User talk:Bahnfrend

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


New infobox[edit]

Hi Bahnfrend,

The new infobox you've made (or modified) is a huge improvement on the old one, I've changed your sandbox to reflect the style and info I think it should carry, the BG colour is the same as the official PT> one, and I think it gels well with the list of routes. I also changed the map to a PNG one, as the other looks to long and unwieldy (and with all the carriage returns on info also a little confusing) and stripped out the status and start date, status should be obvious and the start date is really hard to determine given the age and changes of Melbourne's tram network, for example route 96 could be considered to start in; 1887 with cable trams, 1956 with electric trams (after 15 years of bus operation) or 1987 with the extension to St Kilda along the converted St Kilda railway line, which itself had opened in 1857, given this I feel it best, and most accurate to omit a start date, and just give all the info in the Route description. The one thing that I would ask is for a link to the timetable and/or route map and for the ticketing zone that the service runs in to be added, these were in the old box and I think are quite useful. Liamdavies (talk) 14:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks awesome, thanks for the additions, I might give it a go adding the Zones line later (hopefully I don't break anything). I agree that the white looks better with the YT logo, but am a little unsure if we should use the YT logo or the PT> logo, YT are the operator, but PT> is the authority that it is operated on behalf of, and all trams trains and I assume soon buses will have PT> on them where metlink once was/is. Thoughts? Liamdavies (talk) 08:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I've made a few changes to Melbourne tram route 86 that I'd like you to look at, I figure we get one template sorted out then roll the infobox out across all the routes in one hit (I'm also thinking about using it on smartbus routes), I'll help with that (I'll do about half). I've removed the "on behalf of PTV" from operator as I think it's just to complex and potentially confusing for the info box, and that can be dealt with elsewhere in the article, I'm also not sure is the Locals should be included, for the routes you've done it's not that much of a problem, but some routes go through a lot of suburbs and the list will be huge, what would be a good compromise on that? Liamdavies (talk) 10:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Photos on Trams in Melbourne[edit]

Hi Bahnfrend, I've started a discussion on the talk page of Trams in Melbourne regarding the infobox photo. Would you mind adding your two cents? Liamdavies (talk) 14:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


Nice job on the Rheingold infobox. I had been thinking of adding one myself, but you saved me the trouble. Between the two of us, I think this article now looks much better than it did until a couple of days ago. SJ Morg (talk) 10:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

European named-train articles[edit]

Man, you're making a lot of work for me! I'm just kidding, of course! It's been fun and satisfying, and I wouldn't have spent so much time doing follow-up edits to the many new named-train articles you've recently created if I weren't enjoying it. However, I do have some concerns. In your reply to my Rheingold message, you indicated that you have assumed that "the foreign language equivalent articles [you've] been translating have clearly been based upon Mertens' work". However, given the large number of errors (incl. major omissions) I've had to correct in some of them – e.g. Goethe (train) and Cisalpin (train) – I'm inclined to believe that either (1) many of the articles were in fact not based on the Mertens/Malaspina book(s), or (2) the Mertens/Malaspina book may have a lot of errors in it. I certainly hope it's not the latter, and it probably is not. I realize those errors were not yours; you were only translating from other-language versions of Wikipedia. However, this is one reason I am not particularly supportive of the practice of doing such translations, when the original article lacks inline citations or, worse, cites almost no good sources (someone's blog is not a reliable source). And sadly, the majority of traction (tram & trolleybus) articles and train/railway articles on Wikipedia cite few or no sources, and many are riddled with errors.

That said, I've found it satisfying to be able to use my extensive collection of Cook's Timetables and a few other publications to assist you with these new (mostly-) TEE articles. Your formatting, structure, and general presentation have been good, and it was really only in the area of sources and inline citations that they needed significant work (in my view). I never would have had time (or wanted to take it) to create these articles, so they would not exist if not for you, but I do feel I've helped improve them significantly – particularly in the cases where the foreign-language WP article that you translated contained a lot of errors. You will have noticed that your work even inspired me to create two articles myself, on the Settebello and the Gottardo. We were both working on new/translated articles on TEE trains at the same time this past weekend, and both of us may have been a little worried that we might be working on the same new article at the same time. (I know I was!) Well, I cannot speak for JB63 (who I do not know, but who created Catalan Talgo this past weekend), but I'm not anticipating writing any others – at least not anytime soon, if ever. The Gottardo and Settebello were always favorites of mine (even though I never got to take a ride in the latter), and I had photos of my own to add to those articles. I've long been a TEE fan, and I managed to travel on several of them back in the late 1970s and 1980s, but regrettably I took photos of almost none, as my main interest was in urban electric transit (same as now), not mainline trains. I don't own any books specifically/exclusively about TEE history, unfortunately.

Also, for what it's worth, I'm probably going to have to (almost) stop working on these (new) articles soon, because I'm getting too far behind in my non-Wikipedia obligations. I don't know whether that makes any difference to you, but I thought I ought to let you know, in case were assuming I'd keep going the way I have been doing for the past week. On the Rheingold article, I agree that it's far from being a Good Article, but it's much better than it was just a week ago (as of 17 Feb.), and I view that train as being one of the most important of all of the TEE trains (as well as having a long pre-TEE history). By the way, nice work finding (on Commons) and adding those historic travel posters to the articles. They look great. SJ Morg (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

The more of these new articles that I check, as each one is created, the closer I am coming to concluding that the people who wrote them on an other-language Wikipedia were intending to write only about the TEE era of whatever-name train it was, even if they didn't include "TEE" in the article title. Although I have not checked specifically for it, I'm now guessing that every single time that one of the articles you recently translated claimed or implied (in the original version) that a given named train was discontinued entirely when its TEE status ended (not downgraded) that it was wrong. I'm becoming frustrated at how many of these articles I am having to correct on that particular point – and similarly for ones that state (more likely the writer just assumed) that a particular named train never existed before being a TEE – and so I ask that you proceed with caution for future translations where this may apply. I'm not particularly worried about the cases where the foreign-language articles do include pre-TEE and post-TEE history for a given train, but only in the cases where they imply or claim that no pre- or post-TEE history existed for that name. I those cases, I now suspect that the author(s) really didn't know, one way or the other, or were thinking that their article was only about the TEE with that name (and they may have failed to make that clear in their writing). SJ Morg (talk) 12:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Settebello / Gottardo[edit]

Thanks for the DYK nomination! Although I knew the article was eligible, I definitely didn't want to take time (anytime soon) to do the required QPQ review, and I didn't think it was fair to ask you to nominate the article (or Gottardo), so I didn't even hint at that idea in my post above, and I had resigned myself to the idea that it would not be receiving a DYK listing. Now that it will (no doubt), I went looking for online refs from good sources, to help the reviewer (although it's not required for DYK approval, just helpful). Haven't found much yet, but did find a good one from The New Yorker magazine, and I'll work that in now. SJ Morg (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I posted my initial response to your Gottardo message on my talk page, as you probably saw. I've now added additional sources to that article, so it cites at least four different publications (counting Cook's Timetable as just one), and created a lead section and added more info. on the multi-voltage RAe TEE II EMUs. I don't know if you already had a specific DYK hook in mind, but I'll keep an eye on the page, and if some rephrasing is necessary to produce inline citations supporting the "hook fact", I'll do my best to address that. I've not found any good online sources for this article, but they are not essential, and the article is well-sourced for a new article and has plenty of inline citations.
For the Settebello article, one issue that may be raised by whomever reviews the nomination is that the ETR 300 article is only a stub. In light of the nomination, I'll add a couple of references, but I'm not sure I can really expand its length much at all (with reliable-source material). Some DYK reviewers dislike it whenever any article linked in the hook is a stub, but some don't care. You might just want to be prepared with an alternative hook just in case, maybe one linking to the Trans Europ Express article, which is pretty well developed. SJ Morg (talk) 13:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
I unexpectedly found a great Italian source for several details about the ETR 300 series and I've added them to that article, so the "stub" issue no longer exists. SJ Morg (talk) 14:18, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
I think the wording of your Gottardo DYK hook is good. I see that your Settebello nomination has already been approved. I hope whoever "promotes" it includes the photo. They probably will, but I'm less confident of that for Gottardo, even though I agree with you that it's a nice photo. SJ Morg (talk) 08:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Even though it appears that you and I agree that the Gottardo photo on the banked curve is best, I think you were wise to add an alternative photo to the nomination. Now that Settebello has had its run on the Main Page (as has Blauer Enzian) without a photo, your record of having always had a photo with your DYK entries is, unfortunately, ended. As for me, I've only had photos with about a third of mine (although I've had a lot more DYKs than you, so far), and maybe two-thirds if I don't count the ones for which I didn't even offer a photo, e.g. the one about Interurban Press. I was disappointed that Settebello didn't get a photo, and I'd been fairly confident (maybe 75%) that it would, but one just never knows about that with DYK. But, if a suitable photo is available, there's nothing to lose by offering one in the nomination – something I think you figured out faster than I did. It was also a pity that the Settebello DYK run occurred at the worst possible time of day (middle of the night in Europe, Friday evening in USA), but with DYK there's never any guarantee that an article will be given a good timeslot, and I'm still very happy that it was included in DYK at all. Thanks again for your part in that. SJ Morg (talk) 10:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Settebello (train)[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Blauer Enzian[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

GRJ excerpt length[edit]

I'm no expert in this area, but I suspect that the excerpt from Great Railway Journeys that you placed in the Cisalpin article is a copyright violation, due to its length. I think it's probably far too long to qualify as "fair use" of copyrighted information. Usually, quotations are not more than two or three sentences, if that, and I've never seen an excerpt nearly this long in any WP article (except maybe from famous novels that are in the public domain due to their age). I don't have time to try to find out whether it's within policy, but you should. SJ Morg (talk) 14:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply left on my talk page. It's clear that you know more about copyright than I do. Now that I am aware of that, and also that you are (like me) trying to act with care in that regard, I'm no longer concerned about the inclusion of this long quote. And that's a relief, because it's a nice addition to the article. SJ Morg (talk) 16:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gottardo[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:07, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Please edit[edit] - if anything needs editing :) - very good to have met up - cheers sats 08:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

oops - the worms sir -[1] no cans, just the worms... each and every one I suspect. sats 15:49, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

uncanny resemblance[edit]

of the profile of the ASG from the side, and the S class - is no coincidence - you dont have any refs on that do you? sats 13:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

arrgghhh our mate gunzo - I dont have a copy to hand in my collection - at the office :( - thanks for that, I am sure mills and his team need an article at some stage - the ASG inside story has more to it than meets the eye... sats 13:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
thanks for links - hadnt realised the mills art existed. inneresting lack of cites - but good insights - sats 14:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

translation of gunzo data to here[edit]

You need a barnstar o western australian railway proportions for your updating class lists thanks - and i hadnt realised there were so few damned msa's I always thought there were more (the numbering change probably brought that on), if only we could find someone with a few 2-3 million to spare so we could rebuild one or two from scratch :/ (wa needs a tornado project) or otherwise a spare 200K or two for the south african ng's currently available sats 08:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically Melbourne tram route 96, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 14:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The next time you re-insert a non-free file that violates WP:NFCC I will be forced to request that you be blocked for violating the policy. Werieth (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Gunzburg-History WAGR Steam[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Gunzburg-History WAGR Steam requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. ❤ Yutsi Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 12:03, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Infobox Switzerland station and services= parameter[edit]

I've been patiently converting Infobox Switzerland station templates to Infobox station, because I wanted to use the services= parameter, and according to the documentation that is only available from Infobox station. Now I've just noticed that you have added a services= parameter to the Infobox Switzerland station template on Zürich Hauptbahnhof and it worked. If only I'd realised. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Switzerland station[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Infobox Switzerland station has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Italy station[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Infobox Italy station has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:10, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox Austria station[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Infobox Austria station has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:13, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Naming commons categories[edit]

I strongly oppose this, willrevert,demand consensus, and leave the project if consesous is gained. Liamdavies (talk) 20:15, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
I'll elaborate on my stance now that I have some more time. This has been done for a number of European tram networks, and all it does is make images much much much harder to find by obscuring them in a web of useless categories that serve no educational value. This makes life harder for editors, who wish to find images for articles, as they have to trove through endless categories to find the image they want, and for readers, who click on a link labelled "Wikimedia Commons has media related to: D-class Melbourne tram" only to find no images, but instead pages of categories. In both cases I find it highly detrimental and disruptive, having one category per vehicle is absurd, they are not unique, they are in fact, generic, one B2 is just like another B2. The differences are less pronounced than cars on the road, yet no one advocates sorting road vehicles by registration plate number; why? Because that's absurd.
As an editor who has moved to doing commons work sorting out many trees and adding pictures to articles, my work would be much harder, more time consuming, and fiddly if I had to sort each vehicle according to number. And for what good? I'm yet to hear one good reason, only rubbish about each car being different, and that someone has put much (wasted) time into doing the categorising.
The Commons is about presenting educational images in an accessible and educational way, sorting tram vehicles by number removes both the presentation and accessibility, it is for these reasons that I thoroughly oppose it. The best way to categorise something, is with it's identical kin, B2 2013 is the same as B2 2084, there is no difference, there is no point in separating them, it just makes finding things much much harder.
If you must go ahead, gain consensus first at 'categories for creation', you may, or may not get it (my efforts to undo this level of categorisation have hit a dead end, see here), if it does go through, I will likely stop adding images to Commons (I want the images I use to be usable by people, not hidden in a category) or uploading images with the numbers digitally erased to prevent categorisation by vehicle number (something I don't want to do, but it would be the only case under which I would continue to add images). In the mean time I'm going to be doing useful productive work, like sorting out messes of cats like this into class, route etc. Liamdavies (talk) 09:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Liamdavies on this. I've always felt the that 'by car' categorization of Lisbon tram images at Commons is much more of a negative than a positive. SJ Morg (talk) 12:37, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I suggested how to go about parallel trees, and it was shot down, read over the Prague discussion again. I feel this to be the thin end of the wedge, and that is the point that I will thoroughly oppose. If someone wants to find a specific picture of a tram, in most cases it's in the file name, a common naming style would solve the concerns, and leave only one tree to manage. With parallel trees it is undoubtable that one tree will contain images that the other doesn't and vice versa (see commons:Category:Cable cars in San Francisco), so who will maintain this? If someone fails to see an image in one tree will they know to go to the other? The more I think about it, the more I feel know, it has to be one or the other, not both. The only reason I proposed parallel trees was because I wanted per model categorisation, and saw it as a potentially acceptable middle ground, it was rejected. And even if implemented, who will check and maintain it? It will be a lot of work, sorting through every file periodically to ensure that it is in both trees will be a nightmare, one that I neither wish to endure, or impose on others.
The other huge issue is that we don't have anywhere near the images required to create such an unfriendly, unwieldy scheme. There are ~500 trams running in Melbourne, and we have 288 files (72 which I have taken and uploaded), so roughly half, that will be a lot of empty cats. And that it has taken almost ten years to amass the 216 images that I haven't taken (22 a year), it will take another ten years before there is one picture of each in service car, and even then only one for most.
If someone wants to have a Vicsig like experience, go to Vicsig, the images collection there is unparalleled, and I doubt it could ever be rivalled by Commons, that's not the point of Commons.
I think the first essay you linked to me hits the nail on the head, a complete lack of standards has left Commons a no man's land, and policies are desperately needed, the first one I would implement would be GNG for cats, cats should only be sorting/meta or to support eduction in the other projects (essentially, they should support sorting of other cats, or support articles - no article, no images cat - simple, yet elegant).
The only way that my mind would change would be if categories could have inherited inclusion, that is to say that all files in 'Melbourne tram Z1 1' are automatically filtered down to 'Z class trams‎', that would make by number sorting easy, and remove margin for error. In the mean time I think I might just sort files and hold off on uploading anything quite some time, and will probably redact numbers from images I do upload (I know this sounds petty and WP:DICKISH, and for that I do apologise, but this really hits a nerve with me).
Oh, and as for Z1.1 vs Z1 1, it is number 1 and class Z1, they are independent, not linked. That is why I don't use the . I think it implies that it is Z1 car number one, where as it is a Z1 car which carries the fleet number of one. But that is simply my preference, there are plenty that use the . and I'm happy to for the sake of consistency within file names on commons. I will use the . in future uploads and file rename requests. Liamdavies (talk) 12:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Bahnfrend

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:33, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Bahnfrend. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (stations).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jr8825Talk 10:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to EMC E3 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • major components since 1939.<ref name=pin73>Pinkpank 1973, pp 13, 26, 90, 101, 106, 118, 121, 122.}}</ref><ref name=ros03>Ross 2003, pp 261, 273.</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


Just wanted to stop by and say thanks; before your edit to EMC E4 I was totally unaware (somehow) of Category:Rail transport book citation templates. Very useful! Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Hauptbahnhof moves[edit]

Hello Bahnfrend. You participated in the move discussion at Talk:Kaiserslautern Hauptbahnhof and you made a list of all the affected articles in this section. Since I finished the names in that section, I assume this takes care of it all? Let me know if you see any mistakes in what I did. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and question[edit]


Great work on the automobile infobox. I have a question, which I imagine you could answer (or fix, if it's a problem). On my Mac there is a humongous blank field at the very bottom of Maruti Suzuki. All the way down, past the categories. Is it just me? Is it repairable? Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and compliments on your Commons gallery. Wish I could have travelled as much.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


Your esteemed opinion, edits, trouts or comments upon would be much appreciated. satusuro 10:16, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the project satusuro 13:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
ok thanks for that was meaning to catch up with you off wiki about all that - hope I get a speedy without too much interference from the usual suspects at cfd :(. I also didnt think it was worth keeping the Locos of Oz and Locos of WA together as technically the Oz is a parent cat and on wp en the parent amnd child cat accompanying each other can be an issue :) thanks again for the advice! satusuro 09:26, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
wash your mouth out btw, Category:Midland Railway of Western Australian Government Railways locomotives - no such thing ever existed! also the counter argument can be argued re the naming if you look through the format locos of the... but I will sit on it while i try to catch up off wiki before saturday. satusuro 09:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
If you look at the template at the base of your wagr loco arts - the templates wording is what i probably considered a way of following with... so what with that? satusuro 09:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
just look at the parent cat - of that cat and the way things are - like everything in the whole trains business - x before y and y before x mixed up totally - bad enough to have project called trains... might try a suggestion off wiki about way to go... satusuro 09:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Golden Arrow[edit]

Re your proposal at talk:Golden Arrow (train). I'd say that there have been no objections to the proposal in over six months. If you wish to split the article and create a new one on the Flèche d'Or, then why not? Mjroots (talk) 21:07, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve Saab Car Museum[edit]

Hi, I'm Bailmoney27. Bahnfrend, thanks for creating Saab Car Museum!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. A good start to a page I'll be monitoring as I am active in the subject of the article. Needs expansion.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Bailmoney27 talk 17:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Name of Ford Taunus[edit]

You might have an opinion on this: Talk:Ford Taunus P1

Regards Charles01 (talk) 07:14, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

The Majestic Line[edit]

As requested, logo added to article. Philphos (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposed reorganisation of specification data in Melbourne tram articles[edit]

I've proposed some changes to the was Melbourne tram articles are structured. I want to move much of the specification data out of the infoboxes and into a new section. I've raised a centralised discussion at Talk:Z-class Melbourne tram#Proposed reorganisation of specification data and was wondering if you have an opinion either way. I have also created a mock-up at User:Liamdavies/sandbox. As you've edited in the Melbourne tram area, your input would be appreciated so we can form a consensus, thanks for your time. Liamdavies (talk) 06:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trams in Görlitz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tramway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


didnt catchup - have a great christmas - will try to do so in new year... satusuro 15:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC) any possibility to help with... into english at all please? satusuro 04:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

very sorry crazy time last couple of weeks, the current heat hasnt helped much... any chance of a talk or whatever in next week or so? satusuro 14:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grand Hotel Kronenhof, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grand Hotel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trams in Dresden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tramway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)


So now we have WA locos that are designated S class locos - they could be either steam or diesel, whats happening, I am not sure I follow the recent edits? satusuro 09:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

ok I think further discussion at some point further on certain aspects... thanks satusuro 14:35, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

ok if you are doing that - please check - it would be appreciated if you could improve that if it needs it! satusuro 06:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Western Australian Government Railways may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • * [[ Rail Heritage WA] – official site

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Trams in Vienna[edit]

Do we really have to provide a translation even when it's not official? Isn't English Wikipedia for English speaking users who want to find information about certain topics, not for those who want learn a foreign language? |FDMS 19:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

bus trip[edit]

Hello, Bahnfrend. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Gnangarra 07:22, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

A Request[edit]

I know you're probably busy, but as if you've done this in these in the past... So, is there any chance you translate at least a 'stub' English-language version of the German Wikipedia Stadtbahn Erfurt article? It's looks like every other German Stadtbahn system has an English-language Wiki article now, except the Erfurt system (oh, and the Kassel RegioTram system). (Also, it looks like every German Straßenbahn system has at least some form of stand-alone English-language Wiki article except for the Duisburg, Mannheim/Ludwigshafen and Mülheim/Oberhausen Straßenbahn systems...) Anyway, if you have any thoughts on this, please feel free to shoot me a message. And if you're too busy, that's cool too...  ;) --IJBall (talk) 01:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey! I finally worked up something for a potential Erfurt Stadtbahn page, by translating portions of the German Wiki article. It can be found at my Sandbox page. If you get a chance, I'd appreciate it if you could take a look, and share any thoughts you might have (or go ahead and make improvements yourself!). I'd like to 'move' the draft article so it's "live" in the next 24 hours, or so... Thanks! --IJBall (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Citation Barnstar Hires.png The Citation Barnstar
For your work on expanding the references and bibliography at Japanese whisky. Well done! oknazevad (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Category:Ship book citation templates[edit]

Category:Ship book citation templates, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

FYI, if you put the category here the template will go into the category without screwing up the mainspace article. If you have other books that belong in the category, it would be helpful to put them in rather than leaving it empty (or one now). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

After discussing with GoodOlfactory I've brought this category back, based on the outcome of the rail transport CfD. Mackensen (talk) 21:34, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Template talk:Infobox automobile#WP:V vs. Manufacturer". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 13:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Trolleybuses in St. Gallen[edit]

Hi again. As you have made several edits to this article, you may be able to answer the question at Talk:Trolleybuses in St. Gallen#What does this mean?. chris_j_wood (talk) 10:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Article review request[edit]

Hi! I'd appreciate it if you would take a look and review Trams in Bonn, when you get a chance. If you have any thoughts or suggestions, please let me know! Thanks! --IJBall (talk) 17:33, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

St. Gallen photo[edit]

This new St Gallen trolleybus photo that you took last week and uploaded to Commons is superb. My compliments! SJ Morg (talk) 01:40, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely. Got anything equivalent to decorate the Trogenerbahn article?. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 16:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Trolleybus terminology discussions[edit]

You may be interested in the discussion at Talk:Trolleybuses in Greater Boston over what to call this mode in article titles (and within the text of articles), and the shorter discussion at the talk page for the article Trolleybus, if you have not already seen them. SJ Morg (talk) 19:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Red Tarvydas dress of Rebecca Twigley[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Red Tarvydas dress of Rebecca Twigley, and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Railway Museum (Livingstone, Zambia) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Railway Museum Livingstone Zambia] – unofficial web page]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Red Tarvydas dress of Rebecca Twigley for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Red Tarvydas dress of Rebecca Twigley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red Tarvydas dress of Rebecca Twigley until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

On a related note, I just created Ruth Tarvydas if you want to check it over. Mabalu (talk) 14:25, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for White shift dress of Jean Shrimpton[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

External link on Viking Cruises[edit]

Per WP:BRD, please don't revert a non-vandalism revert without first discussing it on the talk page. I have started a conversation about the external link at Talk:Viking Cruises#External link to review. --Ahecht (TALK
) 16:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)