Talk:Fuxing (train)

Trains Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was submitted as part of the 2016 Wikipedia Asian Month.

Move to Fuxing Hao[edit]

China Standardized EMU is the former project name, which is no longer in use. Therefore I moved the article to Fuxing Hao, which is the name of this train serie used commercially. --WWbread （Open Your Mouth?） 20:11, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Accidents and incidents" section is argumentative[edit]

I don't think this section conforms with Wikipedia's guidelines. The tone is argumentative and judgmental. I can't check the reference confidently as it's in Chinese and I can't find any English language source. Tjej (talk) 05:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tjej The references appears to be just trivial social media posts directly from the train company. Like when it's reporting a delay due to an engine breakdown. It's not newsworthy enough to be on any major news outlets. It even states, "An engine malfunctioned and train was late by 49 minutes." Omg! Such an occurrence happens every month in Amtrak but obviously we don't add that in because it's hardly significant or unusual enough to be included. I do agree that the tone is over kill. Case in point, if you were to list incidents of derailments on American trains, you would be making thousands of paragraphs on the number of incidents. Those fuxing trains don't even derail and their offenses are far milder. It is not neutral nor balanced to put so much content on stuff like a single malfunction. Look at Brightline trains. They literally got at minimum a person killed every month yet editors don't even add every single incident. It seems overly petty to put so much detail for trivial engine breakdowns for fuxing and not have the same treatment given to Amtrak that does these things every week constantly.[1] KelseaMcKenzie (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The table math is inconsistent[edit]

And it should be explained if calculated is supposed to be a simple sum that double-counts car end overlaps or not. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add CR300AF and CR300BF Fuxing train image?[edit]

Can add CR300AF and CR300BF Fuxing trains image, please? 46.77.231.208 (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CR450 Fuxing?[edit]

Noticed there's no information about CR450 so I put in some info. But why was there previously no details of the latest model of CR400 Fuxing train series?[2] Was there a reason I am unaware of? If no reason, I prefer not to add all the info in by myself and hope others can help. [3][4]AlanGrieve (talk) 05:02, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

891 km/h is wrong[edit]

CR450 does not drive so fast. 891 km/h is the speed of China's new maglev train. 212.144.231.18 (talk) 10:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's accurate so leave it as it is, as it's supported by the added source. You simply misunderstood the term. Velocity speeds, in this topic, is a valid term that refers to the combined speed at which two trains move apart from or towards each other when passing. For example, if both trains individually travel at 400 km/h and pass each other successfully from opposite directions, their combined velocity speed would equate to 800 km/h. It is not a measure of how fast a train travels by itself, which is what you're obviously mistaking it as.103.210.125.53 (talk) 22:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Triviality of Incidents and equipment issues[edit]

The Incidents and equipment issues chapter seems trivial. It even notes cases like how one day, the train engine broke down. In USA, it's not infrequent that a trains is delayed because an engine broke down and they need a sub. It's excessive and doesn't seem to be warranted to be mentioned in Wikipedia. If you were to go the social media accounts of Amtrak in America. They also have social media page that report frequently on an engine breakdown and a few hours delay. That's like expected every week and easily rack up hundred of cases in just a month alone. Example is an Amtrak train got delayed for 13 hours because the engine broke down one day and toilets weren't working because of the engine breakdown.[5] Yet we obviously don't add it to Wikipedia as it's too trivial. So I don't understand why it's important enough to add the equivalent trivial cases for Fuxing if we don't do the same for other major trains like Amtrak. Can the one who is adding it in, and or those who truly believes it needs to be included, explain their reasoning in this talk thread. KelseaMcKenzie (talk) 23:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]