Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains

The Trains WikiProject
General information
Main project page	(WP:TWP)	talk
Portal	(P:Trains)	talk
Project navigation bar		talk
Project participants		talk
Project banner (doc)	{{TWP}}	talk
Project category		talk
Manual of style	(WP:TWP/MOS)	talk
Welcome message		talk
Departments
Assessments	(WP:TWP/A)	talk
Peer review	(WP:TWP/PR)	talk
To do list		talk
Daily new article search	search criteria	talk
Task forces
Article maintenance		talk
Assessment backlog elim. drive		talk
By country series		talk
Categories		talk
Images		talk
Locomotives		talk
Maps		talk
Rail transport in Germany		talk
Monorails		talk
Operations		talk
Passenger trains		talk
Portal		talk
Rail transport modelling		talk
Timelines		talk

Requested move at Talk:China Railway#Requested move 17 February 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:China Railway#Requested move 17 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 21:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Indian Railways locomotive class WAM-2/3#Requested move 4 February 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Indian Railways locomotive class WAM-2/3#Requested move 4 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 12:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Infrastructure inspection train

Do we have any articles covering the concept of an infrastructure inspection train or an inspection train? I'm thinking of something like the inspection trains in Victoria (Australia). Nyttend (talk) 04:47, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

We have more specific articles Track geometry car, Track checker (covering only the USA and Ireland), China Railway comprehensive inspection trains, Catenary maintenance vehicle, Clearance car, and articles about individual examples (e.g. New Zealand Track Evaluation Carriage, New Measurement Train, Doctor Yellow, SNCF TGV Iris 320, Inspection locomotive (which focuses exclusively on the steam era)), but as far as I've been able to find we don't have an article on the concept as a whole beyond the higher level Departmental vehicle (an article in poor shape). We have Category:Maintenance of way equipment (which is broader) and sub-category Category:Track recording trains (which is narrower) which I found by knowing the New Measurement Train article exists. It turns out this is an area which needs quite a bit of work. Thryduulf (talk) 12:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Sometimes infrastructure is inspected using an ordinary train that is not carrying passengers (in the UK, it will run under a 1Z** or 5Z** headcode). An example of this is the empty train sent out along the down Northern City line from Moorgate on 8 March 2013, in order to find out why water was pouring through the tunnel crown to the north of Old Street. See Penetration and obstruction of a tunnel between Old Street and Essex Road stations, London 8 March 2013. No spoilers: it's interesting reading. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:01, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Baraboo station#Requested move 4 March 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Baraboo station#Requested move 4 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 22:58, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Bulk page move/updates needed for SEPTA Metro articles

Last week the SEPTA Metro rail network in Philadelphia debuted its new line names.[1][2] This means that there are a bunch of pages that need to be moved, and their articles need to updated. Additionally, we'll have to update many templates and its subpage at Module:Adjacent stations. This is a big task and while some editors have been making some changes, there are currently lots of inconsistencies in the existing articles (i.e. some have been partially updated, some not updated at all). Aside from this conversation from over a year ago, I haven't seen much discussion on it, and would like to suggest forming some type of ad-hoc taskforce.

See this talk post (from December 2023) that mentions many of the proposed page moves that should now be implemented: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Stations#SEPTA_Metro_page_moves

I would be happy to have a discussion about this and I hear any other suggestions. –Dream out loud (talk) 18:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

@Dream out loud: Stations and Modules are already done, I'm saving the line articles for last. Cards84664 18:36, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Have all the station articles been updated to reflect the new modules? Also, City Hall station (SEPTA) and 15th Street station (SEPTA) should be merged into a single article. –Dream out loud (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

All done yes. There's a draft for 15/City that I am adapting now. Cards84664 19:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Camellia railway station#Requested move 28 February 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Camellia railway station#Requested move 28 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 14:59, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

200th anniversary of passenger rail

Wikivoyage notes at voy:Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub#200 years of railway travel that the 200th anniversary of passenger rail travel is coming up in about six months. Does this group want to do anything? WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:16, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Relatedly, I do have plans to get Granite Railway – the first common carrier railroad in the US – to GA or FA in time for its 200th anniversary next year. (It wasn't a passenger carrier until decades later, though.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:28, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Short descriptions

I noticed this morning that a large number of locomotive articles which previously had no short description had been given one… however, I’m strongly of the opinion that the description given was too basic and non-descriptive. I wholly agree that the wikidata descriptions are all too often way too in depth to be used as a short description, but I feel as though the replacement “type of steam locomotive” was too far in the opposite direction.

What do we think short descriptions for locomotives should contain so that we can have some kind of basic consensus on the issue? I’d be in favour of something like, as an example, “type of shunting locomotive in the UK” for a UK-based shunter. Danners430 (talk) 07:39, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy pinging @MediaKyle Danners430 (talk) 07:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

I was basing it off this chart. MediaKyle (talk) 10:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

That makes sense... I think this instance though is an example where a small amount of additional information is actually useful to users - there are so many hundreds (thousands?) or types of locomotive, that simply saying something is a "type of steam locomotive" is (I would argue) somewhat unhelpful, since it could be anything from a shunting loco from the 1850s in Europe to a new-build replica in China. Danners430 (talk) 10:37, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

That makes sense. Feel free to start setting them to whatever you think is right. It does say above the chart that they "can be varied if the context allows something better". MediaKyle (talk) 10:41, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

I'll hold off for now - I just think it would make sense to get agreement on some kind of loose standard we should follow, as right now it's only my opinion :-) Danners430 (talk) 10:44, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

If you take a look here to see both pages that have a short description and infobox locomotive, there's absolutely zero consistency across the 2600 pages with a short description. I wouldn't worry too much about it and just set them to whatever you think will aid the reader in navigation. MediaKyle (talk) 10:49, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

The zero consistency is precisely why I'm using the opportunity to hopefully get a discussion going - obviously if nothing comes of it then nothing changes, but there's never any harm in trying to get a discussion started. Danners430 (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely. I went ahead and left a link to this discussion at WikiProject Short Descriptions, that might solicit some more input. Cheers, MediaKyle (talk) 11:06, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Here are a sample of the short descriptions for articles about individual steam locomotives (in the order search displayed them to me)

along with my comments:

• Stephenson's Rocket Steam locomotive by Robert Stephenson in 1829

  Not sure the builder's name is relevant, especially as it's in the title, but the year is good

• LNER Class A3 4472 Flying Scotsman British express steam locomotive

  Good, but I'd add the year and possibly a note it's preserved, e.g. Preserved British express steam locomotive built 1923

• LNER Class A4 4468 Mallard Preserved British steam locomotive

  Again I'd add the year, role and date ("Preserved British express steam locomotive built 1938") I'm on the fence about mentioning it's the speed world record holder - it's key information but I can't think how to express that concisely

• LNER Peppercorn Class A1 60163 Tornado British steam locomotive built in 2008

  This is good, although I might add "express" in there.

• Santa Fe 3751 Preserved American Santa Fe 3751 class 4-8-4 locomotive

  "Santa Fe 3751 class" is redundant to the title and I'm not sure about the wheel arrangement. I'd definitely add "steam"

• Fairy Queen (locomotive) 1855-built steam locomotive in India

  I might add "preserved" or "operational" or something like that but otherwise I think this is good

• Salamanca (locomotive) Early British steam locomotive (built 1812)

  I can't improve on this

• Southern Pacific 4449 Preserved SP GS-4 class 4-8-4 locomotive in Portland, Oregon

  I'd replace "SP GS-4 class 4-8-4" with "express steam" or "express passenger steam" and the year

• Steam Horse locomotive Early British locomotive (1813-1815)

  This is good, I don't know "steam" is needed hear given it's in the title but I wouldn't object

• Pere Marquette 1225 Preserved PM N-1 class 2-8-4 locomotive

  I think something like "Preserved American steam locomotive built 1941" would be more useful

• Sierra No. 3 Preserved 4-6-0 steam locomotive in Jamestown, California

  I'd get rid of the 4-6-0 and add "built 1891"

• Pennsylvania Railroad 5550 PRR T-1 class 4-4-4-4 locomotive under construction

  I think something like "American express steam locomotive under construction" would be more useful

• Cherepanov steam locomotive First steam locomotive built in Russia

  This is a good short description imo, I might add the date at the end though.

• Union Pacific 4014 Preserved Union Pacific steam locomotive

  "Union Pacific" is redundant, I'd replace it with "American" and add the date (and maybe role).

Having gone through them I think I can say the key bits of information are "steam locomotive", date and nationality with role or other distinction also sometimes helpful. Thryduulf (talk) 12:11, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps something like the following - "Type of [early/late/preserved/new-build] [nationality] [traction type] [express/freight/passenger/mixed-traffix/shunting] locomotive, built [first built year]. As an example for the Class 08 - "Type of early British diesel-electric shunting locomotive, built 1952" - thoughts? Danners430 (talk) 12:35, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

I was focussing on individual locomotives, but that could work for type. We'd need more adjectives for your first set though as I don't think any of those work for something like the e.g. Class 67. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2025 (UTC)