User talk:Trainsandotherthings/Archive 5

Two drafts
Hey. I noticed awhile ago, you reviewed the draft on Wilmington and Western 98, which I might improve myself when I get around to it, but nobody has updated the drafts on Draft:Polson Logging 2 or Draft:St. Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern Railway 5 yet, so I wouldn’t know if they’re good enough to be pages in their current state or not. I’m not necessarily asking you to expand them, but I just want to make you aware that these exist. If you get around to reviewing both of these to indicate whether or not they’re acceptable, that would be neat. Happy Holidays. 23.169.64.51 (talk) 18:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello IP, I actually did not see the draft on number 5, because it didn't have a talk page created yet (I just did that myself). The wikiproject templates on talk pages make AfC submissions show up at WikiProject Trains/Article alerts, which is how I usually find submissions. Draft:Polson Logging Co. 2 needs at least one more instance of significant coverage in a secondary source before I'd feel comfortable accepting it. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Extra source added in the #2 page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.223.120.112 (talk) 03:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I just accepted #2. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if you're aware
I've nominated File:Memes for my wikipedia page (NOtOrrio).gif for speedy deletion. It's basically an attack on you. Steelkamp (talk) 15:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)


 * God damn. I knew he wouldn't just leave me alone. Thank you for the heads up. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:13, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

2600:1000:B067:A61A:A806:B138:77B3:5E5B
Said user is edit warring with me on the Norfolk and Western 475 page. Trains13 (talk) 23:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I am not an administrator, and in any case, it takes two people to edit war; edit warring concerns can be addressed at WP:AN3 but note that your conduct will be scrutinized as well. The IP is adding unsourced stuff, which is an issue, and they can be warned for that. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

@Trains13 Dude, I wasn’t even doing any of that. I was being very polite to you when I was explaining myself. Seriously, you have to calm down. Just because you don’t like a certain users edit doesn’t mean you need to revert it and argue with them, I’ve seen your edit history of harassing users over their edits on locomotive articles. Your behavior towards us is unacceptable, sending messages like that towards users is a violation against the policy. You can’t threaten users like that over their edits. Plus, like I said before, I was being very polite to you and yet your still complaining about little edit I made, which it’s not even a big deal to begin with in the first place. Please, you can’t do this to innocent users. I already told you that I didn’t argue with you, I explain it to you politely and yet you continue to make a big deal out of it. Please, I’m asking you politely to stop this behavior. 2600:1000:B01D:FA84:7505:9C1F:AB6F:A4E4 (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Nonsense! YOU need to understand that Wikipedia pages should keep information at a VERY minimal amount. I'm talking about YOU adding the info about 475's headlight reposition, but I've removed at the last minute because YOU didn't cite a source about it whatsoever. You'll be free readd this info by citing a source from one of the train books or magazine articles. Trains13 (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

It isn’t. But you still don’t need to harass and threaten users about stuff like this, I will politely try to find one like you said and I’ll add it back whenever I find a reliable source. So far, I haven’t found one yet. Still, as I explained it to you on your talk page, don’t go to users talk pages and threaten about stuff like this. As I said before and I’ll say it again, sending messages like that towards users on their talk pages can get you blocked from editing. Don’t go and threaten them like this, it is completely uncalled for. Still again, I don’t wanna argue with you about this. As I said, if you speak to users in a calm and polite way about these edits, then maybe things will work out for you a lot better. Again, it will help you because a better user of you to do that for now on. 2600:1000:B01D:FA84:7505:9C1F:AB6F:A4E4 (talk) 00:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Okay, someone from California, let me make you a deal. I'll be polite to you once you've added the info about 475's new headlight position with a cited source. Trains13 (talk) 00:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

So your saying you only treat users nicely whenever they follow your orders around and pester them about it? Dude, you need to grow up. I already told you I don’t wanna argue with you about this. I just wanted you to stop acting like a jerk towards users whenever they make and edit you don’t like. First off, yes, I agree that we shouldn’t make changes until we find a reliable source to improve it. That I agree, don’t get me wrong. But harassing them about it is not gonna get them anywhere, it only makes things worse. I don’t know what your problem is, but I’m not gonna continue and try to reason with you, I’ve tried my best to politely explain it to you on how to become a better user and not act like a jerk towards everyone. But it likes like it’s not gonna work out. I’m sorry, I really tried to help you. But I guess it’s not gonna help. 2600:1000:B031:FA06:EC4C:7231:1A5D:C01C (talk) 00:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

🚂 New Year's Wishes!
Happy New Year, Trains andotherthings ! Thank you for your many contributions to Wikipedia this year—including getting over ten articles about railway stations to GA status, like this 365 word GA, and, most impressive of all, getting the level-4 vital article train to GA at the start of this year (that is, 2022—this will be confusing for the first two or so months). Additionally, thanks for your advice to me back in November via Discord about conducting GA reviews that has now lead me to reviewing five GANs. I know that I am making this all about GAs, but I doubt that I have to remind you of the amazing cleaning up of train-related articles you do! Anyways, I hope 2023 will be very kind to you and that Wikipedia continues to see your valuable contributions. Yours truly,  𓃦 LunaEatsTuna  (💬) 00:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC) (It is now New Year's Day in UTC)


 * Hi, thank you very much for the warm message! Happy New Year to you as well. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 04:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of New England Central Railroad
The article New England Central Railroad you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:New England Central Railroad and Talk:New England Central Railroad/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 05:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2023 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: and. Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023
Hello , The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day. won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!
 * Backlog
 * 2022 Awards

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from  to

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as and  have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

List of preserved locos in USA
Hiya, I'm acutely aware you live in the US (I'm in the laughing stock of the UK . Just thought as an AfC reviewer as well you might be able to bring some thoughts/policy into this discussion: Draft_talk:Preserved_locomotives_in_the_United_States. Thx. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


 * responded on the draft talk page. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted to say
I appreciate your comments at Wikipedia talk:Good Article proposal drive 2023. Sad to say, I confess I've compiled my own personal "list" off-wiki, I had no idea some editors' contributions were so out of proportion. It's even possible that reviewers might come to the same conclusion as you and I have done and basically take matters into their own hands without any actions "from above"... Shearonink (talk) 18:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm glad my comments resonated with you. I really think the backlog would largely disappear if those who make lots of nominations but never review changed their practice. As they seldom seem to be persuadable, I see no alternative but to refuse to review anything they nominate. If enough editors join in this practice, we can force a change. I only review typically once or twice a month, but again if we get sufficient numbers it will make a real impact. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It doesn't even need to be adjudicated from above, passive resistance would work just fine. We're all volunteers, same as the non-reviewers, we can choose to do what we want. I find the discussion about refining the Christiebot's/Bots' passes & data-gathering to be of interest (Wikipedia talk:Good Article proposal drive 2023).Shearonink (talk) 03:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

In appreciation
Congratulations! Hawkeye7  (discuss)  00:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bighorn Divide and Wyoming Railroad
The article Bighorn Divide and Wyoming Railroad you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bighorn Divide and Wyoming Railroad for comments about the article, and Talk:Bighorn Divide and Wyoming Railroad/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Etriusus -- Etriusus (talk) 01:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of East Providence Branch
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article East Providence Branch 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 00:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of East Providence Branch
The article East Providence Branch you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:East Providence Branch and Talk:East Providence Branch/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 02:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion
Hello, Trainsandotherthings! You might be interested in endorsing an essay in which creation I participated – WP:NOCONFED. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 21:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of New England Central Railroad
The article New England Central Railroad you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:New England Central Railroad for comments about the article, and Talk:New England Central Railroad/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 21:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of New England Central Railroad
The article New England Central Railroad you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:New England Central Railroad for comments about the article, and Talk:New England Central Railroad/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sammi Brie -- Sammi Brie (talk) 21:18, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the duplicate message -- working out a bug in ChristieBot at the moment. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * And here I thought ChristieBot was just especially proud of my work! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Rubber-tyred metro, etc
Leave the components of the Rubber-tyred metros alone. "Reliable sources" for the components are impossible to find because they are too technical (specialised). The illustrations have to attest to their use and existence. Peter Horn User talk 17:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)


 * You do NOT get an exemption from the requirements of verifiability and reliable sources just because you say so. The rules apply to everyone, and that includes yourself. I wasn't going to, but what you've just said has tempted me to start a merger discussion to merge both into Rubber-tyred metro. Your behavior is bordering on ownership, and I suggest you reconsider your next message to me. Articles with zero sources are not acceptable for Wikipedia, and you should be well aware of that. My tagging was proper and I will not "leave the components of the Rubber-tyred metros alone" just because you do not wish to take the time to properly source articles - and if they can't be sourced, they should not exist. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This should do it for all components: Roll way (not a runway It was there all along in external links. Beleve me, I have traveled on the Montreal metro for 50 + years, and this is what I see. The only source may be the websites of ghe metro systems
 * Peter Horn User talk 17:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What makes visual dictionary a reliable source? I cannot find any information on where they source their definitions from or who their writers are. A dictionary or encyclopedia is a tertiary source (WP:TERTIARY) anyhow, we rely primarily on secondary sources. I'm really not seeing the justification for roll way and guide bar to remain separate articles if as you say there are no sources on them; they should be merged into the main article and I will likely formally propose as such today. Pointing to the images and saying "they show what they show" is insufficient; images are primary and also generally considered both self-published and user generated content and therefore not reliable. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * OK This may be better Peter Horn User talk 19:33, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That source is copied verbatim, more or less, from Rubber-tyred metro. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 19:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What makes you say that? That reference was retrieved in 2021 Peter Horn User talk 00:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It first appeared in 2015 and was an exact copy of sections of the Wikipedia article at that time, plus stealing this image. TAOT is entirely correct - neither roll way nor guide bar have any reason to remain as separate articles, and images do not qualify as reliable sources. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * TRUCK (bogie) This comes from a visual dictionary Peter Horn User talk 19:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The terms are all literal translations from those used in Métro sur pneumatiques. Eg "piste de roulement" is translated as roll way Peter Horn User talk 00:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft submission
I submitted the draft on St. Louis Iron Mountain and Southern Railway #5, if you want to either approve it or tell me what needs to be done on it first. 23.169.64.51 (talk) 17:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello IP editor, I've gone ahead and accepted the draft. Some of the sources may not be reliable, but AfC doesn't mandate perfection, and the seMissourian.com story really pushes this over the line for meeting GNG. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:46, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

That old TfD
I've tried, several times, to get Redrose64 to drop the stick, and I've promised myself to stop rising to the bait. This is the worst case of WP:PRAM behavior I can recall, especially because people who get that angry usually just quit the project. Mackensen (talk) 17:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I was really shocked to see such a blatantly childish reply along the lines of "I could do this simple request, but I won't, because somebody was mean to me 2 years ago". Nobody always gets their way, and I've seen decisions I strongly disagree with, but I don't go around being forever angry over them. I'm not familiar with the event Redrose64 is discussing as I'm pretty sure it predates me even making my account. I've tried to reach out to the UKRAIL project a few times when I was looking for someone more familiar with British trains, but this is rather discouraging. I am glad though that ultimately someone addressed the request. His type of response isn't what I'd expect from an admin, though... Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, if you want some light reading:
 * Templates for discussion/Log/2020 July 22
 * Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1050
 * User_talk:Redrose64/unclassified_28
 * I don't think there's anything to be done about it. Having a bad attitude and sharing it doesn't violate policy, though we think better of people when they don't do that. Mackensen (talk) 21:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Cesar Vergara
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cow-calf
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cow-calf 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 17:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Norwich and Worcester Railroad
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Norwich and Worcester Railroad 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 22:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Branford Steam Railroad
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 19 March 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Today's featured article/March 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/March 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Norwich and Worcester Railroad
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment
You are receiving this message because you were a Good article reviewer on at least one article that is part of Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 or you signed up for messages. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of Good articles for copyright and other problems, unless a reviewer opens an independent Good article reassessment and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information. A list of the GA reviewers can be found here. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. You can opt in or out of further messages at this page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of East Providence Branch
The article East Providence Branch you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:East Providence Branch for comments about the article, and Talk:East Providence Branch/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 23:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks for the barnstar! I'm glad you were able to help me expand the article. Do let me know if you ever want to bring New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad to GA; it's been on my todo list for a long time but it's a massive undertaking for sure. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm down to make a run at it someday, but "massive undertaking" is right. Some of the difficulty is going to be keeping the article to a reasonable size; I wrote 2,700 words about a single facet of the 1935-47 bankruptcy (which I'll take it to GA sometime). We'll probably end up creating articles on several branch lines, and other topics like the bankruptcy itself, just to deal with the amount of material available. I do have several sources that cover the New Haven at a company level: The New Haven Railroad: Its Rise and Fall (focused on the 1910s monopoly case, also in need of its own article, but with a fair bit of detail up to its 1969 publication), Steelways of New England, and Connecticut Railroads: An Illustrated History. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

August 1953 articles
Believe it or not, I found that scan completely by accident! I was trying to figure out where the "fair grounds" signed on this streetcar were, and the scan came up in the results. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I've read through much of it, and it's very extensive. Assuming the source passes muster, this would be sufficient to get to FA status. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see why it wouldn't, since it's the publication of a reputable historical organization. I would want to flesh it out more with additional sources, especially since Karr's writeup is heavily based on Snow. (Notably, Karr repeats Snow's biggest error, giving 1932 rather than 1931 as the trolley end date.)
 * Snow's work is also a good source of public domain images, but it'd be nice to get some photos of the remains before FA. I'll try to get some when I'm back east midyear, though some may need to wait for winter. There's some surprisingly impressive structures still intact, notably the trestle over Railroad Hill Street and the Waterbury Branch, the nearby Naugatuck River bridge, and bits and pieces of the Mad River trestles. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd easily be able to grab photos if I still lived in Connecticut, but living in Rhode Island now it's a rather long trip. I'm only over there once every few months usually. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I can be talked into a Waterbury trip at some point in the spring, it's new mileage for me beyond the corridor. Mackensen (talk) 04:32, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!!!
As promised, I'm finally getting around to sending out barnstars, only 72 more to go (yaaayyyy). I got a good chuckle when I saw you apply for GAR coordinator. You really can't stay away. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 21:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)


 * A small part of me hopes I don't get elected so I can finally be free of my torment (only half joking). Thanks for the barnstar! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Area of Navarre
The recent edit is misleading because the area section used to have no decimal whatsoever. Now, for some stupid reason, somebody added a meaningless decimal to the area (changed from 10,391 to 10,391.11 sq km). You have to remove the decimal, because there is no source to support that edit And i forgot to tell you, this edit was made by Locked Empire. Thank you very much. 2601:280:4F81:4490:B155:C35C:C7B9:4843 (talk) 03:07, 24 February 2023 (UTC)


 * The article is not protected, so you can revert it yourself. I'm not sure why you're telling me. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:41, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Cow-calf
BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Newport and Wickford Railroad and Steamboat Company
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cow-calf
The article Cow-calf you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cow-calf and Talk:Cow-calf/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 17:21, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cow-calf
The article Cow-calf you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cow-calf for comments about the article, and Talk:Cow-calf/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 20:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 March newsletter
So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:


 * Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
 * Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
 * 🇩🇪 FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
 * 🇺🇸 TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
 * Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna,  Thebiguglyalien,  Sammi Brie,  Trainsandotherthings,  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Lee Vilenski, 🇮🇩 Juxlos,  Unexpectedlydian,  SounderBruce, 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Kosack,  BennyOnTheLoose and  PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Norwich and Worcester Railroad
The article Norwich and Worcester Railroad you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Norwich and Worcester Railroad and Talk:Norwich and Worcester Railroad/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 19:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Norwich and Worcester Railroad
The article Norwich and Worcester Railroad you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Norwich and Worcester Railroad for comments about the article, and Talk:Norwich and Worcester Railroad/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of LunaEatsTuna -- LunaEatsTuna (talk) 17:22, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

New title?
Metre gauge railway from Fleurines and Villers-Saint-Frambourg to Pont-Sainte-Maxence ---   Tbf69   P &bull;&#32;T 11:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)


 * How did you even find that? It has had a grand total of one pageview in the past month. I do not speak French, but the article title should reflect what is used in sources. Using Google translate, the two sources in the article both use the name "The railway from Fleurines and Villers St Frambourg to Pont St Maxence". From WP:TITLE: Generally, article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

GAR coordinator
I have just closed the poll at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, and you are now officially a GAR coordinator. Congratulations, I guess. Happy editing, —Kusma (talk) 09:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Longshot, but maybe one of your sources might explain this
In American Civil War sources for a few articles I've written, I've seen references to both the North Missouri Railroad and Northern Missouri Railroad (see Battle of Glasgow, Missouri and Battle of Roan's Tan Yard). Any idea if these are the same thing or not? Hog Farm Talk 15:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * In my opinion they're the same, and the correct name is "North Missouri Railroad." See the ICC valuation report for the Wabash. "Northern Missouri Railroad" was used in contemporary sources, though that kind of casual misnaming isn't unusual (plenty of sources refer to the "Northern Pennsylvania Railroad", which was always the North Pennsylvania Railroad). Further muddying the waters, the Northern Missouri Railroad was a short-lived short-line railroad in roughly the same part of the country (in the mid-1980s, well after all this). Mackensen (talk) 17:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks like Mackensen beat me to it, but in general I am happy to try and answer questions like these. I do not have much in my personal library that covers the south; other than the major companies. Names can be ambiguous; my go-to example is that the New England Central Railroad, Central New England Railroad, and Central New England Railway are all different subjects. Publications by the ICC and other regulatory agencies are a good way to figure out the correct name. To make it even more confusing, the company appears to have renamed to the St. Louis, Kansas City and Northern Railway. List of Missouri railroads has the correct "North Missouri Railroad" name. There are books about the railroad history of every state, and one on Missouri railroads was just published last year, if you're really curious. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sometime I might see if I can get ahold of that recent book from a library to try to throw together a short article on the railroad. Hog Farm Talk 04:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Once I'm near my library again I'll take a stab at it too, and also the short line (Drury and Lewis should have me covered). There are a few images on Wikimedia Commons--maps and stock certificates, but nothing really depicting the railroad itself. Mackensen (talk) 12:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Hog Farm I've scaffolded the essentials: North Missouri Railroad. I'd totally forgotten that I had access to H. Roger Grant's history of the Wabash. Mackensen (talk) 15:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Providence and Worcester Railroad scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Providence and Worcester Railroad article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 18, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/April 18, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/April 2023.

I don't mind writing the blurb if you don't want to, but since the existing 3864 characters need condensing to 1025, I could probably do with some guidance on what is important. I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for scheduling the article. Yes, the lead is quite long - I had to cover history from 1844 to present, no small feat! I'm happy to write up a blurb that fits within the 1000 character limit, I'll take care of that today. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that, actually 1025, so you have tons more room! No rush Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * DYK helper claims the blurb I just created is 1022 character, so we should be just barely within the limit now. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Looks good, many thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Signups open for The Core Contest
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—will take place this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24.

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

branford steam railroad
Trainsandotherthings, i had a quick question regarding this article and the associated blurb. is there a source for the assertion in the blurb and the article lead that the branford steam railroad ended passenger service within a decade of the railroad's founding? the assertion seems plausible, but i could only find a statement in the article body mentioning that passenger service had been halted by 1916, and the railroad was founded in 1903. dying (talk) 10:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * That looks like a mistake on my part. The 1916 source is indeed the earliest one I could find that confirmed the company had ended passenger train operations. I've changed both the article's lead and the blurb accordingly. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * looks good. thanks, Trainsandotherthings.  dying (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks
Just now saw your close at Good article reassessment/Ramsdell Theatre/1. Thank you. So very much. Shearonink (talk) 13:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Glad I could help. Since I'm a GAR coord now, I try to close at least a few discussions each week. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

The term foamer is a derogatory term that is offensive to professional railfans
I saw your comment on the latest revision of coaster, and it is a cause for concern. Calling train videos "foamer videos" was not necessary and down right offensive. True railfans don't like this term and only use it to refer to people who talk, yell, or do other unnecessary things while filming trains. Next time you make a revision comment, try to not say terms that could be considered offensive to enthusiast groups. Trimetwes fan1003 (talk) 18:47, 19 February 2023 (UTC)


 * What the hell is a "professional railfan"? I've worked in the rail industry, and anyone self-describing as a "professional railfan" is most definitely a foamer. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I have worked in the railroad industry for over 30 years, and have used the term "foamer" for a long time. The key "Wikipedia-wise" is to guide/encourage enthusiasts to positive contributions to Wikipedia—and away from negative or useless contributions. TwoScars (talk) 19:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Fore River Railroad
Hello Trainsandotherthings: I might review your GA request for Fore River Railroad someday, but I believe it needs a few things before I will even look at it. 1) The lead should be a two or three paragraph summary of the rest of the article. Any fact in the lead should be found in the remaining portion of the article—with a citation. For example: where is the proof that the railroad is a Class III railroad, and what is the definition of a Class III railroad? 2) Your History section contains some information that should be part of a Current operations section, such as markets, services, and current interchanges. 3) I realize that we are talking about a very small railroad, but a sub-section (under operations) called Infrastructure and Equipment might be useful. Under the infrastructure section: miles of roadway (owned, operated), miles of track (owned, operated), terminals. Under equipment: locomotives, freight cars (any information on owned vs. leased). Another useful subsection could contain any publicly available statistics. For a small railroad, that may only be a few safety stats from the Federal Railroad Administration. For a Class I railroad, stats could include those reported to the Surface Transportation Board in Annual Report Form R-1: such as revenue ton-miles from Schedule 755, and Operating Revenue and Expenses from Schedule 210. Misc.) I do not like "paragraphs that are only one sentence. Also, you currently have Conrail Wiki-linked twice. I think you could set a standard for future US freight railroad Wikipedia articles, which would be great—right now you currently have an article for a railroad currently operating that only has a History section for the main body of the article. TwoScars (talk) 18:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I think you could set a standard for future US freight railroad Wikipedia articles You do realize I made Providence and Worcester Railroad a featured article, right? And the same for Branford Steam Railroad which is on the front page right now? However, the P&W article can rely on two profiles in Trains Magazine (1994 and 2016), a 1973 book written just about that railroad, and copious newspaper sources. Sourcing for the Branford Steam Railroad was quite limited for recent years, and I had to look very hard just to find what is in the article. For the Fore River Railroad, most of what you're asking for isn't possible because there's limited sourcing for a tiny class 3 railroad. You're asking me about all these forms that the Class 1s are legally required to fill out, but don't apply to regionals and shortlines. It would be nice if all of these things were available for sourcing, but unless I've missed something, you'll find they aren't. It's not that I've neglected these things - the sourcing is not available. I am constrained by what reliable sources say, and I can't write about things that reliable sources don't cover. It also doesn't help that newspapers.com doesn't want to renew my access through TWL for some reason. If there's modern sources that I've missed, do say so. I will use them to expand the article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, getting information for a small railroad such as Fore River is difficult, and only Class I railroads ("For a Class I railroad, stats could include....") report Annual Report Form R-1 to the STB. It just looks to me like the Fore River Railroad is incomplete, especially comparing to your previous work such as P&W and Branford. Provided the Fore River has had a reportable accident or incident, the FRA will have some data. Here is the FRA Freight Rail Overview. Here is the FRA data site. Even if the railroad has no accidents or incidents, the FRA might have train-miles and yard switching miles. No matter what data are available or unavailable, you say the railroad is Class III (as you should) in the lead, but offer no proof or definition of Class III in the body. TwoScars (talk) 17:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Old sources not useful for this project, but maybe useful for others: ICC Statistics 1888; ICC Statistics 1954. Somewhere, there is a collection of all years. The ICC started reporting Class I only around the 1970s. Poor's Manual of Railroads is a pre-ICC source: here is Volume I, here's 1914; here's 1875. TwoScars (talk) 17:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Another possible resource is the John W. Barriger III National Railroad Library. I don't know what, if any, has been digitized. TwoScars (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It appears none of it is digitized, and I am not going from Rhode Island to Missouri just to see if they have something on the Fore River Railroad. I'm not lying to you, I have looked extensively for sources on the railroad articles I have worked on. Minor accidents are not something worth including in a Wikipedia article. Class III status is verified by the Massachusetts State Rail Plan, viewable here which I have added to the article. You and I both know that a 2 mile long line can only be class III, anyhow. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, you and I know what a Class III railroad is, but other readers may not. Here is a link (scroll down to the blue-ish section) to the Surface Transportation Board web site that explains things. It is actually written into law. Here is a link to resources listed by the Library of Congress that may be useful for other projects. P.S.—I will stop bothering you. TwoScars (talk) 15:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Take a look
Hello. I Hope this message meets you well. Do review this page Oluwole Omofemi Amaekuma (talk) 13:35, 21 March 2023 (UTC)


 * No thanks. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)