Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains/Archive: 2016

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Northern Railways
FYI, WikiProject Council/Proposals/Northern Railways. -- Red rose64 (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

List of rail accidents (2010-present)
Does anyone know why the TOC isn't displaying 2016 in the List of rail accidents (2010-present). Something to do with a transcluded template but I can't work it out. Mjroots (talk) 20:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It doesn't display a normal TOC because displays a custom TOC - which includes a  which in turn includes a   switch that suppresses the "normal" TOC. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Portal merge proposal
A discussion has started to merge Portal:Railways and Portal:Trains. Please join the discussion there. Slambo (Speak) 12:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * . -DePiep (talk) 15:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

"Relief Line"
The usage and topic Relief Line is under discussion, see Talk:Downtown Relief Line -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Transsiberia too big for us
Template:Trans-Siberian Railway is too big to parse, so Wiki does not show it at all. REmove stations? -DePiep (talk) 10:30, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's probably time to migrate it to ; that's really what it was designed to handle. I have a work-in-progress at User:Mackensen/Trans-Siberian Railway. Mackensen (talk) 14:36, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Maybe the map could be back in the article even (it was separated for this size issue). -DePiep (talk) 15:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Still working on this at User:Mackensen/Trans-Siberian Railway. isn't compatible so I rolled a new version based on Infobox. Mackensen (talk) 17:04, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not to push, but things still ok? -DePiep (talk) 22:42, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thanks for the reminder! Mackensen (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * So. Article Trans-Siberian Railway uses Template:Trans-Siberian Railway, and no limits are exceeded. Very good. We can delete Template:Trans-Siberian Railway (overview) then. -DePiep (talk) 00:29, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

"Signal passed at danger" as British-specific term
To what extent should we be using the term "signal passed at danger" to describe train crashes outside British jurisdiction? The article itself currently lists some non-British crashes.

If it is not entirely appropriate, is there a geographically-neutral alternative to this term that describes the same concept?

For example, such an issue was raised about 1987 Maryland train collision (diff, t). --SoledadKabocha (talk) 04:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I think it's the acronym SPAD that is UK-centric. The term itself would apply worldwide, along with "overrun" for stopping past the actual signal post. Mjroots (talk) 13:26, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't believe that "Danger" is usually used to designate an indication in US railway signalling. Choess (talk) 03:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * So is there at least theoretical cause for concern about the way we use the term? Again, does a more geographically neutral alternative exist? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 01:43, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that there is an alternative. Remember, railways were an invention of the British, so there is a case for British terminology to be applied to these things. WP:COMMONNAME also adds weight to that. Are we looking for a problem to apply a solution to here? Mjroots (talk) 11:56, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * British and American signalling evolved independently, though, and the only American cases which a strictly analogous are violations of Rule 291 (Absolute Stop). Looking at the list I see that few of the supposed American cases fit that standard; indeed, the NTSB doesn't really assess accidents along these terms. More commonly the root problem is that speed was not reduced at a prior signal, and that therefore the train could not be stopped short of the signal.


 * Looking at the category, this seems to be a catch-all for every collision between trains that in theory should have been prevented by the signalling system, plus a couple where the train fell into the river because a bridge was open. It seems to me that we should simply have a collisions between trains category, etc. rather than picking out one aspect of what can be a complex of accident causes. Mangoe (talk) 19:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Regarding Mjroots's suggestion that my post represents a solution in search of a problem, I suppose I was motivated by my general doubt regarding how the spirit of WP:COMMONNAME compares to the desire to use terminology that is formally correct in the article's subject area. I have encountered discussions like this in a couple unrelated topics. If you want a specific problem, however, I was going to address the previously-mentioned edit on 1987 Maryland train collision by restoring the mention of Signal passed at danger alongside the US rulebook note. My excuse for not being bold was that I wasn't sure how to word such a change concisely. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 07:19, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Please see discussion for renaming the corresponding category. Mangoe (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Buenos Aires Underground
Hello! FoCuS and I have been working on getting Buenos Aires Underground up to standards to be nominated for GA/FA status, but it still needs a bit more work. If anyone from here is interested in joining in, then please go ahead! SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 19:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

TFD - template used by Portal:Trains
There is a TFD about Template:Trains portal/DYK date. Please join the discussion. Thank you. Slambo (Speak) 23:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The discussion closed as Keep. Slambo (Speak) 02:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Inclusion of "under construction" data in the Infobox Public transit
I wonder if there has been a discussion on the inclusion of stations, system length, number of lines that are under construction in the infobox. To me, it's speculative and clutters up the box. I would say to only include actual stations, with the actual system length. I'm curious to hear other opinions. Mattximus (talk) 21:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If lines and stations are actually under construction, that means that plans have been drawn up, public engagement conducted, and construction works often visible. That means it's quite source-able and shouldn't have to be speculative at all. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. While things can change, once shovels are in the ground, it's no longer speculative at all. oknazevad (talk) 17:20, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Are you sure?. Mattximus (talk) 17:58, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. There's a difference between "speculative" and "cancelled". That is the later. oknazevad (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Trivia and popular culture sections
In view of edits, which are pretty much trainspotting (was the Bluebell chosen because Downton was set in that part of the country, or was it chosen because they had all the necessary settings and their fees were competitive), is it time that we considered a guideline similar to WP:CARTRIVIA? -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see that as notable and so have reverted it. For the record, Hogsmeade being Grosmont I'll accept included, that the Bluebell was in Awdry's books also is reasonable, but random inclusions in tv shows? No. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:21, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think so, yes. We should be writing these standards down. Mackensen (talk) 14:04, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Haverhill railway station
FYI, Talk:Haverhill railway station. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Question regarding the lead and infobox for legacy titles of "Union Station", "Penn Station", "Burlington Station" in US stations
What should we do with the infoboxes and lead sections in instances where American stations share the same name due to being operated by the same company (such as "Union Station (X City)", "Penn Station (X City)", and "Burlington Station (X City)"). Should the infobox and lead read X City Union Station or just Union Station?I ask this because some cities, like Chicago Union Station, Pennsylvania Station (Baltimore), and Union Station (Washington, D.C.) include the city name in the infobox title, but some cities, like Union Station (Erie, Pennsylvania), don't. epicgenius ( talk ) 21:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This discussion is at WT:USSTATION. epicgenius ( talk ) 00:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

New Jersey Transit
I've started a discussion regarding this article's title. Input is requested and welcome. oknazevad (talk) 01:09, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Underground stations
Feel free to join this category discussion about underground railway stations. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Central line
FYI, Talk:Central line. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:27, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Granges-près-Marnand train crash
The final report into the Granges-près-Marnand train crash has been released. I've updated the article a bit using my basic French, but there is probably a lot more info to be gleaned if anyone fluent in French cares to take a look. Mjroots (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Steam train accident in Switzerland
It is reported that a steam train has crashed into/collided with construction equipment (possibly rail-mounted) in Switzerland last night. Not quite sure, but at or near Sihlbrugg railway station, on the Sihltal railway line. Can anyone come up with further details? Is there an article to be had? Mjroots (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If it's as the article says, 16 injuries on a private charter, I wouldn't consider that worth a standalone article. Mackensen (talk) 16:52, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The fact that it's a private charted shouldn't have a bearing on notability. If the fault of the train driver, the that may impact on the case for notablility. Fault not lying with the driver may add weight to the case. All subject to WP:GNG being met, of course. At the very least, it's worth an entry on the station and line articles, as well as the list of rail accidents covering 2016. Just want to be sure it is added in correct place. Mjroots (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Two more sources (in German) 20minuten and Schweizer Radio-unf Fernsehgesellschaft. Seems that a steam railcar collided with a wagon. If we have an article on the railcar, then the info needs adding there too. Mjroots (talk) 17:45, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I see very little that puts this outside routine coverage. Doesn't strike me as notable enough for an article at all. oknazevad (talk) 17:46, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Here is a good article on Tages Anzeiger. I don't think that it is important enough to deserve its own article. Here in Helvetia there was not much coverage about it, maybe because today was a wonderful day and everyone was outside, included the journalists ;-). Alex2006 (talk) 18:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Northern Rail and Arriva Rail North (England) article names
There is a discussion being held at Talk:Northern Rail as to how the Northern Rail and Arriva Rail North articles in England should be named. Thought I would mention to try and gain more opinions Morr747 (talk) 03:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section&. Regards, James(talk/contribs) 17:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

AfD
The Dalfsen train crash article has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Canadian railway station naming
Please see Talk:Hinton, Alberta, railway station for a discussion on Canadian railway station naming conventions. Dicklyon (talk) 05:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Flicker images of trains in Oxford
For info: Commons:Commons:Village_pump--Alexmar983 (talk) 23:05, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Revisiting station categories
We had a long discussion in 2014 about Category:Railway stations in the United States by company, and there was consensus that the existing scheme was unsatisfactory. That consensus having been reached, nothing was done. To briefly recapitulate, there's a whole series of categories within this category which categorize current and former stations by past owners of the physical railway line that they're on. For example, Union (NJT station), a New Jersey transit station completed and opened in 2003, is in the category Category:Stations along Lehigh Valley Railroad lines, because it's on the Lehigh Line, which was built by the Lehigh Valley Railroad and passed to Conrail in 1976. This particular piece of the Lehigh Line remains part of Conrail Shared Assets Operations. Roselle Park (NJT station), the next station over, is in the same categories for the same reason. This doesn't make sense. Union has no connection at all to the Lehigh Valley Railroad. Meanwhile, Roselle should (probably) be in Category:Former Lehigh Valley Railroad stations (currently a redirect), although it's not actually possible from reading the article to determine who built it.

My proposal for refactoring the category scheme would be the following:
 * For stations built after the start of public operation, categorize by operator only (e.g. Category:Amtrak stations or Category:New Jersey Transit stations). Do not add a category for a current private railroad if it happens to own the building (thus Category:BNSF Railway stations would be depopulated)
 * For stations built before the start of public operation, but which remain in use, categorize both by current operator and by the former private owner/operators of a particular station. For the latter, only the final corporate form should be used. This is common sense in most cases, but we have talk pages for where it isn't. For example, Capital Beltway station should be in Category:Former Penn Central stations, being one of the few that company opened, but Pennsylvania Station (New York City) should probably be in Category:Former Pennsylvania Railroad stations and Category:Former New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad stations.
 * For stations closed before the start of public operation, categorize by the former private owner/operator of the particular station at the time the station closed. Example: Kingston Point Railroad Station would be in Category:Former Ulster and Delaware Railroad stations, not Category:Former New York Central Railroad stations, as the station closed prior to NYC ownership.

I don't think we need a CfD for this, and CfD is backlogged anyway. Bulk renames would be inappropriate given the need for diffusion. If there's still consensus we can implement this changes as needed. What do folks think? Best, Mackensen (talk) 14:03, 9 February 2016 (UTC) Any other comments? If not, I think this can proceed. Makes sense. And since this is not a direct category rename, a new "former" category structure will need to be created...which can be done at any time. --Scott Alter (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Support, with a question. What about stations closed after the start of public operation (whether built before or after public operation)? For example, Arlington (NJT station) was built by Erie (NYGL) in 1899, then operated by EL, Conrail, and finally NJT. It closed in 2002. It should definitely be in Category:Former Erie Railroad stations. But what about the NJT categorization? Would it be better off in Category:Former New Jersey Transit stations, rather than Category:New Jersey Transit stations? Does "Former" refer to the station or the operator (or intentionally ambiguous)? --Scott Alter (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Each station in the UK has (or should have) a category to indicate which railway first opened it; but since many of these railways were short-lived or had few stations, the category for a successor railway might be used instead - for example, stations opened by the Manchester and Bolton Railway are placed in . Each UK station that is still open has (or should have) at least one further category, for the train operating companies that presently serve that station - for example . Railways in between (London, Midland and Scottish; British Railways; Regional Railways; First North Western) are ignored, their inclusion would be category bloat. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:34, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Regarding examples like Arlington, that's how we've handled Amtrak stations (cf Category:Former Amtrak stations). Mackensen (talk) 13:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Then it would be reasonable and make sense to put Arlington (NJT station) in Category:Former New Jersey Transit stations. --Scott Alter (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's another question that probably has an obvious answer: What about former stations of former modern systems that no longer exist. For example, 9th Street station (Charlotte) of Charlotte Trolley. Presently, there is Category:Charlotte Trolley stations, but the Charlotte Trolley no longer exists. This category contains all of the stations on the former line/system. Some stations are still used by Lynx Blue Line (the successor of the Trolley), and others are not. Is the answer to move everything in Category:Charlotte Trolley stations to Category:Former Charlotte Trolley stations, and delete Category:Charlotte Trolley stations? So there would be a "former" category, but no "non-former" category? Essentially, this could be handled just like former systems that have folded decades ago (Erie, PRR, etc). It just seems strange to have a category named Category:Former Charlotte Trolley stations, when a category named Category:Charlotte Trolley stations would do the same job and imply that everything is former since the system no longer exists. --Scott Alter (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Convention suggests the former category only; see for example Category:Former Great Western Railway stations. This is both normative and accurate; there are no current Charlotte Trolley stations. Mackensen (talk) 16:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what I hoped would be implied by my comment "Each station in the UK has ... a category to indicate which railway first opened it ... Each UK station that is still open has .. at least one further category, for the train operating companies that presently serve that station". So, both Dixon Fold railway station and Kearsley railway station are in, but only Kearsley is in : Dixon Fold is closed so it doesn't belong in a "Railway stations served by ..." cat. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I really don't oppose improving the categories, but one of the main reason I originally created the Ulster and Delaware Railroad cat was to diffuse it from the rest of the New York Central stations in that category, even if they operated after NYC acquired them. -User:DanTD (talk) 06:50, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Return of a POV pusher
A few years ago we had a POV pusher who repeatedly added their own opinions on what the railways of various countries should do. Well,, and are IP-hopping frequently. -- Red rose64 (talk) 00:30, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Currently at . -- Red rose64 (talk) 00:59, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ugh, this ass? Range block time? oknazevad (talk) 03:35, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Frederick Pennsylvania Line Railroad Museum
Hello all,

I am from the Frederick Pennsylvania Line Railroad Museum. I am not new to Wikipedia (see User:Zellfaze my main account), but I am new to working on articles about railroads. Are there any essential essays or guidelines that I should read, and how active is this Wikiproject? I'm hoping to get the article for the Frederick Pennsylvania Line Railroad Company up to FA status in the coming weeks/months. Any general advice on train related articles would be appreciated. Fpl-dmatzrott (talk) 16:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


 * This WP is fairly active. Re the article you mention, referencing errors need addressing; it could probably do with a copy-edit and putting through the GA process. Then a peer review before going for FA status. The process can be a bit of a struggle, as I found when getting the Hastings Line article up to FA status -Good Luck! Mjroots (talk) 20:18, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Southwest Chief
A discussion re the inclusion or otherwise of accidents to this train is being held at Talk:Southwest Chief. Mjroots (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Looking for advice regarding Thai railway stations
Hi. The articles about Thailand's railway stations are long overdue for clean-up, as they were mostly created by well meaning editors, but also those ill-informed of Wikipedia policies and the MoS. I thought I'd make sure that I don't inadvertently remove established Trains Project content before making the changes.

Please take a look at Siam BTS Station. I see the following that should be removed:
 * The coloured highlight of line names.
 * The Station layout table. Ideally it should be replaced by an actual map, but as it appears, it's useless for the reader.
 * I'm less certain about the Neighbouring stations succession box nested inside the infobox. At the very least, the colours need to go. But is the use of succession boxes still standard practice at WP Trains?
 * Does WP Trains support the use of colours in navbox headers?

Now please look at Ban Phachi Junction.
 * Are such Train services listings allowed? They seem like a violation of WP:NOTDIR.
 * Same question with the succession boxes.

Could Trains Project members confirm or correct my proposed changes? Thanks. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Also: are the use of route diagram templates still recommended? I've created quite a few, but the level of detail creeping into them is becoming quite unmanageable. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:18, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The coloured highlight of line names is not a good idea, it goes against WP:COLOUR.
 * The station layout should simply go. We've removed them from most UK stations, since Wikipedia is not a travel guide, although a prose description of what the different platforms are used for is acceptable.
 * In the succession box nested inside the infobox, the two vertical coloured stripes are normal - these meet WP:COLOUR since there are no contrast issues, they contain no links, and the information conveyed by the colours is also conveyed by the central column. However, the coloured text in the central column does fail WP:COLOUR (links should clearly be identifiable as a link to our readers).
 * The colours in the navbox headers may also fail WP:COLOUR, but alternative methods exist, both based on the idea of a coloured border. These borders may be left and right, see for example the first three of the four navboxes at Oxford Circus tube station; or top and bottom, see for example the three navboxes at Adrian Newman (bishop).
 * I generally consider train services listings to go against WP:NOTDIR, also WP:NOTTIMETABLE.
 * RDTs are definitely becoming too complicated. There's a tendency to include non-railway features, such as nearby roads. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Valley Metro (Arizona)
I've started a discussion regarding this article's title, so feel free to chime in if you are interested Kevin Rutherford (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Request for assistance
I have been banging my head against a metaphorical wall for a few weeks over this, as I have no idea what is missing. Does anyone know why the blue won't show up on this article? This is not the only place it is occurring, and I am very stumped as to why it is not working, as I know another editor also had trouble figuring it out as well. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 08:48, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Where is this blue supposed to be showing? Which edit did you add it in? -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:49, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It is supposed to be showing on the Tempe Streetcar boxes. In theory, the colors are set up in the S-line template to automatically do that, so I was wondering if anyone could dig deeper to see if something is off. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:20, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, there's no colour parameter set, at least that's what I think the problem is. Mjroots (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Where would that be done, as I am copying this from relevant MBTA articles so I have no idea where the issue is occurring. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:15, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * should do it. The input value was being lowercased, so the values that it was being tested against must all be lowercase too. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help, as it is greatly appreciated! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Naming conventions (Australasian stations)
Please see Naming conventions (Australasian stations). Based on existing station naming. Useddenim (talk) 04:01, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Trivia and popular culture sections, March 2016
Further to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains/Archive: 2016, see Talk:Nene Valley Railway. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Route Diagram Templates
is apparently embarking on a crusade to delete RDTs that are only used on single pages: WP:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 March 20. Useddenim (talk) 23:06, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Discussion consolidated at Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template

Flying Scotsman (train) main illustration - what exact engine is pictured in upper left-hand corner?
File:The Flying Scotsman (train) centenary poster.jpg A recent edit changed the engine designation caption from


 * British Railways Poster celebrating the centenary of the Flying Scotsman. The locomotives shown are a GNR Stirling Single and a Class 55 'Deltic'
 * to
 * British Railways Poster celebrating the centenary of the Flying Scotsman. The locomotives shown are a GNR Sturrock Single and a Class 55 'Deltic'.

I don't know which man designed the engine in question (am assuming the pictured engine is the  original  1862 version). I have tried to research the issue but the sources I have found just repeat the same phrase, that it's the poster for the Centenary etc., etc. with almost no information about the engines themselves or about the poster's artist "Bagley". I did find some sales listings for the booklet that mention that the green engine is a "Deltic class diesel locomotive". (This artwork was also used for the front cover of the 1962 booklet "The Flying Scotsman 1862 1962 Portrait of a Train" by Ellis C Hamilton.) Hope someone in the project can help. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 00:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Per WP:MULTI, please discuss in one place, Talk:Flying Scotsman (train) -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Redrose64. Just figuring the more eyes on this the better.  Next time I post asking a WikiProject for help like this, I'll make sure to link back to the article in question.  Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 18:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The image is uploaded under fair use, it cannot be used as an image on pages like this. I have changed it to a link. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Trouble finding references? The Wikipedia Library is proud to announce ...
 The Wikipedia Library

There are up to 30 one-year ASP accounts available to experienced Wikipedians through this partnership. To apply for free access, please go to WP:ASP.

Alexander Street Press (ASP) is an electronic academic database publisher. Its "Academic Video Online: Premium collection" includes videos in a range of subject areas, including news programs (like 60 minutes) and newsreels, music and theatre, speeches and lectures and demonstrations, and documentaries. This collection would be useful for researching topics related to science, engineering, history, music and dance, anthropology, business, counseling and therapy, news, nursing, drama, and more. For more topics see their website. Cheers! 21:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Derailment at Chester, Pennsylvania
Breaking News: An Amtrack passenger train has collided with a backhoe at Chester, Pennsylvania and has derailed. There are reports of dead and injured. 2016 Chester derailment anyone? Sources - BBC, CNN, NBC. Mjroots (talk) 14:18, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's definitely notable and I've started the article at 2016 Chester, Pennsylvania train derailment.  Sounder Bruce  15:15, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge discussion for both Southern Railway (U.S.) and Pennsylvania Lines, LLC into Norfolk Southern Railway
There is discussion on the Norfolk Southern talk page where one editor has proposed merging both Southern Railway (U.S.) and Pennsylvania Lines, LLC into Norfolk Southern Railway. Please join the discussion. Slambo (Speak) 14:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well it looks like there's not enough interest on this topic:/. Granthew (talk) 21:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It says on the annual reports for NS Corp from 2002 to 2010 that the railroad was renamed from Southern Railway to Norfolk Southern Railway.
 * 2010 Annual Report Sheet on Page 9: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2010.pdf
 * 2009 Annual Report Sheet on Page 11: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2009.pdf
 * 2008 Annual Report Sheet on Page 15: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2008.pdf
 * 2007 Annual Report Sheet on Page 31: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2007.pdf
 * 2006 Annual Report Sheet on Page 30: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2006.pdf
 * 2005 Annual Report Sheet on Page 35: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2005.pdf
 * 2004 Annual Report Sheet on Page 30: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2004.pdf
 * 2003 Annual Report Sheet on Page 23: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2003.pdf
 * 2002 Annual Report Sheet on Page 29: http://www.nscorp.com/content/dam/nscorp/get-to-know-ns/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2002.pdf
 * Link to Norfolk Southern Annual Report page on NSCorp.com: http://www.nscorp.com/content/nscorp/en/investor-relations/financial-reports/annual-reports.html
 * Granthew (talk) 00:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

FP on Commons
While looking at the Commons Picture of the Year candidates, I noticed that File:Chicago and Northwestern railroad locomotive shop fsac.1a34676u.jpg is a featured picture on commons. I was thinking that this picture might be useful in some articles within this project. If anyone finds a use for it let me know. I am considering nominating it at WP:FPC because it is WP:CHICAGO-related, but it is only eligible if it is useful in WP articles.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

UK timetable references
Hi, there is a large number of references to UK timetables of the form "GB eNRT 2015-16 Edition, Table 39 (Network Rail)" This is not really very informative as to exactly what it is or how to get hold of it. Is it a book of tables, an online resource or what? Would be good to replace this with some proper citation that users can locate on the internet or via some ISBN or other code. Keith D (talk) 17:11, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Online at http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/3828.aspx --David Biddulph (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * At that link, under the heading "Complete timetable - valid until 14 May 2016", there is a link "Complete timetable - separate PDFs". Click that to start the download, you get a zip file which is something like 56 MB. Assuming that you have a suitable unzip utility, you can extract one or more of almost 300 files from that: the relevant one is named "Table 039.pdf". A few years ago it was possible to make a direct link to that PDF - for example, in May 2012 you could use http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/eNRT/May12/timetables/Table%20039.pdf but that facility was withdrawn. -- Red rose64 (talk) 23:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. We need to have the URL and accessdate in the cite so that readers can find it. Keith D (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

The Lehigh Line name (for the final time)
For the final time, I request that the pages that share the two Lehigh Line names be renamed: If this does not get answered, I will change the title of the pages that best fits the history of the Norfolk Southern Lehigh Line and the Conrail Shared Assets Operations Lehigh Line. Granthew (talk) 22:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Lehigh Line (Conrail) → CSAO Lehigh Line
 * Lehigh Line (Norfolk Southern) → Lehigh Line
 * Lehigh Line → Lehigh Line (disambiguation)
 * Lehigh Line Connection → Hunter Connection (I think the Lehigh Line Connection is called the Hunter Connection)
 * It doesn't work like that. You don't show up and demand that others comment and/or state of no one doesn't you'll do something. If no one commented that is a sign that possibily no one agrees with you. Check your tone, and your attitude.
 * As for the proposed moves, I oppose all of them. Both Lehigh lines are of equal importance and likelihood for searches, so neither is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and therefore both need disambiguators, and the disambiguation page should stay without a disambiguator. The disambiguator for the Conrail line should not be "CSAO", as that is too obscure of an acronym to be useful as disambiguation. And the connector is the Lehigh Line Connector; "Hunter Connection" is an old nickname taken from the interlocking at the NEC end of the connection, but the connection was rebuilt and formally named some ten years ago, so the current name is factually correct. oknazevad (talk) 22:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If a page move might be controversial (which this one apparently is), the way to go about it is WP:RM. -- Red rose64 (talk) 23:28, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not gonna do anything, I'll let this go. Granthew (talk) 02:56, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Tiruvalla railway station
I have been removing some contents based on WP:NTT and WP:FUTURE, but the User:Kiron Krishnan keeps adding/retaining frivolous information. His edits are not constructive and not adhering to the standards of EN WP as evident from his edit summaries. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 09:23, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Today's featured article/May 18, 2016
FAC has been averaging fewer than 7 promotions per week for a while now, so the Today's Featured Article selections have to go further and further back. Brian has scheduled this one for May 18 ... but I see that the lead ends with "as of 2011 is operational", so this one hasn't been updated in a while. Could someone have a look please? - Dank (push to talk) 01:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I've copied this to WT:UKRAIL. -mattbuck (Talk) 06:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * My thinking was that these were historic locomotives and that there would be little recent history to update. Let me know if this is a problem. We do need an article of this type at TFA, though. Brianboulton (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure ... not complaining, eventually we may have to run a lot of older FAs. But I can't use "as of 2011"; all I can do is either mention the fact without a date, or not mention it. - Dank (push to talk) 13:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Updated to 2014 (also the current situation). Mjroots (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks MJ! - Dank (push to talk) 21:20, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

New FL nomination - List of Miami-Dade Transit metro stations
I recently nominated List of Miami-Dade Transit metro stations for the second time, after it was nominated and then archived last year with no consensus. Please help this WikiProject grow by adding your input to the FLC link here: Featured list candidates/List of Miami-Dade Transit metro stations/archive2. – Dream out loud (talk) 08:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

LTSR change of voltage
As a child I lived in Tern Gardens, Cranham. As such my bedroom was 60 feet from the railway. I was sad that the steam trains were going but excited at the night-time activity of the wiring trains preparing for the new electric trains.

When the electric service started we had problems with television and radio reception. as a train left Upminster interference would grow to destroy reception for the passage of the train. We complained and were visited by two gentlemen from the Post Office. They brought in a wonderful cabinet that opened in our living room to display dials and lights. They put on headphones, the first time that I had seen such things. They stayed for an hour monitoring the problem then left. My mother asked if they were doing this in every house in our square. They replied that although they had, had many complaints only two residents had come forward, ourselves and a man who had interference in his hearing aid. They said that the problem seemed to come from the switch over mechanism at Front Lane Bridge, Cranham, where voltage changed from low to high. Shortly afterwards a television detector van toured the area and nabbed all the people who had complained, but had not paid their TV licences!!!

The point of this tale is that the LTSR articles states that the change over from 6.25v to 25k volts was at Barking, perhaps not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.23.29.38 (talk) 09:37, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * There were several voltage changeover points on the former LT&SR system. But the matter of voltage changeover positions really belongs at the talk page of the relevant article; please respect WP:NOTFORUM. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Need help with new page
I started a new page, please see Draft_talk:Constitution-Talca_Ramal

The last remaining narrow gauge ramal train in Chile. Inserted in the depths of Chile, the Ramal Talca-Constitución 88 km journey borders the north bank of the Maule River for about three hours, covering the communes of Talca, Maule, Pencahue and Constitución.

It has been over one hundred years and the landscape around the Ramal Talca - Constitución hasn´t undergone much change over time. This idyllic train is perfect to reminisce past times and rural traditions, it represents a living heritage of an area and is of unique historical and cultural value.

I need help to read throught the sources and get an article together.

If anyone has time to read through the following and help contribute to the draft I would really appreciate it.

Station Map
does anyone know how to make the station map? I made a start Draft:Constitution-Talca_Ramal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.44.139.201 (talk) 00:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed your two lists of references, as they were identical to those given at Draft talk:Constitution-Talca Ramal. Discussion should also take place there. -- Red rose64 (talk) 06:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok thank you. I submitted a draft. Any help perfecting the article would be appreciated. It is my first full article, so I expect errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.44.139.201 (talk) 05:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Category:Blue Ribbon Award (railway) winners has been nominated for discussion
Category:Blue Ribbon Award (railway) winners, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. 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. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

3801
There is a discussion at Talk:3801 on the merits of whether Australian locomotive 3801 should be included on the Hunter Region places and items of interest navbox. Two editors have articulated the cases for and against. Anybody care to offer an opinion? Rad1x11 (talk) 12:13, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not what the discussion is about. 3801 is included in the historical section of the navbox because of the locomotive's historical association with the Hunter Region (3801's infobox image even shows the locomotive pulling the Newcastle Flyer, which was the main passenger transport between and Sydney for 59 years). The problem here is that Rad1x11 is refusing to allow the inclusion of the navbox in the article. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 13:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree with AL. The discussion at Talk:3801 is properly about whether Hunter Region places and items of interest should be placed on 3801. Were there to be a discussion as to whether 3801 should appear in Hunter Region places and items of interest, that would properly be at Template talk:Hunter Region places and items of interest. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a bit of a hand in glove scenario, i.e. if it should appear in the navbox then the navbox should appear on the article, if not in the navbox, then the navbox shouldn't appear on the article. As suggested the discussion has been moved to the navbox with a link at 3801. Rad1x11 (talk) 03:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Categorization of redirects under alternate names
I've opened a discussion here about categorizing redirects under alternate names. This affects a number of train station articles in the US, where the NRHP names are often different from the (more descriptive) names used under WP:USSTATION and previous naming schemes. Please feel free to weigh in. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Naming of rapid transit lines
Yesterday, decided to move all 16 Paris Métro line articles from "Paris Métro Line [1]" to "Line [1], Paris Métro". I've reverted this blanket renaming, because he never asked for consensus on it, other than posting an odd notice on his talk page saying

I understand where he's coming from – all articles for rapid transit lines in China use "Line [1], [Shanghai Metro]". I was wondering if there's an actual policy on whether to use "Line [1], [Shanghai Metro]", "[Shanghai Metro] Line [1]", or "Line [1] ([Shanghai Metro])"? (Personally, if there isn't an existing rule I'd prefer the latter of the three because that's how most other Wikipedia articles are disambiguated.) Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 13:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * My opinion: WP:DONTFIXIT. That and, while he may be editing in good faith, AgentSuperGuy lacks the requisite level of English ability to edit the English Wikipedia. oknazevad (talk) 13:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

von Meck (Imperial Russia)
Hello everybody!

I would be happy to join your community and bring what I know about several persons under the name of von Meck - famous builders of rail roads in Tsar's Russia from very beginnig to the Communist revolution. I am studying their history and have plenty of photos and information.

Please contact me at sebentsov@gmail.com or facebook.com/denseb

Regards Denis Sebentsov — Preceding unsigned comment added by Денис Себенцов (talk • contribs) 19:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Category merge into "2 ft and 600 mm gauges"+
Per article 2 ft and 600 mm gauge railways. See WP:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_20. -DePiep (talk) 22:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Routemap vs BS-map
The debate has reopened again, this time at WT:UKT. Useddenim (talk) 10:33, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Bombardier Movia & CNR Changchun C951
Could I have more editors on this page to have a look and discuss at Talk:Bombardier Movia & CNR Changchun C951 regarding a naming issue. - Mailer Diablo 16:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Help with Dolomites Railway
I've put a query on the talk page of this article and would greatly appreciate it if any project member could take a look. Thanks.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 12:25, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

DIRFT on Northampton Loop Line
Looking at the diagram on this line I don't think that the DIRFT is depicted correctly. I am told that there is access from the north but cannot find it. Can anyone else? Britmax (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Here? 52.34843°N, -1.17198°W, with a crossover at 52.34925°N, -1.17456°W enabling both NLL lines to access DIRFT. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The link into DIRFT from the north is photographed HERE, looking southeast from the A5 road at the location stated by Tagishimon. There clearly is a link from the north, as many trains using it come from or go north. G-13114 (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2016 (UTC)


 * The A5 road bridge is shown in
 * and so the photo shows Daventry North Junction, 80 miles 76 chains from Euston. This connection gives access to the five reception sidings that lie between DIRFT and DIRFT II. So it would probably be better drawn as at right but even that is an oversimplification. -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. The simpplificatiion is better than the current diagram. Britmax (talk) 09:21, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. The simpplificatiion is better than the current diagram. Britmax (talk) 09:21, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Help needed in Wikidata discussion
There is a property proposal on Wikidata, d:Wikidata:Property proposal/signalling system, where there is discussion about what exactly is meant (the intention is different block systems/time interval/ERTMS levels/etc). Due in part of language difficulties and lack of mutual knowledge of British/German signalling systems, we are talking past each other I suspect. This will be helped by input from people who understand signalling systems better than I do and ideally has a better grasp of German than I do. You don't really need much knowledge of Wikidata. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Heritage trains Severn Valley Railway
Why is Arley station missing from the Severn Valley railway? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.129.162 (talk) 10:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't understand what you are asking. Severn Valley Railway mentions Arley in the station list and on the route diagram. David Biddulph (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:HK-MTR timetable
Template:HK-MTR timetable has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 14:04, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Template needs updating
The links created by PLR web are 404; can someone familiar with the Port Authority of Allegheny County light rail system, in Pittsburgh, United States, update it, please? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It appears that PAAC has discontinued individual station information pages; if they still exist I can't find them. In cases like South Hills Junction (PAT station) where it was used as a reference it can and should be archived; otherwise the template should be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 22:29, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

List of trains with/without timings in Indian station pages
A discussion has been initiated. Kindly share your views and inputs to arrive at a final solution. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 09:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Routemap RfC
If anyone cares, I've started an RFC on the conversion of route diagram templates to the Routemap format here. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 05:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Request image recognition help
Commons Internet Archive book images contains many unidentified railway images. Any help categorizing them would be appreciated. Some examples: MKFI (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * commons:Category:Electric Railway Journal
 * commons:Category:Air brakes, an up-to-date treatise on the Westinghouse air brake as designed for passenger and freight service and for electric cars (1918)


 * Some more:


 * commons:Category:Railway Club of Pittsburgh, Official proceedings
 * commons:Category:Science of railways (1916)
 * commons:Category:The Street Railway Journal
 * commons:Category:Railway mechanical engineer (1916)
 * commons:Category:The Street Railway Review
 * MKFI (talk) 06:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York). epicgenius (talk) 00:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Undiscussed page moves, railway stations
FYI, User talk:Amakuru. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:04, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Routemap font size issue
After playing with Template:Alnwick branch line ... why is the font for the A1068 road seemingly larger than that for the A1? --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Remove them both - that way the font size is immaterial. After all, it is a rail diagram template, not a road diagram. See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways/Archive 35. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
 * It’s a function of the A-road image that UK road applies. Useddenim (talk) 23:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Translation of Erzberg Railway (Austria) article from German
Hi everyone! I'm very new here as an editor. As a long-time reader (in French and German as well as English) I've found that there's loads of material in my area of interest (railways in Europe) in other languages, which doesn't exist in English. So as my first project I decided to translate the de:Erzbergbahn article into English. The subject ticks a lot of (my, at least) railfan boxes: Now if you don't think that makes the subject notable enough for a published article on EN, that's fine - I've already learned a lot through this exercise. But I thought you might be interested.
 * Mountain route (meaning sexy scenery, viaducts and tunnels)
 * Rack operation, now converted to adhesion
 * A recent history of commercial decline and closure (typical in this subject area)
 * A successful struggle by local people to raise money and keep the line running as a heritage railway

The article is currently a work in progress in my sandbox. Body translation is done; there are a few to-dos on my list:
 * Cleaning up some of the citations, replacing German conventions with English ones
 * Finishing reading through the references available to me (only the online ones) to check verification and get more information
 * Assignment to categories (though - I think - that should only happen if the article moves out of my user space)

I'd really appreciate comments from more experienced editors in this area, especially about how well my draft fits the conventions and standards for rail articles. I've followed these as much as I know how to, converting the German content (which follows different conventions), but I had a few difficulties:
 * I tried using Template:Routemap but just couldn't get it to work, so fell back on the older Template:BS-map
 * Template:BS promises in its documentation to put mileage and altitude info into small font, but I can't get this to work (it works on DE-wiki): so the result looks ugly compared with the German original
 * How about adding a "maximum gradient" element to Template:Infobox rail line? (This one has an impressive 7.1%...)
 * Should redlinks (no English page) be left as redlinks (e.g. connecting railways, rolling stock classes) to highlight missing information and encourage article development to fill the gaps, or delinked for tidiness?

Of course there'll be other things I haven't noticed, which is why I'd love to get feedback from you. When I should move this draft out into Wikipedia proper? Would it be easier to get feedback and contributions if I moved it once I've finished my ToDos? Thanks, and Glück auf! Ssptwriter (talk) 02:15, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I've taken a look at User:Ssptwriter/sandbox and you've made a good start. Referencing could be a little better. Aim for at least one reference per paragraph. Conversions of measurements would be useful - km to miles and chains, m to yards or feet as appropriate. Gradients from percentages to "1 in xx". Categories need to be the same as those on en-Wiki, such as Category:Heritage railways in Austria. Mjroots (talk) 19:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the very useful feedback! Working on it... I'm not sure about providing conversions within the routemap, as the mileage and altitude columns are already wider than ideal (they fail to use small font, for some reason).  Unless there's some clever template (something like Template:convert), which will only show measurements in one unit, perhaps according to readers' localisation preferences?  If not, I think I'll go with the "in Austria, therefore use ISO" guideline, though I'll convert all the dimensions in the body text. With regard to categories, am I right in thinking that I should only add those once the page moves out of my sandbox into mainspace?  Ssptwriter (talk) 14:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about the conversions for now. As for categories, add them to the article but add a colon before the "c" (per above example). That will prevent them appearing live, the colons can be removed when the article is moved into mainspace. Mjroots (talk) 16:12, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I've had a quick look at the article, and it looks good so far. I will do some more detailed checking, and probably also some editing, of it in the near future. Bahnfrend (talk) 01:42, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Very appropriate username! Please do.  As detailed on the ToDo list, I still have more research to do by reading more of the references, so it's very much WIP.  But I'd appreciate any input you may have.  If I've made some newbie mistakes, feel free to point them out on the Talk page.  Ssptwriter (talk) 09:55, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Camden Town tube station
FYI, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London Transport. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:44, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

San Diego Model Railroad Museum
I'd like to meet fellow Wikipedians while I host a meetup, free to San Diego County residents. If you're interested please see this link to [https://www.meetup.com/SoCalBronies/events/234902477/? the event] on meetup.com.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Edits by Teabagishere
I am getting frustrated with who seems to care little for core policies like WP:V, and has descended to. -- Red rose64 (talk) 01:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

i said you don't live in byfield and you don't, hardly a personal attack but merely a fact — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teabagishere (talk • contribs) 07:03, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * - I hate to say this, but it does appear that you may be hounding this newby. Or is there some other reason why Byfield, Northamptonshire is on your watchlist? (And what's this got to do with trains anyway?) Optimist on the run (talk) 07:36, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * You're missing tricks like Abersea County, some made up shit which Teabag in his wisdom decided to launch into mainspace. Complete bollocks. RR64 may or may not be from Didcot, but that does not disqualify him from editing any article, least of all the mess which teabag (perhaps in his newbieness, perhaps for other reasons) left. So, yay newbies, but equally, please, teabag, get a clue and stop acting like a daft punk. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Examples:
 * GER Class S69. This is not how we do references. And sentences tend to start with an upper case letter.
 * LNWR Webb Coal Tank headings normally have capitals, and, again, we do not do references as you have done them.
 * Pretty much EVERY edit from teabag has this sort of stupidity associated with it, yet he/she is happy to edit war and make pissy comments to RR64. We all only have so much patience and teabag has exhausted it for RR and for me. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

A TfD
I got word on my talk page today that the 1922 Locomotive Cyclopedia template is under TfD now. This is a fairly simple template that should be used like the Bioguide template. There is a copy on Google Books and we have several image scans on Commons. It seems to me that the biggest reason this hasn't been more widely used is that editors just don't know about it as much.

Please join the discussion. Slambo (Speak) 15:55, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Numerical locomotive classes no longer display correctly in categories
A recent algorithm change to the way categories display has inadvertently screwed up the categorization of many articles on Wikipedia including the locomotive categories of locomotives with numerical classes, so instead of displaying Class 01, 02 and 03 locos under "0", Class 11, 12, etc locos "1" and so on, it now lumps them all under "0-9", e.g. see Category:Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft locomotives, Category:Imperial Royal Austrian State Railways steam locomotives, Category:Caledonian Railway locomotives and Category:Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway locomotives. There is a discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Categorization which you are invited to participate in. --Bermicourt (talk) 14:18, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * They do show correctly: ordered by number value (now 10 sorts after 2 = OK). The back side is that all numbers are lumped under one header "0–9", instead of the then "0 ...9" headers. However, the old grouping was not numerical. -DePiep (talk) 02:06, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Please can we keep discussion in one place, per WP:MULTI - as noted by Bermicourt, this is Wikipedia talk:Categorization. -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think this was a helping reply. Explaining, not invoking a discussion, esp re has inadvertently screwed up the categorization. I don't think putting my reply in the discussion thread would add anything to that discussion. But I might be mistaken. -DePiep (talk) 11:44, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

panoramio closing, files on Commons
Panoramio is shutting down, but 400,000+ properly licensed photos have been uploaded to Commons. They need to be categorized and placed in the proper articles of course. If you want to do this, you should go to Commons:Category:Panoramio files uploaded by Panoramio upload bot and use the "search in category" box they've so conveniently provided.

I'm not really a railroader myself, but work on NRHP sites (and historic locomotives sometimes), and places in Pennsylvania right now. The above photo has a locomotive sticking it's nose out that looks kind of funny. Zooming in the front says "Old Express" and "LTD 110" in much smaller lettering. I'm guessing it's patched together from odd pieces, or maybe just worked inside a steel mill or similar. Just curious about what it is. Please ping me if you have a better guess. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 20:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Dynamic Depot Maps claims it's a former Pennsylvania Railroad station (http://depotmaps.com/Images/DepotPA/SharonPA.jpg). There's also an Erie Railroad station nearby with no image (http://depotmaps.com/DepotMap[PA].htm). -User:DanTD (talk) 21:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, it certainly does look like a RR station from the photo link you gave, and similar enough in style to a lot of PRR stations. The engine is my real interest (and your link shows another view).  It just looks odd to me.  It doesn't have the usual red PRR plate on the front. The whole front and the smokestack look different. The yellow bands around the boiler(?) look phony. I'm no expert of course, but it just looks strange to me.  Smallbones( smalltalk ) 01:34, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK this site gives the following info, which tells me that it is a bit strange, but not overwhelimingly so.
 * 110		0-4-0F	4'-8½"	S OH ElPowCo	"3bytheRiver" Restaurants, Sharon, PA	display	Heisler #54, 1940
 * Smallbones( smalltalk ) 01:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a fireless locomotive. -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Smallbones( smalltalk ) 17:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Track gauge 4 ft 7.5 in
Can anyone confirm the source of  which appears in Standard gauge and in Template talk:Track gauge Peter Horn User talk 20:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 20:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. sourced. -DePiep (talk) 19:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Painting on a hoarding at Evesham railway station
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evesham_railway_station — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.43.227 (talk) 17:29, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

IP adding values
Would someone please look at Special:Contributions/2001:268:C061:43BB:A422:6672:3371:F4C1. The editing looks confident although there is a convert error in GCR Class 9P (lbsq should be psi). It would be good if someone could check that the values are not made up. Johnuniq (talk) 08:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, ✅, see [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=Redrose64&namespace=0&offset=20161027152800&limit=24 these edits]; note that some users, such as and  had already removed or amended some of the additions by 2001:268: and I have not reinstated such removals. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * They're an IP hopper, see [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LNER_Class_B17&action=history&offset=20161027161600&limit=3 this]. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Same guy's back, see Special:Contributions/106.161.151.240. A giveaway is the use of the invalid parameter on -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:22, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Old merge proposal
Hey folks! While looking through old merge proposals, I stumbled upon a proposal from October 2013 to merge Trackage rights into Arrangements between railroads. No one has commented on the proposal for the last 3 years so I assume it's a fairly uncontroversial move. Railroads are one of the very many topics I happen to know nothing about, so any chance someone here could take a look and complete the merger if appropriate? Thanks a bunch! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 21:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Maps Task force.
I posted the comment below to the Maps task force talk page Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains/Maps_task_force two days ago. I got one response - which concurred with the difficulty of of constructing route diagrams - and which may of helped prove my point. So I raise here the question - How do we simplify the process so that people who have the knowledge actually want to do the job?. The entire rail network of Britain was diagrammed before it got so complicated. Little progress is being made now on the US system (and other big systems as far as I can tell.)

"As far as I can tell (from the postings to this page) little work is being done on this railmaps project. If I am wrong please accept my apologies - I must be looking in the wrong place. If I am right and little new work is being done can I suggest a reason. The process of constructing a route diagram, as I would like to do for railways in Wisconsin and the Midwest has become incredibly burdensome. It used to be that you could just copy, edit and paste but that now seems impossible. The system no doubt is more pleasing to those whose interest is programming graphics but has likely put off the rail hobbyist who has the data but little interest in the minutiae of how it displayed. Thoughts anyone"Wickifrank (talk) 22:00, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Link, please? to keep the WP:TPTHREAD together. Useddenim (talk) 23:05, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Done Wickifrank (talk) 03:48, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Edge-case notable train simulator video game
Please take a look or comment at WT:VG; in particular, I'm looking to see if train simulators are often-covered in train-related magazines as a general question; as a specific question, the video game is an edge case for notability in video game-related media alone and I'm wondering if there is anything covered in train-related media to which someone working on this project may have access. --Izno (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Track Gauge maintenance categories proposed for deletion
Track gauge populates categories for maintenance under, such as (Russian gauge). The category tree is now discussed for possible deletion. See the category's entry at CfD. -DePiep (talk) 20:09, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
File:Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg Greetings Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, — Delivered: 18:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Riley and Son deletion discussion
I would appreciate the input of anyone here into Articles_for_deletion/Riley and Son. I sort of got involved by accident, have a general sense that this is a notable-enough company, but it's not really my area. Thanks Mcewan (talk) 00:04, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Old Depot Museum
Hello all, I am not a part of this WikiProject, but I did just create the article Old Depot Museum which may be of interest to the group. I would love any help with the article, or an article rating. Thank you! Kmwebber (talk) 17:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Kmwebber
 * - looks a solid B class to me, assessed as such. Mjroots (talk) 19:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Diagram "articles" in mainspace
I've started a discussion here regarding moving articles such as East Coast Main Line diagram to the template namespace; input is welcome. Jc86035 (talk) Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 10:44, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Indiarailinfo.com at RSN
A discussion has been initiated. Editors may input their valuable suggestions. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 12:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Locomore
I started an article on a new German passenger railway company called Locomore. --Ysangkok (talk) 09:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Socks and narrow gauge categories
FYI: Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_15 Andy Dingley (talk) 23:38, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Redlinks found
I was updating Amtrak stations and found these unresolvable links:
 * Columbia station (West Virginia)
 * Green River, Wyoming (Amtrak station)
 * Union Pacific Railroad Depot (Milford, Utah)
 * Union Pacific Railroad Depot (Pocatello, Idaho)
 * Union Pacific Railroad Depot (Rawlins, Wyoming)
 * Useddenim (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Green River, Milford, and Pocatello were discontinued in 1997 when the Pioneer and Desert Wind were cut; they'll eventually get articles as we gradually fill in the former Amtrak stations. I've linked their current commons categories. They're probably fine to leave as redlinks; I might stub them soon anyway. However, as none of them are NRHP listed as far as I can tell, they probably belong as Green River station (Wyoming) (with Green River station becoming a disambig page), Milford station (Utah), and Pocatello station.


 * As far as I can find, Amtrak never had any station named remotely like Columbia, West Virginia. You added the Columbia link in this edit a year ago; do you have any insight into what station you were thinking of? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It may just be an error on my part, confusion with the Charleston stations in SC and WV and the fact that there are Columbias in both places. My apologies.--Cúchullain t/ c 18:28, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for the clarification! I've gone ahead and removed it from the template. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * This is part of the reason I've been against Cúchullain's standards all this time. In the meantime, you should check for other railroads that have gone through these places, and whether or not they had stations there. And regardless, if they were named for the Union Pacific Railroad, or any others, they should get that name. -User:DanTD (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Track gauge maintenance degrading
Per this CfD the maintenance categories will be deleted. I have protested at the closer's page. This deletion is based on uninvolved outsiders prescribing others how to do maintenance, on crippled understandings. Tools thus being taken away, I see no invitation to keep supporting Track gauge. -DePiep (talk) 06:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Section definition article
As I was preparing the text for the next Portal:Trains selected picture, I noticed we didn't have an article describing the use of the term "Section" as it pertains to railway operations. I just started it with the title: Section (rail transport). I know much more about North American operations and use of the term, and would very much appreciate input for use of the term in other regions. Thanks! Slambo (Speak) 19:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

AfD
The GEC Alstom Push-pull article has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots (talk)