User talk:Our Phellap/2005

=Archive of discussions for 2005=

Copyvio
Some clever person's gone and used at least two of your pictures uncredited on creweopendays.co.uk - I thought I should draw this to your attention. That is unless you moonlight as Matthew Wilson :) --BesigedB (talk) 14:29, 22 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Now that bigger versions are available it is clear that these aren't yours. The differences were too small to notice at reduced resoultion. --BesigedB (talk) 21:05, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * OK thanks. I guess many people took similar photos at the previous Crewe Open day in 2003 (Our Phellap 22:12, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC))

Template:Britishmainlines
Hi Our Phellap Thankyou for your sterling work in re-ordering this template: it had worried me! I'm having a bit of a session now at writing articles for the various "Lines" which make or made up sections of the southern railways. You will see I've done two of the London-Dartford lines: only Dartford Loop to go. I see that some articles already existing call these "railways" which they are patently not: quite often they are a shorthand for a means of splitting up services from larger stations of course - and sometimes they are just a PR job to get more passengers! I'm thinking of the wholesale naming of all those branch lines down in Cornwall ... you can just imagine the PR people at head office desperately trying to think up catchy names ... Keep up the good work!!! Peter Shearan 19:45, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Templates
It's a shame that TfD is dominated by a handful of people with a grudge against large, useful navigational templates, and want to see them all replaced by smaller, incomplete, less useful ones. And for some of the more fanatical members, even that's not enough; they want to remove all navigational templates and force everyone to only use Categories to find related articles! Maybe lovers of big templates should mobilise ourselves and make a permanent presence on TfD to argue against deleting any of them? Otherwise, this is just the thin end of the wedge! Miss Pippa 11:07, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

British Rail Class 185
Hi. I'm wondering how this article can be called "British Rail Class 185" when it concerns a class first built seven years after the privatization of British Rail? (This question also applies, of course, to other articles about post-BR classes.) I realize that there is an attempt here to apply a consistent style of title covering all classes, before and after privatization, but I think a different solution needs to be found as titles such as the present one are confusing / potentially misleading. -- Picapica 08:55, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Discussion continued at Talk:British Rail Class 185 -- Picapica 17:03, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Discussion moved to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (British railway locomotive and multiple unit classes) Thryduulf 22:02, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Time-division multiplexing
Your sentence "fitted to locomotives to allow push-pull operation, and/or multiple working with another locomotive" has just been deleted from Time-division multiplexing. I have to admit it does not make any sense as written - TDM is not a device you can fit. Possibly you meant TDM is used in the ...'s fitted ... -- RHaworth 14:29, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)

Nuneaton railway station
You changed my "next" on the Brum-Peterb line from Birmingham to Water Orton railway station. Strictly, I can't disagree with that - it is the next station. But only a few very local all stations trains stop there - it's like Queens Park railway station coming out of London. The difference is that Silverlink distinguish between their local commuter trains (Silverlink Metro) and their longer distance trains to Northampton (Silverlink County), but Central Trains don't. I'm wondering if it would be more correct to add a new "line", meaning another service? --Concrete Cowboy 16:40, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

images
Right, I have two photos of 8Fs that have obtained under GFDL from the [Stanier 8F Locomotive Society http://www.8fsociety.co.uk/]; unfortunately Internet Explorer won't let me save them as jpeg. Can I forward them to you so you can upload them onto the commons please? Dunc|&#9786; 20:52, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * See http://www.geocities.com/pendleton_andrew/LMSLocomotivesUnderBR.htm - that's the 1933 numbering scheme, minus the ones that didn't make it to BR such as the Claughtons numbered in the 6000 series. Dunc|&#9786; 20:47, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Right, me again. I have obtained through slinging out boilerplate request for permission like a muck spreader spreads out, erm yeah, anyway, general GFDL permission from http://www.zen70752.zen.co.uk/bat/ so you can see if there are any diesel photos you want. Happy feeding. Put in a courtesy mention of the guy's B&B at http://www.zen70752.zen.co.uk though won't you? And erm erm um er oh yes, go to commons:Main Page and upload photos there since then they can be taken across language wikis so that if ever Frenchman wants to write an article on le class quarante-sept he can. I've got the Lizzie. Dunc|&#9786; 19:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Other photos! aah! why didn't you say so?  what've you got then? Leander's an LMS Jubilee Class, I was looking for some pictures of 6201 earlier and found some and found This photo of "Princess Elizabeth" (yeah, right).  6233 is LMS Princess Coronation Class, one of those built unstreamlined 1938, but does have some horrible crowns, but that can be forgiven, especially considering that 46441 is in absolutely horribly inauthentic LMS crimson lake and numbered 6441 (the harsh Ivatt lines and the red don't go).  46443 looks better in black, and the Ivatt class 4 would be great though.  You can upload them, I'll write the captions if you like. Dunc|&#9786; 21:15, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, as for other photos it might be an idea to upload them and then use the pictures as a guide as to what to write. I know little about anything other than Midland/LMS, but you could stick in a substub somewhere. The LNER O4 would be good. Server space is free after all. Dunc|&#9786; 21:27, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Class 90 photo?
Do you have a photo you could add to British Rail Class 90 ? I noticed you had some pics of 86s and DBSOs. Also any information you could add would be great too!

-=# Amos E Wolfe #=- 23:33, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

what've you got then?
If oyu upload some steam photos onto your gallery then I'll put in the necessary stubs. Dunc|&#9786; 01:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Any possibility you could start using edit summaries?
Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Your image
I'm about to delete the train image so I can rename it. Please consider going through the Image tutorial and give the image appropriate copyright tags when I've uploaded it again. - Mgm|(talk) 17:41, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see you already reuploaded it with a tag, nevermind. - Mgm|(talk) 17:46, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:30, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Duffield Page
I'm a bit miffed. The previous edit by an anonymous user is partly a lift from the homepage of one of my websites. They could at least have put in a link!

You seem to have some interest in railways - the EVR perhaps?

I am currently stitching in information on the history of the Railway around Derby, including a history of Duffield Station (if I can work out where to put it) Do you mind if I alter your bits or amalgamate in some way. Any suggestions on my input will also be welcome.

Incidentally the bit on Milford Tunnel suddenly appeared from somewhere else, but its all grist to the mill.

Chevin 3 July 2005 13:57 (UTC)

Table of Contents
Hi there. Just to inform you, there cannot be more than one occurrence of id="toc" on any page in Wikipedia. The only time you would ever use this yourself is in conjunction with the __NO‍TOC__ command which inhibits the default table of contents, and you then provide your own. This is done for example on pages where the ToC is an A to Z listing. Nicholas 14:30, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Image:90015 'The Internation Brigades' at Carlisle.JPG
Fancy tagging it - thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Commons
[[image:Volks Electric Railway.jpg|thumb|right|THis file from the commons is used in [[Volk's Electric Railway]] and de:Volk's Electric Railway. Can you please upload your photos onto the Wikimedia Commons at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page . It's a wiki just like this one, and you can then link them through normally, so [image:Volks Electric Railway.jpg]] links through to the commons. That way, your photos can be used across projects, not just. Dunc|&#9786; 17:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Chemins de fer de l'État
Sorry, that I got called away yesterday when in the middle of updating the article on the Chemins de fer de l'État network, so that I wasn't able to follow up all the cross-references.

I won't argue with you for now about your reversion to Chemin de Fer (with capital F) – even though Chemin de fer (with small f) is the usual French style – since much more important is the fact that the network was actually called Chemins de fer de l'État, i.e. State Railways, as I have now discovered, having had a little more time to investigate the matter more thoroughly. Only the Nord and the PO were called "chemin de fer" in the singular.

Before doing anything else, I hope we can agree on the following list of railways which were amalgamated into the SNCF – in 1938, btw, not in 1937 (31.12.1937 was their last date of existence).

Publicly owned:


 * Chemins de fer d'Alsace et de Lorraine
 * Chemins de fer de l'État
 * (The latter having taken over the privately owned Chemins de fer de l'Ouest in 1908.)

Privately owned


 * Chemins de fer de l'Est
 * Chemin de fer du Nord
 * Chemins de fer de Paris à Lyon et à la Méditerranée
 * Chemins de fer du Midi
 * Chemin de fer de Paris à Orléans
 * (The last two having amalgamated, as already noted, in 1934.)

In pre-SNCF days it was usual to refer to the publicly owned operations as réseaux (e.g. Réseau des Chemins de fer de l'État) as opposed to the privately owned compagnies (e.g. Compagnie des Chemins de fer de l'Est).

It might also be worth mentioning in the SNCF article (which IMHO is rather dominated at present by airline-related information of less than vital relevance!) that it did not become a fully nationalized concern until 1983, when its status as a limited company owned 51% by the state and 49% by the former railway companies expired.

Looking forward to working with you. -- Picapica 17:45, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Unsort
Yeah, that was a doh! I saw "Northern" after the unsort and figured I'd come back to it and take a closer look later. I'll 3RR myself one of these days! B-) slambo 18:36, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Mainlines
Hi,

I saw your addition to the Paisley Canal line of a table of Scottish mainlines, which I liked. My comment is that whilst the West Coast Mainline appears in your master list under the heading "Classic" mainlines, it does not seem to appear in the list of main lines in Scotland, (nor I think in the Midlands & NorthWest). Could you tweek your national & regional lists so that they get their fair "share" of the Classic mainlines? Pyrotec 09:07, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

East Anglia railways
Hello. I'm all for this kind of thing but I think the definition of East Anglia is a bit wrong.

Upminster Branch Line - entirely within London so definitely not East Anglia

London, Tilbury and Southend Railway - is all in south Essex on the Thames Estuary. That isn't East Anglia by any definition.

West Anglia Main Line, East Anglia - surely a contradiciton in terms?

Perhaps a London and the South East grouping would be better? Mrsteviec 18:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. Perhaps Railways of the East of England would be better title as it would be aligned to the official region and includes all the places the overhead lines go through. I am in favour of a London group including those railways entirely within London such as the West London Line and South London Line. Not sure what to about the lines that terminate just outside London like the Lea Valley Lines, Shepperton or the lines to Dartford? Mrsteviec 19:43, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Marston Vale line
First, it is not a Midlands line: it begins in the South East region (L&SE as above is good) and goes to the East of England region. Second, what defines a "commuter line"? Because it does provide a commuter service of sorts (to Bedford as well as to MK), but the service frequency makes it a rural line. Hopefully the frequency will improve when it is extended to Milton Keynes Central. --Concrete Cowboy 12:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Bromsgrove railway works
I decided not to put this in "Locomotive Manufacturer" category as they weren't a major one. They only lasted till the Midland Railway took over. Bromsgrove and Lickey Incline and Big Bertha link to it. I am also in the process of making a "List of Railway locomotive Works" which will link to it. I still have to decide whether to make it a list or a table, which will look better but be difficult for people to edit. Meanwhile I'm wondering what to do about "Derby Works" I mentioned to RFJR that it could also mean Derby Rolls Royce Works, and "Derby Railway Works" would be better. He renamed it with a redirect off "Derby Works". Now Duncharris has swapped them round and hasn't replied to my messages. Perhaps I'll give it a couple of weeks. He may be on holiday.Chevin 08:53, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * My original idea was to make "Derby Works" a disambig page to describe it as the everyday name for either Derby Railway Works or Rolls Royce depending on which company you worked for. This would mean starting a page on the latter but there is already one which concentrates on the car factory at Crewe (I detect a distinct bias towards Crewe in a lot of this material. However I don't want reignite an old feud. Neutral POV you know.)So it all gets a bit complicated.


 * Yes there were two railway workshops. However they started up as one, and I'm writing about both together. There isn't much in the literature about the C&W (not so glamorous you know) It depends what you mean about 'built' The Derby C&W did do bits of it but there was a lot of sub-contracting. The APT-E was designed by the British Rail Research Division and the APT-P by the CMEE, both at the Railway Technical Centre and both reporting directly to the board. The Technical Centre and the C&W still exist in private hands (the latter said to be the only train  maker left in Britain) and there is a project for a new centre either at Derby or York.Chevin 10:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Heritage railways template
I don't know whether you've noticed, but despite your edit nearly all of the British heritage railways still appear in category:Heritage railways rather than category:British heritage railways. I don't know how to fix this. Bhoeble 14:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Truth about Wikipedia
From one who used, very recently, to enjoy cooperating with you in writign railway pages. Please see the horrific truth here. about how Wikipedia is really run.

Furness/Widnermere Lines
Hi, you reverted my edits made on the Oxenholme Lake District, Lancaster and Preston stations. My reasoning behind doing so was that, whilst through services occur, the line themselves end e.g. the Furness line ends at Lancaster, though services continue to Manchester Airport. By the logic used, Bolton or MAnchester Piccadilly could be descirbed as on the Furness or Widnermere lines.

By replacing the following station on the service with the name of the line that the service moves onto, theses boxes then follow the format of the Furness Line/Widnermere Line pages themselves; at the moment, these pages contradict the boxes. I have also posted a similar message on the relevant talk pages, but thought I'd explain my reasoning in full here; I really think that my changs tidy it up a bit and give them some consitency.

Further to this, I created an article for Deansagte and Manchester Oxford Road (couldn't find the original, I believe they've now been merged). I am not as certain about some of the factual accuracy of these articles as I would like to be, paticularly in relation to the services towards Liverpool; if you wouldn't mind checking them, it would put my mind at ease Robdurbar 15:57, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

hmm, well must admit i still prefer my own ;). Perhaps if another box was added in oxenholme, lancaster and preston stations, looking at bit like these:

This would explain to the reader: 1. The trains are running along the WCML 2. They are operated by TPE 3. The services run through onto other lines

If you still feel happier with your way, I'm not going to get aall arsey about it; just wondering what you thought as I do believe these read better and have a better logic behind them. The only problem I see with this option is that Lancaster and Preston could get swamped with boxes, but I don't think they're too bad Robdurbar 22:01, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Perfect Robdurbar 22:49, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Commons
Phil,

Can you please upload any new photos to the Wikimedia Commons please? That's http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page - it's just the same except can be shared across interlanguage. Your photos of French locos could be used on the w:fr and w:en from the same source. But the same goes for everything else. You can put images into pages by using the filename like normal. It just looks a bit different.

Could you also try to get some more photos of coaching stock. The SVR in particular has some nice LMS Period III porthole stock, a teak set and a GWR set (I think). Dunc|&#9786; 20:27, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Midland Main Line
Any idea why someone should add two commas to this page? Chevin 07:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

configurable thumb sizes
Phil,

There are now configurable thumb sizes, so that users can decide in special:preferences how wide they want their thumbs to be (I've got mine set on 300). To this end, I think that we need to remove the |250px| bits from the image links, so if you are passing through, please do that. Logged out users get 180px. Dunc|&#9786; 14:46, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Removing links to specific locos
Can you please tell me why you removed the links to the specific locos ?

It is now harder to create a page for the specific loco in the future if someone wished.

chowells 05:21, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply on my talk page. Understood. Congratulations for your photo gallery anyway, it's wonderful! chowells 00:10, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

You got any type 5 photos
? Dunc|&#9786; 19:28, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * As for others, everything that's still around but without a photo! Off the top of my head that's classes 08, 20, 33, 35, 52 I think. Dunc|&#9786; 20:21, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
Do you want me to nominate you for adminship? Dunc|&#9786; 21:03, 24 September 2005 (UTC)


 * See Administrators, which tries to keep any potential admin's ego within a reasonable size. I think you can handle it though.  You have to fill in a questionnaire at Requests for adminship.  My only concern would be that you haven't written enough on topics other than railways to meet enough people to support, but I think it's worth a try. Dunc|&#9786; 18:59, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

why the deletes to railway articles were not vandalism
This is written from the IP address of the entire Edinburgh library system, so it would be a great scale of bad PR for Wikipedia to deem it a "sockpuppet".

The deletions from railway articles have not been vandalism, they have been due efforts to remove content that is illegal for Wikipedia to retain, originally contributed by a user who Wikipedia has since treated badly. If you are not evil, then you automatically always want individuals to be upheld against bad treatment and you never want big corporations to get away with it for a quiet life.

link link


 * Looks like vandalism to me. Dunc|&#9786; 16:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Reedham
Hello. Primary disambiguation. The primary meaning takes Reedham railway station, the disambig page goes to Reedham railway station (disambiguation) and all secondary articles take the form Reedham (xxxxxx) railway station. That way the main meaning (the busier station) gets a direct hit and if you end up there when you were looking for the other place there is the dab link. The naming of the Croydon station was confusing - both on wiki and the real world! London or Surrey? Its bad enough explaining how there are stations in Zone 6 that are not in London but in Surrey/Essex/Herts and included in the zones without the need to explain there are stations that are in London and Zone 6 and then name the article xyz (Surrey). Mrsteviec 06:59, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

B12
Do you have a photo of B12 61572 from Railfest? Dunc|&#9786; 13:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Images
Oh dear. I'll change 'em back. Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Tram stops / tram stations
Hi there, I noticed you've been creating a lot of articles about tram stops and calling them 'xxx tram station'. Now, as you kno, there's a difference between stations and stops, and the latter ar usually not considered worthy of articles on Wikipedia (since there's so little that can actually be written about them). I suggest you rename all of the 'xxx tram station' articles to 'xxx tram stop'. - ulayiti (talk)  19:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I've always been under the impression that for something to be called a station it needs to have a station building. So under that criterion just having platforms wouldn't be enough. Furthermore, at least the NET website refers to all of them as 'tram stops', not 'tram stations', so I think that's the term that we should use as well. - ulayiti (talk)  17:11, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Stanier 2-6-4Ts
Yeah, there were two types. I have my handy stockbook here. 3-cylindered versions for LT&S line, 2 cylindered for everywhere else.

2425-94 & 2537-672 are 2 cylindered.

2500-36 are 3 cylindered.

(I think). Dunc|&#9786; 22:18, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Probably have to go for a dab page to LMS 2-cylindered Stanier 2-6-4T vs LMS 3-cylindered Stanier 2-6-4T, though they weere v similar. Dunc|&#9786; 22:18, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah, they're at http://www.railuk.co.uk/steam/getsteamclass.php?item=4P-E and http://www.railuk.co.uk/steam/getsteamclass.php?item=4P-F respectively. It's probably worth covering them separately. Dunc|&#9786; 23:55, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:156451 at Lancaster.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:156451 at Lancaster.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use .)  See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by going to "Your contributions" from your user page and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Nv8200p (talk) 22:16, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Rhiwbina
Ever been to Rhiwbina, then? Since you seem to know so much about it as to redo the page.

Category:Railway stations in the United Kingdom
I have proposed a reform of this category that you might be interested in commenting on. See Category talk:Railway stations in the United Kingdom for details. Thryduulf 02:25, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch railway station to Llanfairpwll railway station
Why the move to Llanfairpwll railway station? This was debated a while ago and left where it was. The station name is Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch railway station as shown on the station board. The fact that it is shortened to make it fit time-tables etc for the conveneinece of train operators etc does not detract from the fact that the actual name is the full-lenth name not the truncated version. Velela 06:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Powys railway stations
I will do as you advise. (Sloman 20:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC))