Talk:Mumbai Central railway station

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-01-29/mumbai/30675666_1_long-distance-trains-wr-chief-public-relations-mumbai-central. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MER-C 12:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

STATION CODE

Do not edit war with the station code. [1] (the official website of Indian Railways) and enter BCT or MMCT you get MUMBAI CENTRAL in the source or destination station box. I would recommend to talk before making such changes. Here you will find the station code to be MMCT. Similarly, even here(IRCTC website) you will find the same (i.e., BCT or MMCT will give you MUMBAI CENTRAL).Sai199610 (talk) 10:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

So as usual, you haven't learned from your mistakes at the Talk:Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus page. MMCT is pending approval by IR, Just like PBHD. My source is from 2015, which is fairly recent, since the station's name was changed in the 1990s. Making edits that suit your needs and saying "DON'T CHANGE THIS" will easily get you banned. ✘ anonymousвهii 17:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

@Anonymousboii:I said I can prove it. Click here you will come to know what is the station code. I think you do not have enough "Knowledge" and just keep edit warring and that is the reason you get warnings. If MMCT is a pending approval the press release won't say "It has been decided to be changed from 1st February 2018".Sai199610 (talk) 07:08, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

First of all, learn how to use talk pages. Use proper syntax. It is clear that you dont know how formatting works, look at how messy you’ve made the CST talk page, so please read the MOS and stuff. Secondly, I have more first party sources to back my claim than you do, but these aren’t good citations to put in the article in my opinion, because they’re not part of a table of station codes. Anyway, these are from 2018 and 2019:

https://wr.indianrailways.gov.in/view_detail.jsp?lang=0&id=0,4,268&dcd=4280&did=1549718583762C38430CEF0048D25D82EDD50321921FA

http://www.wr.indianrailways.gov.in/cris/uploads/files/1540364930147-Section%204%20of%20RTI%20act.pdf

https://wr.indianrailways.gov.in/view_section.jsp?lang=0&id=0,2,330,484,486

http://www.wr.indianrailways.gov.in/cris/uploads/files/1325505476981-BCT.pdf

http://www.wr.indianrailways.gov.in/cris/uploads/files/1430908728738-BSNL%20Office%20Directory%20of%20Officers%20of%20BCT%2024.04.2015.pdf

I think you don't understand. I have provided a press release of the year 2017 and you are providing source older than that. Also your first source itself shows MMCT used in the table given below.

• https://m.timesofindia.com/city/mumbai/mumbai-central-stn-disappears-from-rly-app-commuters-derailed/amp_articleshow/61731764.cms

Sai199610 (talk) 08:40, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Because BCT is the official Indian Railways station code, most common and prevalent, MMCT was legislated and it hasn’t passed (yet). This is similar to Elphinstone Road/Prabhadevi, whose station code was to be changed to PBHD, but still uses EPR I have provided more citations for BCT than you have for MMCT. Please learn from your mistakes instead of urinating in the wind. Also: PLEASE USE PROPER FORMATTING, MAN. IF YOU DON’T KNOW HOW TO, YOU CAN ALWAYS READ THE MOS OR ASK SOMEONE. ✘ anonymousвهii 09:37, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

You will never learn from your mistakes. You know you are wrong but you have too much attitude to not to accept your mistake. Again I am asking you if MMCT was not passed how can they release a press statement that new code will be effective from 1st February 2018. There are no press releases about PBHD. I hope you know what a press release is (or you do not know even that). I can't think anyone being so silly even after MMCT being used in one of your sources you are not ready to accept. You only know to argue with other users even after you are proved wrong (your talk page also proves the same). Again and again you are coming to the same track saying you have more sources to back. Why don't you understand that you are providing sources older than the release of the press statement (that is the reason why I have even provided a newspaper article). Your behaviour proves that you are reluctant to accept the changes. I feel I am speaking to an illiterate person explaining the same thing again and again and you are teaching me to use proper format.Sai199610 (talk) 10:01, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I've provided 7 official sources for BCT, you've provided one unrelated news article for MMCT. You refuse to learn how to use a talk page properly. You've quarreled and reverted User:Fowler&fowler, User:Fylindfotberserk User:Matthew hk, User:Wishva de Silva, User:Balablitz and me. Wikipedia is not a travel guide. And you need to agree with consensus, not cry. I won't submit a request to ban you, but I can guarantee you someone else will.✘ anonymousвهii 11:10, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Its not an unrelated news article. You haven't read it so you say unrelated. Yes you have provided 7 unrelated and outdated sources. I come to know that you don't know that a newspaper article is a secondary and the most reliable and relevant source than the official primary sources. Read this WP:RS you will come to know. I have argued providing valid and relevant proofs. Go ahead with a request to ban me. Lets see who gets banned.Sai199610 (talk) 13:15, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

You will find this statement in the article: The railways has decided to change the station code of Mumbai Central from BCT to MMCT from February 1, 2018. that I had been repeating but some don't understand at all and just keep arguing for no use. Provide a secondary source and then argue. As per the rules I have provided a primary source and a related secondary source.Sai199610 (talk) 13:24, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

For your reference since you have not read WP:RS:

• Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere.
• Secondary source material:

1. A magazine article based on previous media reports
2. A book about a historical event, based on letters and diaries written at the time
3. A systematic review or literature review that combines the results of previous researchSai199610 (talk) 13:33, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

A secondary source provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. Secondary sources are not necessarily independent sources. They rely on primary sources for their material, making analytic or evaluative claims about them. For example, a review article that analyzes research papers in a field is a secondary source for the research. Whether a source is primary or secondary depends on context. A book by a military historian about the Second World War might be a secondary source about the war, but where it includes details of the author's own war experiences, it would be a primary source about those experiences. A book review too can be an opinion, summary or scholarly review. I know you will again come back saying you have provided 7 official sources and will keep arguing and hence I repeat An official source is a primary source that is not a reliable source. At the same time a newspaper article is a secondary source which is reliable and relevant and when provided with a related primary source is the most reliable and relevant. You can't argue regarding this as this was explained to me by User:Matthew hk which is also written in WP:RS. To say even the station code table that is a primary unreliable "official source". But I won't argue since you do not have knowledge about that and hence I would like to help you but for that you need to have an open mind ready to accept what others tell. If yet you are not ready to accept it go ahead with a request to ban me. I will help you out. But don't tell me later when you get banned.Sai199610 (talk) 14:20, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Lol, I like how you conviniently cropped out sections that don't favor you. It is clearly written there that "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.".

Therefore,

• 1. The Indian Railways website is very reliable as it is the owner of this infrastructure, and is up-to-date.
• 2. The source I'm using is a station index, which is literally codes of stations, so no misinterpretation there.

Alright then, I'll add the MMCT change later in the lead, but not as a new station code, because I have yet to see a revised station code table of it. Also, @Fylindfotberserk: can you please see to it that this user doesn't go around making non-consensus based changes like they did here and on Talk:Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus? Thanks. ✘ anonymousвهii 16:22, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Anonymousboii here. Let there be a consensus. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

@Anonymousboii:Haha, I like your attitude. When you say Indian Railways website is up-to-date you are not ready to accept a Press Release by the same Indian Railways that too from their website.Sai199610 (talk) 16:33, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

It's good to see you're finally learning how to use the talk page and how consensus works. Now all you need to do is stop acting like a 10 year old and you're good to go!✘ anonymousвهii 16:35, 26 June 2019 (UTC)