User talk:Saharazosh

Business Plan clean up
(1) The 2022 Business Plan is a document title, so needs capitalization. If you wish, you could italicize it or something so that's more obvious.

(2) It also specifically said 5 actions, and the one you removed needs to be re-added. This is a specific, high priority item. Robert92107 (talk) 13:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * If you can find the specific page of a current document that lists those five actions as of particular note, feel free to add it back yourself. I did not find it in the 2022 Business Plan, and in fact found several documents which directly contradict claims in the deleted section, in particular the claims regarding the top speed in the section. Saharazosh (talk) 01:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I must admit, this was driving me crazy. I distinctly remember seeing that, but now I'm not sure where it was! However, it is obvious that it IS one of the critical actions the Board is taking (and has documented in the 2022 BP). Hence, I added it back, even if I can't find it in a list in the document. Robert92107 (talk) 00:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Reference deletions
(1) I do have concerns that in your attempt to make the text cleaner you are also removing source references. Since lack of source references is a critical Wiki concern here, I think you need to be more thoughtful. Some further corrections will need to be made.

(2) Also, have you actually read the 2022 Business Plan? There is a lot in there, and I'm not sure you're conveying what it is saying. (For example, I just decided I need to make some minor corrections due to what Table 3.3 says, and also need to add a link to that table because it is so critical.)

(3) While I may be a bit too detailed and factual, I prefer to make information more specific. For instance, you removed the note defining "guideway". I had to hunt down that definition in a note in the November construction report. Why remove a useful clarification which was unobtrusive? Likewise, the completion date is a problem. I gave a precise, comparable one referenced in the text. You've made it worse.

(4) In Further Reading I put in a note about the CAHSR template which was also informative. This was entirely reasonable, since it made a novice reader aware of the template and its purpose, and was in fact a reference for "further reading". Without it actual "further reading" content would be divided into two different sections with no reference to the template at the bottom in the main text. I made things more understandable, you made them worse. The implication of your removal would be to copy all those WP references and put them also in "Further Reading", making it horribly long.

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Five stations
This is somewhat confusing, but the plan is to have five stations. Madera will be designed by local sources, which is why it is not mentioned elsewhere in the BP. Also, the Authority is seeking to have federal funds pay for the five stations. (I think they must be pretty confident to put it in the plan.) See Table 3.3, which says "Five initial stations, including intermodal hubs at Merced and Bakersfield." Robert92107 (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Table 3.3 also states "Implement passenger service on HSR infrastructure at true high speeds (up to 220 mph)" i.e. not at 180mph as you have repeatedly inserted into the article without any source. You also do not provide a citation for your claim of 4 trainsets. The cost estimates mention 2 trainsets, and the funding request summary mentions 6 trainsets (https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Federal-Grant-Strategy-Update-to-Board-FINAL-20220606-A11Y.pdf page 10). I have not been able to locate any mention of specifically 4 trainsets in the 2022 Business Plan or in any other current documents.
 * The onus is on you to provide citations demonstrating these claims.

Saharazosh (talk) 06:51, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I couldn't find exactly where I saw that speed reference. Indeed, it came from an earlier reference, and not the 2022 BP. However,
 * https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/brdmtg_020921_Item3_2021_Prop_1A_Funding_Plan.pdf
 * says (p. 38):
 * "Rolling Stock
 * The Authority also is planning to begin procurement of high-speed rail Trainsets (also known as rolling stock). As part of this effort, the Authority will work with the California State Transportation Agency and the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority to explore interim trainset procurement or lease options that could provide the early interim high-speed service between Merced and Bakersfield at speeds up to 186 miles per hour, but at a lower cost through use of existing production trainsets or a lease approach. Under this scenario, as the system expands beyond Merced and Bakersfield, the Authority would then procure trainsets capable of operating at speeds of 220 miles per hour. For full 220 mile-per-hour trains, the Authority will utilize a long-term contract model that bundles manufacturing, testing, and certification with the long- term maintenance."
 * With federal funds for train procurement available, the timetable for the real CAHSR trains might be available sooner and have higher speeds.
 * As to double-tracking, that is already well-documented.
 * As to the 4 trains in service, I still have to find that reference. Clearly, this fits with the 6 trains to be acquired (4 on the road, one as a ready spare, and one under repair). Robert92107 (talk) 00:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Something to note regarding your latest updates to the page is that applying for federal funding for X is not synonymous with planning for X. Just because CAHSR has submitted an application for funding for six trainsets, does not mean that they plan to receive them. To do so would be counting their chickens before they've hatched. Many, many applications for funding are rejected or only funded in part.
 * Conversely, just because CAHSR has not applied for federal funding for Y, doesn't mean they are not planning for Y. For example, CAHSR is only applying for federal funding for the Fresno and Kings/Tulare stations at present, but quite obviously plans to build more stations. Saharazosh (talk) 15:51, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Overhaul of California High-Speed Rail
Hi Saharazosh! I noted that you have been regularly contributing to California High-Speed Rail. That article is in need of a general overhaul, as it has been growing in a somewhat uncontrolled manner during the past 2 or 3 years. I made some high-level suggestions in the discussion: Talk:California_High-Speed_Rail. Given that you are well acquainted with the topic and similarly dissatisfied with the current quality of the article, I'd like to ask if you would be interested in forming a team to give it a proper scrub. I am quite new to doing serious edits on Wikipedia and am keen to take it on, but for the sake of the project I should not be doing it by myself. DracaenaGuianensis (talk) 03:36, 8 March 2024 (UTC)