. Of course, there are the very rare exceptions, such as the Tebay rail accident. Mjroots (talk) 06:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

London, Chatham and Dover Railway
Please explain why WP:JOBTITLES should not apply to justice of the peace in this article. <font color="#C30">Chris <font color="#060">the speller <font color="#900">yack  14:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's correct grammar. Where a job title is normally rendered by letters, then the phrase is a Proper Noun and is capitalized. You wouldn't write "queen Elizabeth II", "John Doe, member of parliament" or "Joe Bloggs, member of the european parliament", would you? Same goes for JPs, Sherrifs, High Sherrifs and similar ranks. Mjroots (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2016 (UTC)`
 * I have moved this discussion to WT:MOSCAPS. <font color="#C30">Chris <font color="#060">the speller <font color="#900">yack  17:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Over at RfD
Thank you for when I call you answer. it is not often we get a railway one. You nursed me through the railway templates and I do them from time to time they are a fiddle. Not often we get a railway one that Neelix made and that was a bang-on call and I can't see how anyone could possibly disagree with you. I wouldn't have been able to find it because they kinda "block" search and you end up going in a baloon loop.

Where I live in Budapest the Kéleti Pályaüdvar (built by British people thankg goodness that is why it is still standing) faces due east (Keleti is Hungarian for East or rather Eastern, the í at the end makes it kinda a dative). At the vernal equinox I took a lovely pic with the sun rising and going through the train shed. It just shines straight through. Nyugati pályaudvar western station was put up by that French pillock Georges Eiffel so of course that is all collapsing. On the front of Keleti there is on the left a statue to James Watt and on the right to Robert Stevenson. Built in 1894 I think. There is a railway museum near here but just full of old junk frankly old Russian steam trains but we had a nice day out. I send you a photo some time if you want. Where I live is called Máv telep on some maps which is roughly speaking railway town so there are lots of nice bits and pieces going on but I am no trainspotter just nice to see em still going. Si Trew (talk) 21:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)


 * No problem. Took me about a minute searching on Yahoo to find the correct target. Re the photo, better added to Commons methinks. Mjroots (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * .I think I actually did. I put it on the article at Budapest Eastern Railway Station and tagged it and such but someone removed it I think. 21:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Yep it is on that article I took that at exactly 7am on the vernal equinox I wasn't waiting for it I just thought it looked beautiful. Looks pretty crappy most of the rest of the year! Si Trew (talk) 21:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for 2016 Andria train crash
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;2016 Andria train crash&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Skycycle (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Wootton Bassett - support crew on footplate
Hi again. The page is looking great. Good luck with the review. I undid my edit after checking the rulebook page. Whilst pretty much everyone in the industry reckons they shouldn't have been there, I don't want to libel or start a war. The Good Book says...."Module G1: Section 1.4 You must only travel in the driving cab of a train if it is in connection with your duties and you have authority to do so." Whether true or not, it could be stated post-event that a manager had authorised them to be there to move coal forwards on the tender or something similar. Although if that WERE the case, whilst on Network Rail infrastructure, unless they were Driver or Fireman qualified they needed to have been issued with a Red Cab Pass AND be accompanied by a Driver Standards Manager/Traction Inspector. I wonder if RAIB checked this. So unless we are certain of the facts, it's probably far safer not to include this. I'm glad you took it out again. Best wishes, Dr Sludge (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

No Mention of the historical Luton Tram accident
http://www.worldwar1luton.com/event/seven-hurt-1916-tram-smash

Hope this helps — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.49.198 (talk) 23:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've added the accident to the list. You could have been bold and added it yourself. Mjroots (talk) 05:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Arrived at a hospital
Thanks for the explanation! I hadn't thought of the singular-vs-plural distinction that you mention; I just figured that it was saying "only fourteen of them lived long enough to be hospitalised". And thanks for the confirmation that my wording is acceptable. Nyttend (talk) 14:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Train crash at Darlington on 9th August 1947?
Hi mjroots,

You wrote in the article Darlington railway station that there was a train crash on 9 August 1947 due to a signalman's error, citing Ken Hoole's "Trains in Trouble".

I searched in the web but I couldn't find it elsewhere mentioned. However, there certainly was a train crash on 9 August 1947 due to a signalman's error, but this happened in Doncaster. Here you can read the official report by the ministry of transport.

Is it possible that you cited Hoole wrong or your source made a mistake? --King Rk (talk) 13:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * mea culpa, now fixed. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Mjroots (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Greetings --King Rk (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Category talk:2 ft gauge railways has been nominated for discussion
Category:Category talk:2 ft gauge railways, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Class 377 at Eastbourne
Are you still after a reliable source for the fire damaged 377 at Eastbourne, or has that been put to bed? The joy of all things (talk) 18:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, a RS is still needed. If you can do this, please edit the article and add the incident. Mjroots (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. It's scant on information (i.e. it mentions damage to one coach, but doesn't say which coach), but it does say which unit it is (377442). Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 18:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 01:21, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Proper order at topic?...
I placed the 2015 Wootton SPAD incident within Rail transport at its proper WP:GA topic but wasn't completely sure where it should be placed... It's after the "1996 Silver Spring, Maryland collision" and before the "7 Subway Extension". Please take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_articles/Engineering_and_technology#Rail_transport to make sure I put it in the correct order. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident
The article 2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2015 Wootton Bassett SPAD incident for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 15:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Tenterden?
Michael, since you're familiar with this line, maybe you can check the photo & description I added at Kent and East Sussex Railway and see if it's plausible. I may have misremembered where on the line I took this shot, and I'm not sure what to call those dudes. Dicklyon (talk) 07:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it's Rolvenden. Chap on left would appear to be a passenger, chap in uniform is the guard. Mjroots (talk) 08:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks; searching my archives for Rolvenden I found a report on our trip that says "Most of the group decided to travel back to Tenterden on the 14.17 train; many alighted at Rolvenden to visit the loco repair shops, whilst the rest of the tired and weary party went on to Tenterden..." The guy up close has a badge that says "Ticket Inspector", which I guess is what "guard" is.  The other has the same uniform, I'm pretty sure, but maybe a different role. Do I recall right that they staff these trains with volunteers? Dicklyon (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have more from that trip online, including a few in the loco works at Rolvenden, at pbase. I had sort of forgotten about going through such old galleries that predate my serious wikipedia involvement. Maybe the one inside the train, with photographers pointing their cameras at each other would be good, for showing what the train is like? Or is this too ordinary/personal to be a good illustration for that line? Or the Station Master photo? Dicklyon (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You are free to upload images to Commons. Whether or not they get used is another matter. Mjroots (talk) 19:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The loco is a . -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 23:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Drafting an RFC on narrow-gauge railway titles
See my draft at User:Dicklyon/rfc. I invite anyone who wants to help make it a neutral question and productive discussion to make tweaks there, or make suggestions, or start your own alternative proposal. Thanks. Dicklyon (talk) 01:55, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Waterloo
Looks like you've got the wrong ref in ? --David Biddulph (talk) 11:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Paragraph 110, 3rd bullet point. Mjroots (talk) 11:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've added "|at=para 110" to the ref, in case other folk are as confused as I was. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Class 47
Hi. You've changed much of this article to put a space in between the class designation and the fleet number (i.e. "47 001") but they were never classed as such by BR - if you look at TOPS readouts they were simply five figure numbers (47001). I realise that the works did usually leave something of a space there on the sides of the locos originally, but not always and by the later days they didn't bother (i.e., ). Regardless, you haven't changed all of them, so we need some consistency, I would say? Black Kite (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * BR practice was that locomotive classes had a space after the class number. 47 001 was a locomotive, whereas 47001 could be a carriage number. The preserved Hastings Unit had a carriage number changed to prevent confusion with a Class 60 locomotive. Point taken re consistency, but the omission to the dreamt number is deliberate. This could be in quote marks for clarity. Mjroots (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep - when rolling stock was introduced into the TOPS system in the early 80s, it wasn't allowed that a carriage and locomotive number could be identical, which is why a number of DMU/EMU vehicles and carriages were renumbered (for example the 56xxx DMU vehicles were switched to 53xxx). But yeah, we need consistency throughout the various articles. My tendency would be to drop the space, but I don't really mind as long as each article is internally consistent. Black Kite (talk) 20:45, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * - I've changed them all to use a non-breaking space. Mjroots (talk) 21:19, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No, 56xxx DMU cars became 54xxx; it was the 50xxx which became 53xxx. For some reason, leading zeros were significant: TOPS was apparently able to distinguish the loco 03 063 from coach 3063 without either needing to be renumbered. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Whoops, yes you're right. And yes, the leading zeros were significant because TOPS treated the numbers as character strings rather than integers. I remember trying to run a class 86 locomotive (can't remember what, but let's say 86999) through an E31 request one night and typing it in as 06999... and the system throwing it out despite 6999 existing as a valid coaching stock number. Black Kite (talk) 23:05, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Saint Petersburg Metro bombing articles
I noticed that the other article was created later but it also has the most info so far. If you want to keep it some info should be moved.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Great Western main line
Hi. The article has no lede except that appears after the contents box and there is a section of references before the moved lede. I think it may because of your transclusion but I cannot be sure as I am on my mobile. Could you check it out? Thanks and regards. The joy of all things (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've jiggled things around a bit. Think it should be OK now. Mjroots (talk) 20:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ta. The joy of all things (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

User:94.143.95.215
Hi there. Recently this IP address has made repeated edits to TOC pages (Northern, TPE, Merseyrail and Arriva Trains Wales off the top of my head) where they consistently re-add in their edits when it is changed back to as it was before

I just don't see the point in having "Class" in every row in a column which is titled "Class" hence why I removed it in the first place (and nobody else has really seemed that bothered about adding it back in from what I've noticed) - yet each time I do that the user returns it to "their" version which also includes numerous links (which in my view aren't necessary) to the unit family articles. It's getting a bit frustrating to be honest so I was wondering what could be done?

Thanks and best wishes - Coradia175 (talk) 17:38, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * You could issue an edit war warning and invite the editor to discuss their edits. As multiple articles seem to be affected, WT:UKT would be a suitable venue. Semi-protection is something else that can be looked at, but let's see if there is a response first. Mjroots (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * - Thanks for your quick reply. I've left them a message on their talk page so hopefully we will be able to come to a resolution as soon as possible. All the best wishes for the new year - Coradia175 (talk) 19:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

User:MIademarco
Dear Mjroots. Thanks for your previous help. I have a listing for the list of rail accidents, for June 19, 1926. It got deleted again because of inadequate reference. I have an internal Pennsylvania Railroad letter of which I am the owner. I (or with your help) uploaded the image of that letter. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_rail_accidents_(1900–1909). Please advise, help.

Best wishes for a New Year - MIademarco (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:31, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Catterick Bridge Explosion
Hello Mjroots; unsure if Catterick Bridge Explosion should be listed as a railway accident of not? Basically, in February 1944, the poor handling of ammunition onto a railway wagon in Catterick Bridge railway station caused a massive explosion, killing twelve and injuring over 100. Thoughts? Happy to seek wider consensus from WP:UKTRAINS if needed. Regards and a Happy New Year. The joy of all things (talk) 22:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd say it is, per the example set by the Soham rail disaster. Mjroots (talk) 06:12, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Your GA Nomination of 2016 Croydon tram derailment
Hi, Mjroots. I saw on WP:GAN that a good article nominee was requiring a second opinion, so I left my own review on the talk page. I hope it helps. Thanks!Mgasparin (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I've had a quick look, and will address the issues raised in the next few days. Mjroots (talk) 11:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Maria Asumpta.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Maria Asumpta.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:31, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

2019 Pakistan train fire
ITN-worthy? —— SN  54129  16:44, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've already nominated it. Mjroots (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sammy the Shunter


The article Sammy the Shunter has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant English-language coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of 'This article meets criteria A and B because...' and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you."

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. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:58, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Sammy the Shunter for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sammy the Shunter 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/Sammy the Shunter 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. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Croydon tram derailment
Greetings. I hastily added a source which named the driver, but only learnt about iff after checking the revision history. Therefore my edits likely need striking, so would you be able to do that? All the best; Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:51, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * - you've reverted yourself, which is sufficient, thank you. Mjroots (talk) 05:09, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Westerham Valley branch line
Hi, how would you like to check out Westerham Valley branch line for neutrality? Recent edits seem a bit POV to me. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 08:32, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I presume you mean the edits by adding the "Promoted Inevitability" section. I think that a viewing of the episode would enable us to form a better opinion on the matter. I will say that the section heading does need to be changed to something far better, although I don't know what. Mjroots (talk) 08:42, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Short section about Westerham starts at about 5:45. Mjroots (talk) 08:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways
Disruptive user picked up the stick again, improperly restored an archived discussion, accused me of continued hypocrisy even though I have no prior involvement, so they don't seem up to WP:CIR.  Cards   84664   20:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hypocrisy indeed, The discussion was selectively restored to eliminate the last two posts - by myself and Mjroots. More at the user's talk page also at User talk:Σ. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 22:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Wester Pipe Railway
Thanks for your message, yes I could absolutely make an article on the wester pipe railway, I also hope to be able to make some articles about railways in Canada but I don't know if that's ok. N1TH Music (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

East Coast Main Line diagram
Hi, I am putting this here because it could be wrong, but isn't the Werrington Dive Under located south of the line that branches off to Stamford? At the moment, the junction is at Tallington; is that right? Then again, it's late, I'm poorly so I am probably wrong. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 21:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Internet back on, don't know if it will last. - it's between Peterborough and Tallington. See my comments below. Hope you're feeling better. Mjroots (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The dive-under starts at Marholm Junction, 78 miles 63 chains from King's Cross. The existing line branches off at Werrington Junction, 79 mi 34 ch. Tallington is some way to the north-west, from 84 mi 64 ch to 85 mi 2 ch. I don't think there has ever been a junction at Tallington.-- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. I'm currently having internet connection issues. Am currently on my phone which l am not up to using for complicated editing such as that diagram. Will take a look when normal service resumes. Mjroots2 (talk) 09:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm at Meetup/London/175 this afternoon. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 09:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Having taken another look, it seems to be correct. It needs to be remembered that it is a schematic diagram. As shown here, there can be several miles between one element and the next. Mjroots2 (talk) 09:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Railway Preservation Society of Ireland. The discussion is about the topic Railway Preservation Society of Ireland. Thank you. —Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:32, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Kirkby train crash for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kirkby train crash 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/Kirkby train crash 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. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Prosecutions of railway staff following railway accidents in the UK are extremely rare
You forgot Manor House 1892; I expect I can dig up others. But yes, they are very uncommon. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Larry Harrisson, too.  SN54129  23:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Manor house was even rarer, an absolute discharge. Mjroots (talk) 07:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Another one - Connington South rail crash. Mjroots (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Railway accident articles
Remember this one? Well, while almost certainly unrelated, there's an IP (in fact, probably multiple ones) who keep running around and adding routine incidents (yes, road vehicle drivers are apparently very idiotic...; but now also we have trains which derailed [probably at low speed] and injured nobody...). For ex. Special:Contributions/71.163.7.41. I've gone and done a big clean at List of rail accidents (2020–present), but that was only 2 years of stuff to wade through. I don't know if it would be more efficient to protect these pages so as to stop the issue getting worse (not sure this is strictly within the guidelines, but people incessantly adding trivial information to a list is a bit disruptive...). Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:12, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * - I think that the problem is that the scope of these lists are not well defined. The List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft, for example, has a very clearly defined scope - no article = no entry. This issue is probably best dealt with by an RFC at WP level. Would suggest WT:TWP would be the best venue. Mjroots (talk) 06:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think we have a CIR issue here. I've already told the IP to not include local events or generally inconsequential ones, but they don't seem to have entirely grasped that (ex. routine LC incident), and they also keep adding plenty of examples of stuff which might have happened at or near a railway line or station but is in no way a rail accident (ex. ). Even ignoring that, their edits still usually require a lot of cleanup (going all the way from formatting to sometimes having to read the sources all over because what they wrote has a very tenuous relation with the actual sources - for example here the claim about the cause of the crash which is entirely WP:OR). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Also is it just me or specifying the whole date for each event (ex. List of rail accidents (2010–2019)) is entirely redundant? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * entirely redundant to section headings. I've removed them from the 2010–2019 list. Mjroots (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry to pester you again with this, but this seems like a full blown CIR issue. Besides the obvious lack of finesse with the English language, there's also stuff like, which somehow takes a source about [yet another L.C. incident...] an accident in B.C., Canada, to support a line about an accident which, supposedly, happened in North Carolina... (the two locations are over 3,600 km away...). I'm not sure whether this is a case of sheer incompetence or of deliberate lack of clue, but if you can spare me a visit to the dramaboard (even though there shouldn't be too much drama in this case), that'd be nice. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've blocked for a week. Let's see if they learn anything. Mjroots (talk) 05:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)