Jump to content

Talk:Indian Railways/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Claims

Please follow wikipedia standards of neutrality and attribution when contributing to this page to prevent your edits from being reverted. Thanks! =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Second largest employer in the world

This page says indian raiways is the second largest employer in the world behind the Chinese Army. This is incorrect ... the US Department of Defence has close to 3 million employees. I have removed that sentence from this article ... if you can find a verifiable source to indicate that Indian Railways is the third largest employer, then put that in. If not, its better to leave out such relative facts -- its enough to just state the number of employees the company has. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.76.6 (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Is the US Department of Defence a single organization? I do not think so. I've pulled out reliable sources that speak of the claims. [1] and [2] =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Jay Prakash Chaurasia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.30.246.116 (talk) 12:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Wal-mart

Also Wal-mart article states they have 2.1 million employees which is more than Indian Railways

Department of defense

Department of defense is not a commercial or utility employer same as Chinese Army. Therefore, the information about Indian Railways as being second Commercial or Utility Employer would be correct. Furthermore,2.1 million employees is wrong for walmart since there have been redundancies and layoffs in countries where walmart operates in the recent years to 1.4 million employees instead of 2.1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snagraj (talk • contribs) 19:22, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I.R. Number of employees

The number of employees as per Indian Railways Statistical reference available on internet at location [[3]] is 1406430. Can someone correct it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganjudeepak (talk • contribs) 15:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done - The stats have been updated. SBC-YPR (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Indirect employment might be many times more than 1.4 mn. What about mentioning that.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.96.7.226 (talk) 12:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Reliability of references

Are the following references currently used in the considered reliable/authoritative ? If not, it may be better to remove them now so that we know exactly what statements need citations. Abecedare (talk) 00:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

  • "Indian Railways: Strides of Progress in 2007". INRnews - Indian Real Estate & Property News. Retrieved 2008-12-11.
  • "railways in India". Tcil.com. Retrieved 2008-11-11.
  • IRFCA (the whole site/parts of it / ... ? )
  • Glyn's train (the site seems defunct)
I have removed the above listed references, except for IRFCA, which I personally trust (although some FAR reviewers may disagree. Abecedare (talk) 04:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree that IRFCA is quite a reliable source. The TCIL (Transport Corporation of India) article looks reliable, and the organisation doesn't seem to be a phony. The INRnews article is a reproduction of this PIB press release [4], and can be relied upon. The Glyn's train site does not exist. SBC-YPR (talk) 12:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
ICRA is acceptable. Their content is peer-reviewed in their mailing list, so it would be accurate. Incidently, Peer reviewed content by experts makes content accurate, and that's welcome on Wikipedia. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Formatting of references

Any input on how we should format references in Notes and Reference section, i.e., what style and templates should we use (full references vs Harvard) ? (Note: I plan to add some print references to the mix.) It would be good to decide once, so that we don't have to re-do them down the line. Abecedare (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no fixed view. Harvard would seem ok if there are many books to cite. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I feel that we should stick to full references for the sake of uniformity, at least in the case of web resources. SBC-YPR (talk) 13:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

History

Since this section already has a main article, I feel it should be shortened and only the most essential details included on this page. The rest can be moved to the sub-page. What say, folks? SBC-YPR (talk) 13:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The 1974 strike

The article does not even mention 1974 railway strike in India.That makes it somewhat imcomplete. Shyamsunder (talk) 09:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The references provided here doesn't match with the content. so it's missed out 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 14:42, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Recruitment

Please add more information about fraud, Paper leak, racketeers, Influence in Railway Recruitment —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.85.34 (talk) 10:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

KR as a zone

Why isn't KR mentioned as a zone? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Konkan Railway is not a zone of IR. It is operated by a company, which is not controlled by IR. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 11:53, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

I have reverted the additional infobox as there was already one infobox in the article and the second one merely duplicated the information. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 13:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


But that infobox contains the details of the railways not the company!

Regards,Sharadbob —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharadbob (talk • contribs) 14:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but I do not think the infobox rail template would be appropriate for Indian Railways as it is a very large network and there is no homogenity in gauge. Further, that template seems designed for North American railroad companies (because of parameters such as Reporting mark). Anyhow, you are right in that the current infobox does not provide rail-related info about IR. We must find some way to incorporate both without duplicating information and adding multiple infoboxes. I will leave a note on the Trains Wikiproject talkpage. Please discuss if you have any ideas. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 14:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Moved from /Comments page

Sir,

I am very glad to see this portal and I wish to express my view with u to improve working skills to not only to a clerical cadre but also for all officers. Please make available these items also in web sites. they are,

  1. Rules regarding procurement of imprest cash
  2. Schedule of powers in case of Disaster management
  3. Schedule of powers to procure other items
  4. Major accidents, cause, violation of rules, remedy etc.
  5. suggestion or requirement of modification in safety rules or freight rules

these sites will automatically develop the employees working culture , thinking,dedication and devotion.

Than you.

G.SRINIVASA Rao
Station Manager, DUVVADA,
East Coast Railway, Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.145.131 (talk) 00:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Largest employer claim

The article states that Indian railways is the largest "commercial or utility employer". This statement is vague, and factually incorrect (Wal-mart has over 2 million employees, and is a "commercial" employer). Perhaps this line should be removed and just state the number of employees. There are two "sources" listed for this claim: I could not find anything on the Government website repeating this claim, and the other is paper source from 2005. There are several sources stating Wal-mart has 2.1 M employees (see wikipedia page), and a source stating that indian railways has 1.4 M employees (not disputed on this page). So let's remove that claim. 207.237.53.242 (talk) 03:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

IR is the fourth largest "commercial or utility employer". check this 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 08:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Claim of 9000 trains daily

This is asserted under Services, subsection Passenger; specifically "Indian Railways operates about 9,000 passenger trains and transports 18 million passengers daily"

I looked at the 2009 "Trains at a glance" online, pages 42-48 for "train numbers" and the number of trains I come up with is 2000. I come up with a similar number when I look at the list of train names in Trains At A Glance.

That is quite at variance with 9000. A suggestion is made that passenger trains, the slow-stop-at-every-station type, that are only enumerated in the zonal time-tables and perhaps the EMUs ( the locals in Mumbai ) account for the additional 7000. Can we get a citation for the 9000 trains number ? Otherwise I suggest the following modification:

"Indian Railways runs 2000 cross-country passenger trains daily( cit: Trains At a Glance ) and a further number of slow passenger trains and a substantial number of suburban trains that service the large metropolitan areas".

Absent further discussion, I propose making this change in 4 days time. -skthetwo Skthetwo (talk) 16:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

When was hump shunting ceased?

Since years ago the Indian technical railway reviews which I (German) can read in the Hannover Technical University do not write anything on hump shunting in marshalling yards such as Tughlakabad, Mughalsarai, Andal, Nimpura, Bhilai, Bhusawal, Tondiarpet etc. The Google Maps images show that many tracks in such yards have been lifted and many retarders have been removed. Thus obviously in India the transport of single wagonload freight must have been disappeared such as in Great Britain and Japan in 1984; and also obviously in Spain around the turn of the century. But nowhere I have found an article or even a small notice neither in Indian periodicals nor in other important railway periodicals like International Railway Journal, Railway Gazette, Eisenbahntechnische Rundschau, Der Eisenbahningenieur, Révue générale des chemins de fer, Ingegneria ferroviaria, Vía libre etc. which confirms my presumption. Does any expert on Indian Railways know what's the matter with India's hump marshalling yards - specially: when and where was the last hump closed; and where is it documentated? Thank you very much in advance for your labour. Michael. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.176.114.147 (talk) 14:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The hump yards ceased to be in operation in the early 1980s, when the Chairman Railway Board, MS Gujral, dis-allowed piecemeal-loading. Henceforth, only complete freight trains could be hired; no single-wagons were offered, and so the shunting of wagons to form rakes at different hump yards ceased.Tinpisa (talk) 07:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Use of non-IR photos

This is an article on the Indian Railways. It would be better to delete non-IR photos from the article. Your opinion. Tinpisa (talk) 07:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

No opinion against, is deemed as acceptance of the proposal. Tinpisa (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Removed unsourced text

I've removed some material that was added by a member of the WP:IEP program; see that page for details of the cleanup. It is unsourced and I found a short copyvio section taken from here. This is the diff for the removed material. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

This material was copied from [5] in violation of copyright and must not be re-added. See Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/Indian_Education_Program. Hut 8.5 23:01, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Correct date of foundation in Infobox

The date of founding needs to be corrected to 1951. The Railways are free to claim their origins from the late 1850s however, the organisation proper was instituted in 1951 only. It shoud also have the act being passed as a reference, with the date it was passed as the founding day, in the absence of any specific declaration by IR. AshLin (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

founding matters more than establishment.That's why it is written there. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 07:57, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
yes possible, provided citation should exits 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 13:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
You will surely get it in the railway related books. I am not sure but there are chances that online sources will be available for this as this is an important date--ÐℬigXЯaɣ 14:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Konkan Railway

Konkan Railway is not a zone of the indian Railways, but a subsidiary company (along with the state governments of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Goa). Second later, Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited (DMRC), that has constructed and operates Delhi Metro network, is a joint venture of the Government of India and the Government of Delhi and is an independent organization not connected to the Indian Railways. Similarly some other like Bangalore Metro, Hyderabad Metro, Mumbai Metro and Chennai Metro are also independent organizations.please do not add such not sure contents without providing citations. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS (talk) 07:22, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 July 2012

please change list of employees of indian railways as of 2012 which is 2.4 million according to List_of_companies_by_employees

Rahulvijh (talk) 08:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikipedia is not considered to be a reliable source.  TOW  talk  10:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Formatting and lexical issue

Hi, thanks all for your work on route articles. I'm finding consistently that descriptions of train routes in India use the word "halts" for "stops". Also, I've been correcting zillions of wrongly spaced A-to-B expressions, like Bhopal – Lucknow Express corrected to Bhopal–Lucknow Express.

And I'm seeing a lot of overcapitalisation, like "the Train leaves", "three Coaches", and caps in titles as a formula.

Your vigilance would be appreciated. Tony (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Attention

Helo everyone please do not add poor images related to kolkata or west bengal or any bengali speaking place.The article is about an organization not any private company.Since i'm watching this article from today,i'll never hesitate to revert all your poor and unsource edits.If any queries post it to my talk page.Thank you. -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 17:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I reverted your restore to a June edit. It's a bit much to revoke 4 months of edits to the article. Please added in anything that you believe has been "ruined" piece by piece rather than using the wholesale restore tool (which should be used in case of extreme vandalism rather than good faith edits.) Cheers, --Patrick (talk) 17:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Reader feedback: which is the longest train s...

117.211.32.3 posted this comment on 7 August 2013 (view all feedback).

which is the longest train service in india?

Any thoughts?

Anitek bhattacharya (talk) 10:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC) Vivek Express, between Dibrugarh and Kanyakumari, has the longest run in terms of distance and time on Indian Railways network. It covers 4,286 km (2,663 mi) in about 82 hours and 30 minutes. and Himsagar Express, between Kanyakumari and Jammu Tawi, has the second longest run in terms of distance and time on Indian Railways network. It covers 3,715 km (2,308 mi) in about 69 hours and 30 minutes. The Bhopal Shatabdi Express is the fastest train in India today having a maximum speed of 150 km/h (93 mph) on the Faridabad–Agra section. The fastest speed attained by any train is 184 km/h (114 mph) in 2000 during test runs.

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased 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, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their 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. Diannaa (talk) 23:07, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Railway Claims Tribunal

The substantive liability of the Railway Administration for loss, destruction, damage,deterioration or non-delivery of goods entrusted to them for carriage and for death or injuries or loss to a passenger in a railway accident or untoward incident is laid down in the Railway Act - 1989. The establishment of Railway Claims Tribunal was necessary for speedy adjudication, providing relief to rail users by way of expeditious payment of compensation to the victims of rail accident or untoward incident, refund of fare and freight and compensation to those whose goods are lost while with railways. It was thought that the setting up of such a Claims Tribunal with Benches in different parts of the country with Judicial and Technical Members, will provide much relief to the rail users and reduce burden of the civil courts http://www.rct.indianrail.gov.in/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.18.177.170 (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

INDIAN RAILWAY

AGRA FORT - AHMEDABAD SUPERFAST EXPRESS THIS TRAIN NUMBER IS 12548 DOWN AND 12547 UP THE TRAIN SPEED IS 56 km/hr. THIS TRAIN Rake/Coach Composition Eng-Slr-Gen-Gen-Gen-S9-S8-S7-S6-S5-S4-S3-S2-S1-A1-B1-B2-Gen-Gen-Gen-Slr. THE TRAIN USE ENG IS WDP4 D AND COACH ICF THE TRAIN HAVE CLASS 2A, 3A, SL, GN USE COACH 1=2A,2=3A, 9=SL,6=GEN

TRAIN NUMBER 12548/12547 TIME TABLE http://indiarailinfo.com/train/timetable/ahmedabad-agra-fort-sf-express-12548-adi-to-af/14056/60/805 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CHAKRAVRTI (talk • contribs) 13:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Indian Railway Ticket Reservation Codes Article

This article is about to be deleted from main space. It is put here as it may be useful to Indian travelers.

Indian Railway Ticket Reservation Codes

Indian Railways uses Ticket Reservation Codes. Passenger ticket reservation can be done through IRCTC website www.irctc.co.in. People often ignore the differences between waiting list status as the codes for waiting list differ by priority. So the full form and nature of reservation and confirmation strategy mentioning here.

Reservation Code Full Form
CNF Confirmed Ticket with full berth
RAC Reservation After Cancellation
Half berth confirmed if not achieved CNF status before boarding
GNWL General Waiting List
CKWL TATKAL Waiting List
RLWL Remote Location Waiting List
PQWL A Pooled Quota Waiting List
RLGN Remote Location General Waiting List
RSWL Roadside Station Waiting List
RQWL Request Waiting List
  • GNWL:

General Waiting List (GNWL) waitlisted tickets are issued when the passenger begins his/her journey at the originating station of a route or stations close to the originating station. This is most common type of waiting list and has got the highest chances of confirmation.

  • RLWL:

Remote Location Waiting List (RLWL) means ticket is issued for intermediate stations (between the originating and terminating stations) because usually these are the most important towns or cities on that particular route. This type of tickets will be given a separate priority and confirmations will depend on the cancellations of a destination confirmed ticket. For this type of ticket there are less chances of confirmation.

  • PQWL:

A Pooled Quota Waiting List (PQWL) is shared by several small stations. Pooled Quotas normally operate only from the originating station of a route, and there is only one Pooled Quota for the entire run. The Pooled Quota is generally allotted for passengers travelling from the originating station to a station short of the terminating station, or from an intermediate station to the terminating station, or between two intermediate stations.

  • RLGN:

Remote Location General Waiting List (RLGN) is issued when a user books a ticket where WL quota is RLWL. This means after ticket booking RLWL gets named as RLGN.

  • RSWL:

Roadside Station Waiting List (RSWL) is allotted when berths or seats are booked by the originating station for journeys up to the road-side station and distance restrictions may not apply. This waiting list has also very less chances of confirmation.

  • RQWL:

If a ticket is to be booked from an intermediate station to another intermediate station, and if it is not covered by the general quota or by the remote location quotas or pooled quota, the request for the ticket may go into a Request Waiting List (RQWL).

  • CKWL:

For tatkal tickets, the waiting list issued is CKWL. If CKWL ticket goes up, it directly gets confirmed and doesn’t go through RAC status unlike GNWL. During chart preparation, general waiting list (GNWL) is preferred over tatkal waiting list (CKWL) therefore tatkal waitlisted tickets are less likely to get confirmed. Follow these tatkal booking tips to get a confirmed tatkal ticket.

Financial Information table

Was wondering if it will make sense to insert a new section in the article with Financial Information data (along with references). Kindly provide your opinion below. Devopam (talk) 14:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

In the history of Indian railways you said "Profit: US $ 2.4 bn". Is it gross profit or net profit? I have a reason to pose this query, which I shall discuss after I receive your confirmation.

Regards,

Rrao29 (talk) 07:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Indian Railways. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 14:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

17th zone, Kolkata metro

TOI article says so but the official website doesn't acknowledge it. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I think we better go with what the official sources are saying. Here's another. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 22:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Gets worse, "Year-book 2009-10", Indian Railways, pp. 13–14, says it is. Now we have an official one contradicting it. Give that it's dated to 2009 I'm inclined to not trust it that much though. More research as to be done? Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:15, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
There the 17 railway zones and Kolkata is independent zone headed by General Manager(GM).This website is probably not upadated and this doesn't mean that we keep old facts. Please refer to organizational structure of railways as published in 2015-16 and ex-Chairman of Railway Board Shri Vinay Mittal's Resume at UPSC. Thus without dout there are 17 Railway Zones. JPskylight (talk) 13:18, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
@JPskylight: A good find but it still isn't straightforward. The site says "last Reviewed on: 07-01-2016" so that sounds updated to me. They not putting such a thing in their main website makes me think it's doubtful. There's now two official supporting it versus the main site and the other link I put above. I reckon that there's probably no doubt but they seem to have bungled up this and not been consistent, making us confused in the first place. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
@Ugog Nizdast: Now I think I am going to most convincing argument for 17 zones and you will be fully satisfied with it. First of all if there are only 16 zones and Kolkata Metro is not part of any of them then, where Kolkata Metro lies? Since Kolkata metro is part of IR and no other zone covers it, it must be come under separate command. This is actually under GM as independent zone. Secondly, the amount of evidence for 17 zones is almost everywhere, in every report by railway ministry itself and I couldn't find even a single reference to 16 zones in any official document. These are some of these reports and documents and for credibility please refer to their date of publication: 1.organizational structure of railways as published at end of 2015-16; 2. ex-Chairman of Railway Board Shri Vinay Mittal's Resume at UPSC; 3.direct reference to apex management and zones of railways published at end of 2015-16 4. at page 56 about railway zones published at end of 2015-16; 5. below Railway Audit Report No. 53 of 2015 heading on page 127; 6.TOI article as you mentioned. Now take contrary evidence: 1.this is too old(2003) to rely on; 2. this was probably not updated by officials rather by IT team and also this can't by any means considered authoritative. Thus I think I should change number of zones to 17 adding Kolkata Metro as 17th Zone. If someone has any issue please reply soon until then I am holding previous version.JPskylight (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, Kolkata Metro is the 17th zone of Indian Railways. Sources like this & this are not updated because either they didn't mention about the new zone(s) or new division(s) (e.g: Salem railway division isn't included). More than Curriculum Vitae's, Reports and Press Information Bureau can be considered as reliable source. Please see these: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 to back up TOI claim and other IR reports. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 02:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I've probably was making a mountain out of a molehill putting weight on their website which is subject to be updated on their whim. I've put them back here and at Zones and divisions of Indian Railways. I doubted because there have been instances where something official was announced with the news reports on it for a short while but on checking years later official make no mention and it has likely passed off. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:26, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Konkan Railways

There's another issue which I would like to be checked. At least two times by different users, Konkan Railway was added as the 17th zone as well. Here's a sample edit. I don't remember checking up on this one. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:26, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ugog Nizdast: Good of you. Officially Konkan Railway is not considered as zone of Indian Railways per: 1 & 2. But de facto it is considered as zone technically due to its administrative set up and operational aspects which is almost similar to a zone of Indian Railways. Hence it can be categorized under Zones of Indian Railways but can't be mentioned in anywhere in the part of an article.--βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 21:21, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks and that answers the question. How did you find it still being technically a zone warranting a category though? Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
@Ugog Nizdast: Kolkata Metro might have been made as zone on political and regional chauvinism. Its a rapid transit system. But it is Konkan Railway that functions and operates as like a zone in all means running scheduled services. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 10:52, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, very true. The part about it being not a zone should be added to IR's zone-related page as an explanatory note, and in regular text for the KR page. Additionally, about it functioning like a zone or its mechanism in general would be an interesting addition to the KR page but maybe source-hunting would be required. IMO adding the category would confuse the reader further and cats reflect the article body subject to WP:V; so being not official equals no category. Please go ahead and make these changes, I won't be free for some time. If replying, ping me as usual. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:16, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Caboose vs Brake van in Indian Railways

The term "Guard's Cabin" under the section Indian_Railways#Accommodation_classes directs to Caboose which is a North American term. Brake van is the term used in India. In fact, the very first line in Caboose wiki is "For the United Kingdom equivalent, see Brake van". I had made a change which was reverted twice. Would like to discuss this in the talk page.

Please see the below links which mention a brake van but no caboose.

http://www.indianrail.gov.in/luggage_Rule.html http://indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/directorate/tele_comm/downloads/TELE/TelephoneCNL/TC-11.pdf http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/codesmanual/IRPWM/PermanentWayManualCh12_data.htm http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/gurgaon/Travelling-with-pets-in-train-cheap-but-complicated/articleshow/19748554.cms

I suggest that the term "Guard's cabin" link to Brake_van and not Caboose

கிருஷ்ணா/Krishna (talk) 02:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I have updated the Guard's Cabin to direct to Brake Van. கிருஷ்ணா/Krishna (talk) 10:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Indian Railways. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 09:32, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Indian Railways. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 06:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

New Updates to Indian Railways page

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have made a few changes to the article over the last few days; adding some missed content and bringing the article up-to-date. The edits are in the followings sections

  • Locomotives
  • Goods Wagons
  • Passenger Coaches
  • Manufacturing
  • Freight Services
  • Issues

If you find any issues with the updates, please reply on this thread.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venkatarv (talk • contribs) 18:03, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

This article has very less information about Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway Suggestion

More information can be added about : Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway
Abbasquadir (talk) 16:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Indian_Railways/Archive_3&oldid=1136816611"