Portal talk:Trains/2006 archive
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Portal colours
Although this portal is now a featured portal, and I support it being such, the colours may still need to be worked on. I'm not sure how well the new colour meshes with the box backgrounds. Anyways, congratulations.--cj | talk 14:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
would you like to create certified articles in trains? -- Zondor 03:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Models and Reality Merge?
Does anyone like the idea of linking from the pages about the real rolling stock to pages about the models? For example, the pages on the DB 101 could link to the new LGB model of the same name and any other manufactures that makes a model of that engine. Does the modeling community see any value in the resource/activity? --14 January 2006
- I don't see much of a reason not to include "See also" links to articles about the models. I included a model section in Pioneer Zephyr as I wrote the article and took it through the WP:FA process to featured status. However, I don't think the prototype article should be merged and redirected into the model article; for example (just picking something from one of my current modeling projects) EMD GP30 should be about the prototype while Atlas GP30 would be about the model manufactured by Atlas Tool Company, but once the article about the model is created, it could be mentioned in the article about the prototype. Slambo (Speak) 14:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Categories
I think we could add Rail transport in Poland category to the categories section on the Portal page, as the topic developed lately.
CCMichalZ 01:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Railfan category
Hello Slambo. I was wondering of creating user category "railfan", so that the infobox could add an user into a new category. It would be good to see how many of "us" are currently contributing. I would like to read your opinion on this toppic. CCMichalZ 22:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
- Take a look at {{User Railfan}}, a userbox that adds the user pages it's placed on to Cat:Railfan Wikipedians. I've got it near the bottom of my user page. Slambo (Speak) 12:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- My mistake that I didn't notice it. Thanks for the answer! CCMichalZ 12:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Article in need of attention
The article on Minffordd railway station has the potential to be very good, but as it stands it needs some attention to sort the wheat from the chaff in terms of what is important and what is just trivia. Comments are on the talk page. Thryduulf 00:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Commons category organisation
I've started to split the Commons:Category:Train stations in the United Kingdom in the same way as Category:Railway stations in the United Kingdom here. I've categorised all images/sub cats and England, Scotland and Wales. I've also done some but not all of the splitting of England into counties. Any help with the rest would be much appreciated. 13:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Will be glad to help when there are enough images/sub categories per county. Thanks for creating Derbyshire, Lincolnshire and South Yorkie cats. Regards, Captain Scarlet 12:24 25 March 2006 (GMT)
Mistake in DYK (21 March 2006)
Hi Slambo. I am afraid you misunderstood an article about PKP class ST44. The locomotives that were imported from Romania were PKP class ST43 (as stated in article), but Soviet Union did not want it's satelite countries to produce heavy locomotives, and thus "ordered" Polish communist government to order M62 (ST44) from SU instead of PKP class ST43 from Romania. CCMichalZ 17:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
TGV 001
I have noticed the presence of TGV 001 on Things you can do/Expand and have just edited the article. I have tried to keep out of simply translating the french article. Regards, Captain Scarlet 12:01 25 March 2006 (GMT)
Did you not know...
- [pace ...that until 1988, new lines of Spanish railway company RENFE were built at the broad gauge of 5 ft 5½ in (1,668 mm)?]
that
- The main railway networks of Spain and Portugal were originally constructed to gauges of six Castilian feet and five Portuguese feet. Later, following adoption of the metric system, these two gauges were defined as 1674 mm (5 ft 5.9 in) and 1665 mm (5 ft 5.55 in) respectively. The gauges were sufficiently close to allow inter-operation of trains, and in recent years both have been adjusted to a common Iberic gauge of 1668 mm. (See Rail gauge.)
In other words, for most of Spanish railway history, new lines were not built to a gauge of 1668 mm. The "Portal" should do better research... -- Picapica 19:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, so I'm not as familiar with Spanish rail history and I misinterpreted the article when I added the item to the portal section. It seems that we need to do some work on the RENFE article; since I interpreted the text that way, there's bound to be someone else who did too. At this point, the item will roll off the DYK list tomorrow, so updating it there wouldn't be as productive. I'd like to invite you to find and add more non-US DYK facts to the suggestion page as I'm trying to keep one country's facts from dominating the section. Slambo (Speak) 13:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your reply, Slambo (I probably was having a bit of a tetchy moment there...). I take your point about the original RENFE article and will take a look at it shortly. -- Picapica 21:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Problems with layout
In this portal, the first box (Titled 1 The Trains Portal), is shifted over to the left, so that it half covers the standard Wikepedia logo and links. To the right it has the words "purge server cache" as a link. Does anyone else get this?--Tivedshambo 21:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Follow-up to the above - Could it be the skin I'm using? when I log out, it appears fine. I use the "classic" skin. If it's the browser, I use IE6.--Tivedshambo 21:05, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- The skin seems the likely culprit. I'm using the default skin and it looks correct for me in the various browsers and operating systems that I use. Have you looked at any of the other portals? Does the same thing happen with them? Slambo (Speak) 13:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- Other portals work ok, but they don't have that "purge server cache" link. Is that required?--Tivedshambo 15:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- The link itself isn't required; it's here so I can clear out the cache after updating several sub-templates (like on Sunday night or Monday morning when I update the Selected article and image templates and the DYK templates in one swell foop) to have them display on the portal correctly. I suspect the problem is in the box-header template. I'll try to take a look later this week to see if I can find what might be causing it. Slambo (Speak) 16:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- I've removed the link, as nothing else has been done. Should "technical" links be displayed on a main page? The layout seems fine now.--Tivedshambo (talk) 05:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- Other portals work ok, but they don't have that "purge server cache" link. Is that required?--Tivedshambo 15:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Category renaming discussion
Please note that there is a rename debate taking place at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 July 27 regarding Category:Locomotive engineers. Noisy | Talk 14:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up, Noisy. Update: the CFD discussion closed on August 4 2006, with the conclusion to rename the category to Category:Locomotive designers/builders.-- danntm T C 23:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
People mover ceases operations
Peachliner became Japan's first people mover to cease operations. Fg2 01:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Interesting; thanks for the info. I'll try to find a way to add it into the portal update later tonight. Slambo (Speak) 12:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Red links and other
Please beware of red links – they are inimical to this portals featured status. Also, the News section could be more concise. Thanks,--cj | talk 14:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Happy Holidays to all Train Buffs!
Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, this wish for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral, celebration of the winter/summer solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of our choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all - and a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures, and without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, sexual preference, religious faith, or choice of computer platform of the wishee.
By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms: This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with or without alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year, or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.