Talk:High-speed rail in Europe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is this article necessary?[edit]

What purpose does this article serve that is not already covered by High-speed rail by country? I could understand the need for an article discussing the ongoing integration of services and networks between countries, but that's not what the article currently does. Alcuin (talk) 17:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's precisely what this article should do eventually, as the unique situation with Europe attempting to harmonise and increase high-speed rail across international borders means an article is called for which delivers far more than the brief overview of the other article you mentioned. However, whilst it grows, most of the information here will be culled from other articles, so it will take a while for it to stand on its own feet as it were. Grunners (talk) 18:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to shape the article so that it focuses on the emerging European HSR network, then. Alcuin (talk) 20:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is a mess currently. This should not be a historical summary with sections like 'France leads the way', rather, it should be a summary of high speed rail in Europe per country. After all, people get directed here from the High-speed rail by country article, and expect to find a summary of high speed rail in Europe here. If you want to discuss the integration of the European high speed rail network between European countries, I propose to do this in a seperate article. --Joop20 (talk) 15:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Future transport developments are not usually kept in a separate article when there is already an existing article covering the subject. Future integration of European high speed rail belongs as a sub-section of this article. MickMacNee (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to the High-speed rail by country article? And what exactly do you mean with future transport developments? These should be discussed in the Planned high-speed rail by country article.--Joop20 (talk) 17:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The European push towards integration of existing networks for a pan European HSR network, not entire planned new systems by country, hence 'in Europe'. It's explained in the lead paragraph. MickMacNee (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I get you now. However, according to me the push towards integration of existing networks in Europe should be discussed in a seperate section of this article, just like the history of the European high speed rail network. The main goal of this article is not to describe integration of the European rail network, rather to summarize high speed rail in Europe per country. Joop20 (talk) 18:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, I think the history section of this article should be deleted. The main High-speed rail article already contains a history secction, and it is more appropriate here. Moreover, the current section does not contain any information on the history of high speed rail in Europe in specific.--Joop20 (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't a clue what you're trying to do actually, but these three articles could all be merged into one. There is no reason for me to split countries with planned systems from countries with systems with planned extensions, if everything is to be listed by country, and no need to contain planned extensions and systems in Europe in one article. MickMacNee (talk) 18:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, and I haven't got a clue what you're saying now. First of all, which three articles are you talking about. Secondly, sometime the choice was made to discuss high speed rail in Europe in a seperate article from the High-speed rail by country, see the discussion above. I don't agree with it being seperate articles, but we have them now. Regarding planned systems, these are discussed in the Planned high-speed rail by country article. And notice I've was talking about sections in this article, not about seperate articles, in my previous two comments.--Joop20 (talk) 18:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible merge and restructure[edit]

of:

Basically, all three seem to duplicate sections, and considering most of the countries have their own, 'high speed rail in X' country articles. I propose the following:

  1. Merge all 3 into 'High speed rail by country', with the parent article high-speed rail
  2. Basic copy edit it into sections:
    1. Overview
    2. Existing systems by country
    3. Systems under construction by country
    4. Planned systems by country
    5. Pan European Integration Project
    6. Any other cross national projects
  3. Mercilessly copyedit to remove all duplication between articles with their own country article

MickMacNee (talk) 18:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input Mick. However, I propose the merger of:
The Planned high-speed rail by country article clearly has another goal; here, proposed or planned high speed railway projects are discussed, which you will not find in the High-speed rail by country article. In the parent article high-speed rail, there is also a distinction between high speed rail per country and proposed high speed rail per country.--Joop20 (talk) 19:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just from my reading all three over the last hour, whatever the actual intentions, the actual articles did not give me the idea behind their differences well enough. A planned new line in Italy goes in one place, but a planned line in Egypt goes in another article? And there are also differences between in construction, planned and proposed systems, and hence where they go. And America can basically be considered two separate countries regarding planned/proposed, such are the differences and distances involved. With a proper eye to removing duplication, it would all fit logically into one article, 'HSR by country', with no confusion. The differences between exists/under construction/planned/proposed is what tables of contents are for. MickMacNee (talk) 19:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds fair enough. However, merging the three articles into one coherent article is going to take quite some time, and there are alot of missing sources as well in the information in the current articles. I've only started making contributions to wikipedia since today, so I have no idea what and how to do this. And who is going to take responsibility for it?Joop20 (talk) 19:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone, that's the beauty of WP. MickMacNee (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does the merging of articles or the closure of articles have to be announced somewhere, or can you, me, or someone else just start with the job?Joop20 (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It can be listed at requested moves if you want. Basically, you can be bold and merge whatever you like, but obviously people who object can easily reverse it, so you can list it to save wasted effort, although if no-one is bothered, it can be a waste of time. MickMacNee (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are too much HSR systems in europe so a separated article doesn't seem to be problematic. Sotavento (talk) 12:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map errors[edit]

I've traveled around in Europe by train a bit, and the trip from Hamburg to Freiburg, the speed rarely dropped below 300km/h (they have information monitors on the trains showing speeds), so the map of Germany seem outdated. Also with Norway, the map shows parts of Vestfoldbanen (south of Oslo) as high-speded (>200km/h). This rail standard there doesn't allow these speeds, even if the trains servicing there do. Rkarlsba (talk) 12:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I travel the north-south route very often (the last time about two weeks ago), and I know it never reaches more than 250 km/h. These tracks are constructed for a maximum speed of 280 km/h - more would not be allowed by the federal railroad administration. I think you mistook some numbers there. Maybe you looked at the screens when you travelled the Frankfurt-Cologne-Line? (Sorry for not logging in, it somehow doesnt work right now). 129.206.185.112 (talk) 11:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The north-south line in italy is now complete so the speeds should be raised to reflect that I believe. Olyus (talk) 20:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, darlings, where's information about Poland xxx :* http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szybka_kolej_w_Polsce —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejedef (talk • contribs) 12:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to new info posted on the the Finland section, the line as far north as Oulu is being raised to up to 200km/h. This will be interesting because the map will have to be expanded quite a bit, as Oulu is not too far south from the artic circle. Olyus (talk) 11:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 350Kmh Madrid-Valencia line and the Madrid-Albacete branch are finished. Trial trips finished last week. First official trip with politicians etc. ran last Friday 10 Dec 2010. Commercial trips will begin next Saturday 18 Dec 2010 and Wednesday 15 Dec 2010 respectively. http://www.europapress.es/economia/transportes-00343/noticia-economia-ave-reyes-inauguraran-ave-valencia-principes-conexion-albacete-20101210123611.html Please update map! --Megustalastrufas (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additionaly work has started on LGV EST phase and the map should reflect that. Olyus (talk) 16:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure that this article and the country articles are updated, becasue they (and de:Schnellfahrstrecke) are used as source for the map, with some delay, to make some change time to be accepted. Right now High-speed rail in Spain is not updated. --BIL (talk) 20:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the hint, High-speed rail in Spain is now updated. :) --Megustalastrufas (talk) 09:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see the map has been updated somewhat recently, it looks great but LGV Este phase two still isn't shown as under construction. I'd do it myself but I don't have experience in these things? I realize this maybe isn't the place, but which programme should I use for fixing the map? any tips? thanks. Olyus (talk) 00:53, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the line between Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Driver2369 (talk • contribs) 09:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not a high-speed line (speed below 200 km/h) --FlyAkwa (talk) 10:42, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Russian country HSR page says some of the Nizhniy Novgorod track is high speed with two daily services. ALSOSome people have made Map comments on the Map talk page (despite it not being the place for it) 180.216.110.169 (talk) 14:24, 14 August 2012 (UTC) Rob[reply]

the Albacete-Alicante high speed line has been completed. Commercial high speed services started on 18th June therefore map should be updated 188.153.223.206 (talk) 18:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what does it take so long in order to update this map? the Barcelona-figures section was opened on January 2013 but the map was updated on July. Can the person responsible for this map update it quicker?188.153.223.206 (talk) 18:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maps are updated by volunteers. Would you like to do it? bobrayner (talk) 21:12, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eskişehir-Ankara not in Europe[edit]

Currently the article reads: The first line aimed to connect İstanbul to Ankara (via Eskişehir) reducing the travel time from 6 – 7 hours to 3 hours 10 minutes. Eskişehir-Ankara line has started operating regular services on March 14th 2009 with a maximum speed of 250 km/h being the first High Speed Rail Service in Turkey making Turkish State Railways the 6th national rail company to offer HSR services in Europe.

Although part of Turkey lies in Europe, this stretch of rail lies entirely in Asia.Ordinary Person (talk) 06:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


When talking about raillines you shouldn't be looking at the Geography map. You should think of the Economic regions since Railways are always built with economic interests. Railways are not natural like rivers as you can talk about a river being on some continenet exactly.. Railways are networks so you need to check which network does a specific rail line belong to. You may take UIC (International Union of Railways) as a reference to see which area is Turkish railways included. Just for brainstorming i would like to ask which part would you include Georgia if one day they propose a HSR line? Halfalive (talk) 04:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey is one of the founding members of the Council of Europe since 1949 and has been an "associate member" of the European Union and its predecessors since 1964. The border between Europa and Asia is arbitrary, and has changed over time. The idea that the Bosphorus is the limit is a creation of the 18th century devised by Philip Johan von Strahlenberg at the height of the Ottoman Empire, and is purely political. Geographically, Europe is not really a continent but a subcontinent of Eurasia.

Think of Cyprus, a member of the European Union, yet to the south-east of Anatolia.--Megustalastrufas (talk) 18:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original rails (when the lines first opened) where laid by Germany, the line engineered by German engineers, at least some of the railway stock (such as the sleeper from Aleppo to Istanbul) was made in East Germany, bahn.de can tell you travel times from anywhere in Europe to Istanbul etc, so I second the argument that Turkey belongs (at least railway wise) to Europe.--Soylentyellow (talk) 23:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

internet coverage[edit]

Is there internet available on tracks other than Deutsche Bahn ICE trains?--78.48.177.201 (talk) 15:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.bahn.de/i/view/GBR/en/trains/overview/wi-fi-access.shtml

Yes. For instance, it's available on some thalys and AVE services iirc, and it's being rolled out on some TGV services. Are you interested in any particular route? Should the article be updated? bobrayner (talk) 16:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You should be aware that internet is generally available through public mobile networks almost anywhere. --BIL (talk) 21:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! I got caught in the trap of careless phrasing too. Onboard Wifi, then. ;-)
However, the article is a bit deficient in this area. It only talks about infrastructure & rolling stock, and almost completely ignores other aspects such as the traveller's experience (for instance, ticketing is barely mentioned) or maybe the environmental aspects, the political, the NIMBYs... Os there room for some improvement? bobrayner (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


200km/h removals[edit]

I notice in the last week two sections for croatia and bulgaria have been removed because the lines they deal with are 200km/h and the deleter felt these were not "really" high-speed. whilst I agree that 200km/h isn't really modern high-speed rail, my understanding is that 200km/h is the threshold used by wikipedia to define high-speed rail. as such, I will revert the edits if no one objects?Olyus (talk) 13:33, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. Revert away! --NorthernCounties (talk) 14:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

eurostar voltage[edit]

The UK section of this article claims the eurostar supports two voltages but the article on the trains (British Rail Class 373) claims they support four... 80.0.68.41 (talk) 02:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changed.--BIL (talk) 09:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the coloring system on the map[edit]

Hi. I think the colors are not very explanatory....... for example purple orange , yellow , pink, my mind gets confused and I re-check all the time which color means higher speed. ...... Can the person responsible for the map update the colors in an order of variances of single color (for example: variances of red) and not pick different irrelevant colors? what do you guys think ? --88.244.86.71 (talk) 16:09, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I (try to) maintain the Europe and Asian map for high speed. The current colors have been choose to offer the best contrast and distinction, on any screen. The colors are all in a coherent scheme, from yellow to red (purple is recent because of recent speed higher than 300 km/h, and has been choose to replace a dark red, difficult to distinguish from red).
The use of only one color varying the luminosity is not suitable because of :
- The size of the lines on the map when reduced (lack of contrast)
- The size of the line on little screen (lack of contrast)
- Confusion with background (light red / gray)
- Variations of luminosity of different screens.
--FlyAkwa (talk) 16:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's the purpose of this article?[edit]

There's discussion above from about 4 years ago about merging this article with High-speed rail by country. As it existed then, and exists now, this article is really just a list of national infrastructure programs. My sense is that, if this subject truly merits its own article, then there should really be more discussion about network and service integration between countries. High speed rail in Europe, not High speed rail in Europe by country. There has been service deregulation in recent years, and several notable megaprojects that will further shape Europe as a single network instead of many (Fehmarn, Alpine tunnels). 4 years ago, I did some major editing to this article, incorporating text from related articles. My version ordered the sections by proximity and chronology, with France at the top. France is/will be the natural hub of international HSR service mostly due to geography (it borders the other big 4 economies of Europe) but also because it embraced this type of infrastructure a bit earlier than others, and thus has more established network. Another editor reordered the sections alphabetically, feeling that the previous shows Francophile bias.

So, what I'm looking for is some discussion. First, can/should this article be more than a list of country sections? Second, how can we best organize the article to encourage article growth consistent with the title of the article. My sense is that this should really be about service in Europe, not service in each European locale. How should we organize it? Any thoughts?Alcuin (talk) 03:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't the sections entitled 'Cross-border infrastructure projects and passenger services' and 'Integration of European High-speed rail network' basically what you're refering to? There isn't much beyond that because European projects really are done by country or occasionally with the co-operation of two countries. Perhaps a coherent history of all the important HSR events in Europe could be included? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Several things might be missing:
  • History of high speed lines in Europe, for instance line to England only make sense because there is a line between Belgium and Paris,
  • Regulatory considerations, because most HS lines in Europe have same kind of common technicalregulation, including same track gauge in Spain,
  • The single markets considerations, because in the EU and in the UK, service will be open to competition in a near future.
  • Companies operating cross border
  • New projects of building new high speed rail infrastructure, funded with €23.7 EU billion since 2000.
  • Court of auditors opinion, which consider it as an "ineffective patchwork" https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eca/special-reports/high-speed-rail-19-2018/en/ with only two lines were operating at an average speed above 200 km/h, and none above 250 km/h.
  • Missing cross border tracks: "Because most of the section between Bordeaux and the Spanish border is not a priority for France, infrastructure at the border remains antiquated, incompatible and poorly suited to a modern high-speed rail network. France is not ready to invest in this infrastructure (therefore does not ask for EU funding), and this will negatively effect on Spain and Portugal’s connections to the EU network along the Atlantic corridor." iSBN 978-92-847-0082-0 ISSN 1977-5679 doi:10.2865/724276 QJ-AB-18-014-EN-Q © European Union, 2018. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.136.208.216 (talk) 10:56, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the new charts, lines under construction[edit]

I appreciate the effort of adding the charts with the lines under construction, but I think they are a bit misleading. After a paragraph explaining the extent of the network in the country one would expect a chart of existing lines. Maybe this chart belongs in the specific article for the respective country. Or maybe all lines (existing and future) should be in the chart, or at least, the charts should have a title explaining what to expect in them.--Megustalastrufas (talk) 08:13, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Denmark: Recent decision on comprehensive electrification of network = end of diesel era[edit]

See

http://ing.dk/artikel/gaveregn-til-tog-danmark-nye-skinner-paa-vestfyn-og-jernbanebro-over-vejle-fjord-156640 ,

via Google Translate.

Also, the northern 1-track bottleneck on the Jutland line to Germany will be removed, until 2015, see

http://www.bane.dk/visBanearbejde.asp?artikelID=10712 .

We can probably expect that the 2nd, southern one will be gone once the Fehmarn fixed link is ready. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.120.228.89 (talk) 08:55, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Could you please start to correct at least the electrification error criticised? I gave you danish-language sources, today comes a recent one in english:
'Oil to fund electrification and reduced journey times'
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/oil-to-fund-electrification-and-reduced-journey-times.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.120.228.89 (talk) 10:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The law authorising the Danish Minister for Transport to begin work on electrification of the main railway lines was only passed today.[1] Laws have still not been drafted regarding the individual electrification projects, in particular, the laws concerning the Esbjerg-Lunderskov and Kolding-Århus-Aalborg upgrades have still not been drafted, although a political agreement concerning the Esbjerg-Lunderskov upgrade was agreed in June 2012 ("Bedre og billigere kollektiv trafik"-forliget). Electrification plans are high on the government's agenda, but they are not yet law. TogfondenDK also currently remains a governemnt initiative that has not been signed into law, and the Tinglev-Padborg "bottleneck" doesn't seem to be on the government's current agenda. 89.239.209.112 (talk) 16:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

merge this article into into "High-speed rail/Europe" section[edit]

This article looks like a duplication of effort and I think some of it ought to be merged into this article and other things moved into the articles for individual countries. Then the High-speed rail in Europe link should redirect to the Europe section of the High-speed rail article. What do you think? Both articles contain efforts listed by country and it creates a maintenance nightmare. AadaamS (talk) 21:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TR2013, I think we should discuss the merge here and reach a consensus before deleting the merge template or discussing in the changelog comments. Imho a lot of this article is a duplication of effort and so would not need merging, especially not the national sections. The information in national sections should go into the respective national articles. AadaamS (talk) 22:36, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TR2013, have you edited with another account before? Perhaps an account which is permabanned? bobrayner (talk) 00:08, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's yet another article with duplicate effort: High-speed rail by country. AadaamS (talk) 09:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; we have a problem with duplicated content. bobrayner (talk) 12:24, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's a larger problem than I realised when I posted this merge suggestion. Perhaps I should raise this with Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains? (I leave this link here so I can go to that project in the future). AadaamS (talk) 12:32, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Have started a new discussion in Wikiproject Trains talk page. AadaamS (talk) 10:41, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.railway-technology.com/news/news90607.html
    Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fyra[edit]

References to Fyra in the Dutch and Belgian sections are now obsolete as the Fyra project has now been abandoned. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 21:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Travel Times[edit]

Should there be a table of travel times, similar to High-speed_rail_in_Germany#Travel_times, maybe at the end of the "Integration" section? I think it would be informative to have a table showing travel times between the most important hubs (Paris, Marseilles, Toulouse, Barcelona, Madrid, London, Brussels, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Berlin, Munich, Hamburg, Cologne, Zürich, Vienna, Milano, Rome, etc. - quite a few of them, actually). Or maybe, given the (growing) number destinations, it would be better to display travel times as a list rather than a matrix? In any case, I think it would be convenient to have this kind of information aggregated in one place and ready at a glance. --Silvercowcreamer (talk) 06:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on High-speed rail in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:00, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on High-speed rail in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on High-speed rail in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on High-speed rail in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on High-speed rail in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:43, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on High-speed rail in Europe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:28, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Country order[edit]

I am wondering about the order in which the countries are listed, particularly the early ones.

It is not alphabetical by country name in English, as that would result in: France, Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom.
Nor is it arranged in order of "appearance", as the order (for HSR as defined in the article itself, i.e. >200 km/h) would be: United Kingdom, Italy, France, Germany, Spain. (I think, as derived from each of the country sections - please comment)
France would go first if the threshold were 250 km/h, followed by Germany, Spain, United Kingdom and Italy. (possibly)
It is not in order of network length as that would be: Spain, France, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy.
What do you think is the most adequate order?

I think order of appearance is the way to go, and that it would be good to write a paragraph about it in the intro to the section, but I'd rather we discuss this here before implementing. The date of "appearance" in each country may be controversial, and would need to be agreed. Please comment. --Megustalastrufas (talk) 10:56, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated/wrong information[edit]

I have never experienced a train in the Netherlands, Randstad, going more than 160-180 km/per hour (Rotterdam-Amsterdam via Schiphol), Eurostar from Paris slows down to around 150 from 300 once it enters Belgium and later the Nerherlands. The article and the maps contained are completely out of proportion to reality. The map shows the speed of certain tracks in the Netherlands to be 270-300 kmh but the article states further that not even 200 kmh is possible due to not high enough voltage.

It doesn't seem that this article is in any way reliable. The reality and sources of information available about Dutch tracks completely don't stick to what is written here. Even Dutch sources say 140 kmh is actually the maximum. 270-300kmh shown on the map is utterly senseless. And it's only the Netherlands. Other countries might be similarly not accurately shown. The fact that Eurostar goes 300 in France doesn't mean it goes 300 in the Netherlands and Belgium. It's simply not possible and the article shows false data.

https://nos.nl/op3/artikel/2227785-waarom-schieten-kilometers-spoor-maar-met-140-onder-je-door https://www.rtvdrenthe.nl/nieuws/143517/trein-naar-randstad-moet-uiteindelijk-250-km-u-kunnen-rijden 45.93.75.81 (talk) 20:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing ref[edit]

@ZlatanSweden10: could you please provide a definition for the ref you named "FBC"? -- Fyrael (talk) 03:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it now ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 14:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:High-speed_rail_in_Europe&oldid=1217554380"