User talk:TheTrolleyPole

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

Welcome![edit]

Hello, TheTrolleyPole, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox[edit]

User:TheTrolleyPole/sandbox

Contacts[edit]

s-line template[edit]

The Carleton Station article has the following statements:

{{s-rail|title=OC Transpo}}

{{s-line|system=OC Transpo|line=O-Train|previous=Carling|next=Confederation}} | mpassengers= }}

The line parameter in the s-line statement needs to be changed from "O-Train" to "O-Train Trillium Line" as OC Transpo will have 2 lines of O-Train service.

From the documentation (Template:S-line), there appears to be a table hidden somewhere in the system to define each rail line. Do you know where that table is stored and how I can view it? Should I be attempting to modify that table or cloning it with the new rail line name?

Thanks, TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:30, 16 July 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Those {{s-line}} sub-templates are rather intricate. In this case I renamed Template talk:S-line/OC Transpo right/O-Train and Template talk:S-line/OC Transpo left/O-Train (for the "right" and "left" terminus) and and adapted Template:OC Transpo lines and Template:OC Transpo color. I also updated all the Trillium Line station articles, not just Carleton Station. That should take care of the issue. Huon (talk) 22:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Search for all articles referencing a given article[edit]

Does Wikipedia have a utility to identify all articles that reference a certain article?

Foe example, I would like to identify all articles having [[O-Train]] or [[Ottawa O-Train]] (a redirect), or simply the phrase "O-Train" buried in the text. The meaning of "O-Train" has changed so that virtually all articles that mention "O-Train" must be slightly reworded. All such articles would have a link to the O-Train article.

I find that the Google search engine (e.g. search: Wikipedia "O-Train") provides only partial results.

So far, I have found 16 such articles but I suspect there may be more.

Thanks, TheTrolleyPole (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

here -- Diannaa (talk) 18:14, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Special:WhatLinksHere also may help. Huon (talk) 18:19, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again.

When using WhatLinksHere to scan for article O-Train, I get over 500 article hits of which I estimate that 95% are unwanted hits. The problem appears to be that O-Train is referenced in 8 templates. So even though there are no direct references in 95% of the articles, there appears to be an indirect reference via the template. Would there be someway to exclude such indirect references from the search?

If not, a user (who I believe is an editor) suggested I temporarily delete O-Train from all 8 templates, do the search and changes, and then undo the temporary deletions. Any comments on this Plan B would be welcome.

Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editing eight templates, worsening (even temporarily) hundreds of articles in the process, just to do a search seems a bad idea to me. This search finds all occurrences of "O-Train" in the wikicode, but it's not limited to links (and you apparently can't search for "O-Train]]" in the same way). Still, those pages most likely all are relevant. Huon (talk) 22:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Other searches[edit]

Splitting the Trillium Line article[edit]

Splitting the Trillium Line article 1[edit]

I wish to complete the splitting of article Trillium Line by first copying all its text into article O-Train (which is currently a redirect toTrillium Line and then start to edit or delete duplicate sections. The Trillium Line article is a somewhat intricate Siamese twin of 2 topics, but I know how to handle that.

I documented my plan on the Talk page. An editor directed me to seek the advice of the help-me service.

Another editor had expressed concern about copying over the revision history to the new article and an article said there is an administrative function to do so.

So, could the text and revision history be copied over from Trillium Line to O-Train?

Also, is there a command I could use to lock out non-registered (IP-address) users from editing for a week while I work on the 2 articles?

I would appreciate any other advice you may have.

Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-and-paste moves indeed are a problem, but since here content and edits on what should remain and what should be split are intertwined, it's impossible to use admin tools to cleanly split page histories. The procedure for splitting pages is explained at WP:PROPERSPLIT. One could argue that it would be more appropriate to keep the current article's history at O-Train; if that's preferred, you could move the page to that title and then split off the Trillium Line content. Regarding protection I have replied at the article's talk page. Huon (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting the Trillium Line article 2[edit]

Given the answer in the previous inquiry, I believe I should build a stub article to replace the redirect in O-Train moving text from article Trillium Line.

I have cataloged the sections in the Trillium Line article below and perhaps the splitting is not as complex as I first thought

  • 0 (introduction) - Move only paragraph 2 to O-Train
  • 1 Pilot project - Stays in Trillium Line and add a brief overview in O-Train
  • 2 Trillium Line - Stays in Trillium Line and add a brief overview in O-Train
  • 3 Early extension plans - Move to O-Train and replace by brief overview in Trillium Line
  • 4 Expansion plan - Intermixed topics
  • 5 Fleet - Stays in Trillium Line
  • 6 Facilities - Stays in Trillium Line
  • 7 See also - applies to both articles with little modification
  • 8 References - No REF commands are coded in this section.
  • 9 External links - Stays in Trillium Line

Sections 3 is nearly half of the article length and appears to be the only section I want to move intact to article O-Train. The main problem with this section is that other articles link to this section directly thinking it is in O-Train, which the redirect disguises.

Thus, I want to move paragraph 2 of the Trillium Line intro and Early extension plans to the O-Train article with attribution. Expansion plan is a small overview to be reworked in each article.

Given the article cited in the previous help request, it appears I should give attribution to each block of text I move from one article to another where attribution means stating "Contents [[WP:SPLIT]] from [[Source article name]]" and "Contents [[WP:SPLIT]] to [[Destination article name]]" in the edit summary. There are only 2 blocks of text to be moved with attribution.

So, I need to spend a lot of up-front time building the O-Train stub, install it and then quickly transfer in the 2 chunks from article Trillium Line with attribution.

Is the above the approach I should take?

Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I'd suggest you create a draft in your userspace, transfer whatever you need at your leisure into the draft (with attribution), and when it's ready we can get rid of the redirect and move your draft in its place. That last step will require an admin's help in deleting the redirect; you're welcome to {{ping}} me when you're ready. Turning the redirect into the new article will also work, of course. Huon (talk) 15:42, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting the Trillium Line article 3[edit]

Hello again.

I like a little clarification on how to do the attribution mentioned in your last advice:

  • When you say "userspace", is that my sandbox?
  • My sandbox's revision history is rather cluttered due to experimentation. Does that get copied when an administrator installs the new article?
  • The article you directed me to, How to properly split an article says:
    • Paste into the new article (contents from the source article) with edit summary "Contents [[WP:SPLIT]] from [[Source article name]]" and save the new article."
  • Thus, does this mean that I should copy the split text in a separate step so that the edit summary for the split contents becomes part of the sandbox's revision history? Is that how I should handle attribution?

Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 01:40, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TheTrolleyPole, you can have multiple sandboxes, for example User:TheTrolleyPole/sandbox1, User:TheTrolleyPole/sandbox2, etc. There really is no limit. You could also call them other things like User:TheTrolleyPole/O-Train.
As for the actual content creation - I'm with Huon on this one. There is no need to "quickly" copy things over, as it simply makes for more errors and more work in the long run. Pretend that your sandbox article is the new O-Train article, and do everything properly (attribution and whatnot). When it's ready, it can be moved to the proper location. Primefac (talk) 08:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting the Trillium Line article 4[edit]

@Huon:Could you please install the new "split" O-Train article. It has attributions in the revision history and is in User:TheTrolleyPole/O-Train. It replaces the redirect on the current O-Train page. Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 23:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Section links[edit]

Some articles link to a section within another article: e.g. [[O-Train#Early extension plans]]. At times I find such links broken when someone has renamed the section. Thus, I like to add a comment such as:

==Early extension plans==<!--[[OC Transpo]] links directly to this section name-->.

I have come across a case where about a dozen articles link to a section name in a single article with the majority of the links being broken due to section renaming. I was thinking in this case I should set up a redirect page called "O-Train early extension plans" containing: #REDIRECT [[O-Train#Early extension plans]] and have the dozen articles reference the redirect. The benefit is that if the section name changes, then only the redirect needs to be changed. However, I am concerned that someone might say I am cluttering up the search function with unnecessary search titles.

The question is: Does Wikipedia have a recommended practice for such section links?

Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{anchor}} within the heading rather than an external redirect. If the heading gets renamed, as long as the anchor remains so will the link. I will demonstrate tomorrow. Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Secondaywaltz; this is precisely what the {{anchor}} template is for. Basically, add {{anchor|Name of the section as it appears in the incoming links}} next to the section heading, and if it's subsequently renamed, the links will still point to the right section automatically, with no need to even change the redirect. On an unrelated note, I have moved the draft on O-Train into the mainspace. Huon (talk) 01:40, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For the example you give it would be {{anchor|Early extension plans}}, which you insert at the end of current heading name to maintain the link. Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Section link test[edit]

Main article: Culture of Israel § Theater

The title is "Theatre" but the anchor is "Theater".

If the heading is the same, then adding the anchor is redundant. I thought you wanted to add an anchor where the title had been changed. 12:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
From what I seen, contributors change section names without worrying whether another article links to it. A major part of the problem is that there is no warning (a comment) or protection (an anchor) in the wiki-code. Thus, my concern is in future mods rather than just past ones. So, I should either use a comment or an anchor to mark linked section names. Which would you prefer? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 01:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: A compromise would be to add a comment on the line for a linked section name saying: <!--Other articles link to this section name. Thus, if you change this name, you must code an {{anchor}} for the old section name to avoid broken links.-->. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be letting minor problems distract you from the prime mission of writing a good article. Don't worry about any of those petty things. Secondarywaltz (talk) 05:14, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

O-Train maintenance[edit]

See Big O-Train maintenance contract up for grabs, for more information. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I was trying to find info on who is currently doing the maintenance but without success. Alstom says they would do maintenance training but not for whom. So, instead of leaving "Maintenance is provided by Bombardier Transportation", I replaced it with the more neutral "Before their retirement, the Bombardier Talent trainsets were maintained by Bombardier Transportation at the Walkley facilities." TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
. . . . and that is why I gave you this link. It was not a coincidence or mind reading! I could not find any recent contract called or given out by the City of Ottawa, and that article was a year ago Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hillcrest Complex[edit]

I see you have added more details about the Hillcrest Complex (and improved articles for other TTC facilities). Perhaps it is time to create a stand-alone article, to go with the carhouses. Note that the redirect has existed for a long time. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:37, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So we would like to do a split of the Hillcrest section to replace the redirect with a new article, and replace the old section by a summary and a "main article" link. I might be able to find more material for the new article but until that time the new article would have nearly the same content as the old section. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably the TTC's most important facility. I think we should be able to work up something. There is no rush. Secondarywaltz (talk) 05:09, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New article[edit]

I am splitting the "Hillcrest Complex" section from article Toronto Transit Commission facilities into a new article called Hillcrest Complex that will replace a redirect of the same name. Could you please replace the redirect with the following new article from my sandbox:

User:TheTrolleyPole/Hillcrest Complex

The first revision history description for the new article says: "split content from Toronto Transit Commission facilities#Hillcrest Complex; see that article's history for attribution".

After installation of the new article, I will delete the old section from article Toronto Transit Commission facilities with a revision history description saying: "split content to Hillcrest Complex". Then I will add the following replacement:

Hillcrest Complex

Main article: Hillcrest Complex

Hillcrest Complex is the TTC's largest facility and is responsible for most of the maintenance work on the system's surface vehicles, including heavy overhauls, repairs and repainting.

Thanks TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:24, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the draft to Hillcrest Complex, but I'd say it needs better references. Of the current three, one is TTC, another is a fan page, and the third is a blog. None of that constitutes a reliable independent reference. Huon (talk) 21:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above comments on reliable, independent references are problematic. Both Steve Munro and James Bow have much knowledge of history and current events. Disqualifying them wipes out a huge, reliable source of info. Disqualifying the TTC means we cannot cite the commission's project plans and announcements. This would leave only published books (by rail historians) and occasional comments by newspaper reporters. Any comments from editors? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Huon: You were too quick in moving an unfinished Draft from User space. Well, at least it's out where other editors can contribute. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@TheTrolleyPole: Fill out the content on each building, and add more references. You don't need to discuss everything with others. Just do it! Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about declining the help request, but I expect the topic is notable enough for an article; everything else can be resolved by editing. Huon (talk) 22:25, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SmartTrack[edit]

I'd invite your comment on this. Thanks. --Natural RX 13:17, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maple Leaf Forever Park[edit]

User:TheTrolleyPole/Maple Leaf Forever Park is a new article to replace a redirect to Alexander Muir#Legacy. This is not a split as no material will be removed from the Alexander Muir article, which will be modified to link to the new article. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:21, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Topher385 moved page User:TheTrolleyPole/Maple Leaf Forever Park to Draft:Maple Leaf Forever Park: Preferred location for AfC submissions.

AfC notification: Draft:Maple Leaf Forever Park has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Maple Leaf Forever Park. Thanks! Naraht (talk) 10:01, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Muir Memorial Gardens[edit]

Draft:Alexander Muir Memorial Gardens is a new article to replace a redirect to Alexander Muir#Legacy. This is not a split as no material will be removed from the Alexander Muir article, which will be modified to link to the new article.

Disputed contribution[edit]

Contributor Special:Contributions/99.255.143.109 made a change to article SmartTrack that I disagree with and wish to reverse. I documented the issue in Talk:SmartTrack#Unionville; however, I doubt Special:Contributions/99.255.143.109 will read it. I suspect that this is the second time the contributor made such a change. Do you have advice on how I should proceed? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:22, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. You should try to talk to the editor first, then take higher steps if the previous ones don't work. The nutshell summarizes it quite excellently:
—Hexafluoride Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk 20:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to this map: http://smarttrack.to/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/SmTk-NewOption.png?x64185 2607:FEA8:A29F:FDEE:592B:5D66:F665:799E (talk) 22:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Second inquiry[edit]

Contributor Special:Contributions/99.255.143.109 has no talk page to discuss the disputed entries, and has been using out-of-date info to override my own contributions. May I add the {{Disputed}} tag to the article pointing to the article's talk page to attract comment hopefully from editors knowledgeable about the subject matter? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:12, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTrolleyPole: You can still post messages to an IP's page, just like any other user: User talk:99.255.143.109. The {{Disputed}} template is used when the entire article's accuracy is disputed, which I don't think is the case. What you're describing is called disruptive editing behavior on 99.255.143.109's part. If the IP user doesn't respond to your concerns you should start an request for comments on the article's talkpage.
Obviously, if you have newer reliable sources that show that the information supersedes that of the old ones, you should go ahead and do it yourself. If the user keeps making those disruptive edits, and your various steps of conflict resolution don't stop them, then you could request a block (or page protection, the admins will evaluate and decide). Make sure that you're not violating the rules yourself (such as the three-revert rule; see edit warring). —Hexafluoride Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk 06:19, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

173.230.176.176[edit]

REF date formatting[edit]

The date function eg {{date|2017-01-23}} translates into "23 January 2017", but one editor insists that the date be presented as "January 23, 2017". So, is there a date function that would produce that result from yyyy-mm-dd input?

I have created templates in an offline file to reduce work and errors, and facilitate consistancy. The template (see example below) is based on yyyy-mm-dd format. I simply key in the yyyy-mm-dd date once, and copy it to the other locations modifying the "accessdate" as needed.

<ref name=TheStar-2017-??-??>{{cite news |url=??? |title=??? |newspaper=[[Toronto Star]] |author=Ben Spurr, San Grewal & Jennifer Pagliaro |date={{date|2017-??-??}} |accessdate=2017-??-??}}</ref>

I suspect that editors may be inconsistant in opinion on date format judging from corrections (or lack thereof) to REF dates in my contributions. I believe I saw the date={{date|2017-??-??}} technique from the contribution of one editor, which appears to be unacceptable to another. Is there a published standard for REF dates?

Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Try {{date|2017-01-23|mdy}} to get January 23, 2017. There is no general standard; the date format should be appropriate for the topic of the article (that is, articles on American topics get "month day, year", British or European topics mostly get "day month year", other topics accordingly - if in doubt, follow the pattern used by the source itself. Unless it's a clear-cut case of inappropriateness, don't change the pattern already established in an article. WP:MOSDATE has more on how to format dates. Huon (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Date template[edit]

Talk page discussion copied here for reference

I am wondering why you have been converting the REF dates, for example, from {{date|2017-05-13|mdy}} to May 13, 2017 even though the date template produces the same result, thus satisfying MOS:DATEFORMAT. A Wikipedia Help person actually had advised me on how to use the date template to produce mdy format specifically for a REF date. See User talk:TheTrolleyPole#REF date formatting. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 17:16, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just using a script and it doesn't use the Date template. It does find and fix occurrences of misformatted dates in the body, though, and honestly I think using the date template for references is overkill. The only benefit of using {{date|2017-05-14|mdy}} vs. plain "May 14, 2017" is that it makes it relatively easy to change the date format if you want to... except this script, WP:MOSNUMscript, can do that quickly too, and "May 14, 2017" is arguably easier to read in the source than the templated version. —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answer. If there are utilities to convert REF date formats, why does Toronto subway still use one convention (access date : ymd) and the line articles (e.g. Line 5 Eglinton) use another (access date : mdy)? The inconsistancy is one reason I use the date template. (Another is that my REFs usually have 3 dates where I type in one in ymd format and copy it to the other locations. Still another, is that I can convert an access date from ymd to mdy without retyping the date.) TheTrolleyPole (talk) 18:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I edited many of the TTC-related articles to follow mdy as that seems to be a fairly accepted "Canadian" format and most of them had a collection of very inconsistent date formats. However, Toronto subway had access-dates that were all or predominantly yyyy-mm-dd and as per MOS:DATERET, we are apparently supposed to maintain existing formats. I didn't think a strong argument could be made that everything in that article should be converted to mdy on the basis of it being all over the map, so I left it as is. —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Visible anchor[edit]

I had modified an existing section title within an article to make it an anchor because another article has a link to that section (Line 1 Yonge–University#Toronto–York Spadina Subway Extension). The idea was to inform future contributors that modifying this section title would result in a broken link. My mod in article Line 1 Yonge–University was:

== {{Visible anchor|Toronto–York Spadina Subway Extension}}{{Anchor|Spadina extension}} ==

The {{Anchor|Spadina extension}} was pre-existing.

However, Editor #1 reversed that mod with:

==Toronto–York Spadina Subway Extension<span id="Spadina extension"></span>==

Editor #1 explained the mod as "Toronto–York Spadina Subway Extension: per both {{anchor}} and {{Visible anchor}} template documentation, neither should be used in section headings, also id with section name created by section formatting already".

An Editor #2 told Editor #1: "That is what they are designed to do. I leave that to you but you probably broke links", but left Editor #1's mod intact.

The visible anchor documentation says: "This template should not be used within section headings. Doing so will result in broken links in edit summaries, as well as possible duplicate anchors."

So, who is right - Editor #1 or Editor#2? If Editor #1 is right, why does visible anchor exists? How should one protect against broken links?

Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 14:45, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It helps to provide links to diffs, and pinging the editors in question could be considered a courtesy when discussing whether they are right or wrong.
That said, Joeyconnick referred to the template documentation in their edit summary. You quote it above; it clearly says that the template should not be used in section headings. So Joeyconnick is right, and Secondarywaltz is wrong about what the templates are designed to do.
The templates exist because people may want to link to parts of an article that are not section headings - say, a word within a table, or maybe even something within the running text. In such instances the templates can be used to create new anchors that will accept incoming links. If you are concerned about broken links, my advice would be to add a HTML comment after the section heading (likely in the next line) that says where the links are coming from. Huon (talk) 15:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

==Toronto–York Spadina Subway Extension<span id="Spadina extension"></span>==

Using Wikipedia articles as a REF[edit]

I revised a short summary paragraph in a neighborhood article to briefly describe public transit in that neighborhood with links to the public transit articles that had all the details and the REF's. The short summary required 5 REF's which I copied from the linked articles.

Instead of copying REF's from the linked article, is there a way to indicate to editors that the linked Wikipedia articles are the references? Using the main-article and see-also tags seemed to be inappropriate. Thanks.TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:33, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying references is the way to go. Firstly, readers should not be sent on a scavenger hunt to verify information. Secondly, the article you are referring to might get changed - and then you'd be pointing to an article that might no longer back up the content in question. Huon (talk) 23:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What you did is correct. Every article should stand alone, although links are expected to the related subject. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:20, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming an article[edit]

See {{Requested move}} to do this formally. Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requested moves

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions

Public art[edit]

McCowan Yard[edit]

Draft:McCowan Yard is a new article to replace the redirect in McCowan Yard which currently points to a deleted section in article Toronto Transit Commission bus garages, an article no longer related to "McCowan Yard". Thus, the redirect "McCowan Yard" must be deleted before moving Draft:McCowan Yard. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 12:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Background notes: Toronto Transit Commission facilities was moved to Toronto Transit Commission bus garages after all rail facilities were deleted from the article including the section on the McCowan Yard. Redirect TTC McCowan RT Yard needs to be changed to redirect to "McCowan Yard" after the draft is moved. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 12:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to replace a redirect with a new article. I have set up Draft:McCowan Yard but I think it is missing a template to trigger the review process. How would I get the draft installed? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 12:31, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I've tagged the page with WP:G6 and an administrator should delete the redirect shortly. :) TheDragonFire (talk) 12:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: McCowan Yard has been accepted[edit]

McCowan Yard, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

TheDragonFire (talk) 12:50, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trillium Park[edit]

Hello. I made a mistake and moved new article User:TheTrolleyPole/Trillium Park to Wikipedia:Trillium Park when I should have tried to move it to the "article" space. Sorry. I was trying to replace redirect Trillium Park with the new article. When I tried to replace that redirect with the new article, I got the message that I was not authorized to do such a move. Could you please help me out of this dilemma. Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:45, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The redirect to be replaced merely points to a section that just makes a brief mention of the park being described in the article. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:47, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Alex ShihTalk 00:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge award[edit]

The Red Maple Leaf Award
This maple leaf is awarded to TheTrolleyPole for improvements to the quality of a half-dozen transit and park articles during The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 15:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Schematic diagram[edit]

Documentation[edit]

Is there documentation on the codes used to draw lines for rail line schematics as in the attached template (St. Clair detailed)? Currently, I have to search for an example elsewhere and copy in its code. Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:03, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think a good place to start would be at Wikipedia:Route diagram template. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. You can also start a discussion at WikiProject Templates. Primefac (talk) 01:17, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Symbols:

Route map: Template:Routemap

Symbols[edit]

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge award (year two)[edit]

The Red Maple Leaf Award
This maple leaf is awarded to TheTrolleyPole for expanding three transit articles during the second year of The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 00:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maps as REFs[edit]

User:Magnolia677 reversed a mod I made citing the reason "This entire section is based on an editor's interpretation of two maps". (The article was Exhibition Loop which describes a streetcar loop.) I had used maps before as REFs without a problem. Essentially I was converting into words what I saw on the maps. I know that Wikipedia has writing guidelines. So, are there guidelines for or against using maps as a REF? I have seen seen Wikipedia articles (e.g. Leslie Barns) showing a schematic diagram of a rail installation but not citing a REF. So an additional question is why would it be appropriate to describe a rail installation in a diagram without a REF, but not in words even with a REF? Presumably, both came from a map. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Joeyconnick: Request for information. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the problem with looking at a map and describing what you see is that you may see something that isn't there. This essay describes that and other issues. For example, in this edit you wrote "Exhibition Loop lies on the north side of Manitoba Drive within Exhibition Place", but the maps used as sources show the streetcar tracks going under a highway (which may or may not be "within" Exhibition Place). This map also does not support that the tracks are "within" Exhibition Place. I've also been unable to find a source to support or deny this, so at this point it's just one editor's interpretation of a map. That was just one example from the edit, which certainly seems to be original research. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I'd be very cautious about using maps as references; it's rather easy to give them undue weight or even to engage in original research. For example, "The loop [...] runs counter-clockwise." - I don't see that the map shows the direction. There are also issues with Google Maps' reliability. Not citing a source of course isn't any better. Using reliable secondary sources and summarizing what they report about the loop would be the way to go. If no human has bothered to write about those details, maybe they aren't all that important. Huon (talk) 23:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge award (year three)[edit]

The Bronze Maple Leaf Award
This maple leaf is awarded to TheTrolleyPole for substantial expansions to four articles on public transportation in Toronto during the third year of The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 20:12, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

REF for a downloaded document[edit]

A webpage has a PDF document that is loaded with useful facts for Wikipedia articles. The problem is that the PDF must be downloaded rather than displayed in the browser. The question is how should I code the REF template? Should I code a REF (with notice "Reference PDF file must be downloaded") as:

<ref name="Amstelveenlijn-Fact-Sheet">{{cite web |url=https://amstelveenlijn.nl/english/ |title=Amstelveenlijn Fact Sheet |work=Amstelveenlijn |date=September 2018 }} Reference PDF file must be downloaded.</ref>

Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd cite it as {{cite web |url=https://amstelveenlijn.nl/english/ |title=Amstelveenlijn Factsheet |author=City of Amsterdam |date=September 2018 |website=Amstelveenlijn |format=pdf |access-date= |url-status= |archive-url= |archive-date= }}, which is pretty much what you have. I don't think the note about clicking through to the PDF is necessary, but feel free to leave it in. If the PDF could be reliably linked to directly, I'd suggest doing that, but that doesn't look like a good option in this case. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kronenburg tram stop[edit]

Greetings from Amsterdam. Just to let you know, Kronenburg tram stop has been reopened in march 2020. It lies underground now. There are new pictures on commons,Ceescamel (talk) 12:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. In which Commons category are the new pictures? Could you give me a link to one of them? If there is a picture of the new Kronenburg stop, I would like to incorporate into the Amsteltram article. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 17:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

§ symbol[edit]

There are a number of top-hat templates such as main, also, further, etc. that accept a page#section such as {{also|page#section}} and format it as "See also: page § section", with "page#section" being displayed as "page § section". What I wish to do is the following:

==See also==
* [[page#section]]

and have page/section displayed as

  • page § section

Is there a Wikipedia template to do that? Or must I always code the link as [[page#section|page § section]]? (I don't know the name of the § symbol.)

Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{Section link|User talk:TheTrolleyPole|Welcome!}} renders as User talk:TheTrolleyPole § Welcome!. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Street Railway[edit]

Transferred discussion to Talk:Horsecar#Toronto Street Railway

514 Cherry & 504 King[edit]

I am currently proposing to merge these articles. If you would like to discuss, see Talk:504 King#Merger proposal. Username6892 16:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Placing tables side-by-side[edit]

In Toronto Railway Company#Roster summaries, there is a list of 4 small narrow tables. I would like to put the tables side by side in pairs rather than having them all stacked with a lot of white space to the right. Is there a way to do this? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Better to ask this sort of question in the technical section at The Village Pump.
Because Wikipedia pages may display in both desktop and mobile formats, what looks desirable on desktop may not work so well on mobile and vice versa. Whatever approach you take on this desired appearance has to take the different formats into account. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 01:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Placing tables side-by-side:

The {{help me}} staff advised me to pose the following how-to question on the Village pump: In Toronto Railway Company#Roster summaries, there is a list of 4 small narrow tables. I would like to put the tables side by side in pairs rather than having them all stacked with a lot of white space to the right. Is there a way to do this? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 15:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Put the small tables inside a larger table having 2 columns (see the rather excessive examples at Help:Table) or this may be simpler: {{col-begin}}{{col-break}} Two tables {{col-break}} Two tables {{col-end}}. See Help:Columns and Example 4 at Template:Col-begin — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 16:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tables are for tabular data, not page layout. Your sugegstion is an accessibility barrier. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:32, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pigsonthewing, Let me just expand on that a bit. The gist is that you need to separate semantics from presentation. Semantics is what the text means. Presentation is what it looks like. Consider that what you write will be consumed in many different ways:
  1. Reading it in a web browser on a computer
  2. Using any of a number of different CSS skins
  3. Reading it on a mobile device.
  4. Reading a machine-generated translation to another language
  5. A non-sighted person listening to it via text-to-speech technology
  6. A minimally-sighted person using text zoom-and-pan technology
  7. A computer program doing data-mining or search engine ingestion
By conflating semanic and layout, you make it more difficult for one or more of these consumers. For example, I just looked at Toronto Railway Company on my phone. The main body type was easy to read, but those four tables were too small. I quickly zoomed in so each table was the width of my phone's screen, and they were immediately easy to read. If these were laid out in a 2 x 2 grid of sub-tables, that would have been a mess. Navigating it using text-to-speech would have been neigh on impossible, I would guess.
The right answer is to mark the text up so the semantics are clear, and then rely on presentation tools to handle things properly for the particular device-user combination. See Responsive web design. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:54, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

Freedom of panorama

Union Station Bus Terminal[edit]

User:TheTrolleyPole/Union Station Bus Terminal

Amsteltram s-line[edit]

Re: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Amsteltram s-line

A segment of Amsterdam metro line 51 was rebuilt as light-rail tram line 25 (a.k.a. Amsteltram). Thus, I would like to convert the infobox s-rail and s-line entries for each rebuilt station (e.g. Sacharovlaan tram stop) so that "Amsterdam Metro" (s-rail title) becomes "Amsterdam trams", "Line 51" becomes "Line 25" (or better [[Amsteltram|Line 25]]), "Amsterdam Centraal station|Centraal station" (preceding station/toward) becomes "Zuid station" and "Isolatorweg" (following station/toward) becomes "Westwijk". I can change the s-rail title, but the others are stored in or validated against some hidden table entry for line 51. There also appears to be another hidden table to convert s-line station names (e.g. "Sacharovlaan") into article names (eg. [[Sacharovlaan tram stop|Sacharovlaan]]). What I would like to do is create a separate table entry (or entries) for line 25, but how do I do that? Template:S-rail and Template:S-line do not seem to provide the answer. I do not want to change the entries for metro line 51 as the line exists today but takes another route. How can I solve this problem? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 15:40, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TheTrolleyPole, the answer is probably in the Category:Amsterdam Metro templates. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:59, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Template:S-line/Amsterdam Metro left/51 and Template:S-line/Amsterdam Metro left/51 appear to be components, but I still looking for the assembly instructions. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Disambiguation pages with links/Guide#Station succession may be of help, even if no dabs are involved. Certes (talk) 19:23, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Amsterdam Metro templates appears to contain all or most of the components to make s-rail and s-line work for "Amsterdam Metro". But how do the s-rail and s-line templates know that these are the templates to use for "Amsterdam Metro"? Is it by a strict naming convention (e.g. Template:Amsterdam Metro lines, Template:Amsterdam Metro stations, etc.)? The Template:S-line documentation suggests but does not explicitly mention a naming convention. Or is there another table to link all the "Amsterdam Metro" templates? I would like to know in order to set up a similar set of "Amsterdam Trams" templates. Could someone advise? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 18:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds as if you need a new "system", replacing {{s-line|system=Amsterdam Metro|line=51|previous=Spinnerij|next=Westwijk}} by something like {{s-line|system=Amsterdam trams|line=25|previous=Poortwachter|next=Westwijk}}. That will require {{Amsterdam trams stations}}, to translate "Foo" into "Foo tram station", and {{Amsterdam trams lines}} to convert 25 into the desired text. You'll also need {{S-line/Amsterdam trams left/25}} and {{S-line/Amsterdam trams right/25}} containing the names of the terminal stations. An alternative is to use the newer {{Adjacent stations}} and write some simple Lua code in Module:Adjacent stations/Amsterdam trams based on a similar Adjacent stations module. Certes (talk) 19:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Certes: Thank you for your answer. From your answer, it seems that the proposed Amsterdam Trams templates must be precisely named in order for s-rail and s-line to link to them; that is, a spelling variation would cause malfunction. So, presumably, if I keep to the strict naming convention, everything should automatically work. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. S-line uses its |system= and |line= arguments to create template names, and requires that templates with those exact names exist. You are free to choose the system and line names but must use them consistently. Certes (talk) 11:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amsteltram s-line links[edit]

View source for Template:S-rail/lines

WP:Disambiguation pages with links/Guide#Station succession

Module:Adjacent stations

Template:Adjacent stations

Fonts too small[edit]

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Fonts too small

Has the EN.Wikipedia reading font been recently changed? I find it to be too small and hard to read. Fonts on other websites are OK including those on FR.Wikipedia, DE.Wikipedia and NL.Wikipedia. Is there a way to increase the font size just for EN.Wikipedia? Changing the Chrome (Version 87.0.4280.141) font setting makes the EN.Wikipedia font better but makes the font too large for all other sites. I use Windows 10 Version 2004 (OS Build 19041.746). Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just use Ctrl + or Ctrl - on the page to enlarge or reduce and it will keep the setting for that website. That's how Firefox does it and I think Chrome is the same. Also try Ctrl 0 to reset the font size and that might restore your normal Wikipedia size. —  Jts1882 | talk  16:48, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Village pump[edit]

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

Wikipedia:Graphics Lab

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps

Wikipedia:Teahouse

Two-dimensional schematic diagram[edit]

I would like to do a two-dimensional schematic diagram to represent a streetcar network of 3 north/south lines and one interconnecting east/west line. I would like to use Template:Routemap but I would want the east/west line to be a horizontal line instead of twisting it into a vertical line. Thus, the schematic would resemble the city street grid. However, I suspect I would have problems indicating and labelling east/west stops. Is there any existing examples of doing this?

My second choice would be to acquire some inexpensive, easy-to-use diagram software to produce a diagram similar in style to this svg example or this gif example. Could someone recommend software to do this? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TheTrolleyPole, I have zero experience in this area, but I believe Inkscape is a free popular choice for graphic design, although I would imagine most of it is actually done with Adobe Illustrator. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:36, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the tip about InkScape. It looks complicated but there are lots of online tutorials. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I use Inkscape and find that the learning curve isn't too steep, especially if you can find something it can input as a starting point (such as the .svg map you mentioned). In my case as a chemist, I create drawings in a chemical drawing package (which can't do .svg directly) and use metafile formats like .emf to swap into Inkscape for final tweaks and conversion to .svg. Note that Wikipedia has an .svg Help Desk at WP:SVG help where there are real experts. Good luck, TheTrolleyPole. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:16, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Two-dimensional schematic diagram

Wikipedia:Teahouse#Two-dimensional schematic diagram

Inkscape[edit]

Inkscape

Inkscape

Wikipedia:How to draw a diagram with Inkscape

Lytton and Nlaka’pamux[edit]

I believe the statements you asked about can be explained as follows, but it’s based on slight familiarity and the explanation should be checked if this is important. Nlaka’pamux is an ethnicity, Lytton First Nation is a government entity, and also a community or band of that ethnicity (?) but which is not governed by the Nlaka’pamux Elinruby (talk) 01:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of tips from talk pages[edit]

I sometimes create talk page entries to document tips on interpreting, accessing or presenting sources of information. User:lowercase sigmabot III is deleting such tips. (Example: Talk:Toronto streetcar system#Route length which I just restored.) Is there a way to suppress its actions for certain talk sections? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 16:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The bot archives old discussions off, so you could pin that discussion so it doesn't get archived. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cite title-link[edit]

Re: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Cite_title-link

Many years ago, I coded the following REF: <ref name=Schedule>{{cite web |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TYRR_schedule.jpg |title=Daily Schedule - Sutton to Toronto |author=Toronto and York Radial Railway |date=19 May 1916 }}</ref>

Then sometime afterwards, someone reformatted that REF as: <ref name=Schedule>{{cite web |title=Daily Schedule - Sutton to Toronto |author=Toronto and York Radial Railway |date=19 May 1916 |title-link=:File:TYRR_schedule.jpg |author-link=Toronto and York Radial Railway }}</ref>

The problem with the reformatting is that it now generates the error message "{{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)". I think the error message started to appear in recent years. The "title-link" still displays properly. The question is: How can I code a REF to a jpg so as not to produce an error message. Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 01:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{cite sign}}. This is no longer a web-based citation, but an interwiki-based one. 68.173.76.118 (talk) 02:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, perhaps {{citation}} is more apt if this was printed as a pamphlet or brochure. If it was posted in a physical bulletin board, {{cite sign}} is better. It is tricky regarding verification. 68.173.76.118 (talk) 02:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Schematic diagram symbols[edit]

Village Pump TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a tutorial or tool to create/modify advanced schematic diagrams (e.g. Template:Eglinton East LRT)? I have modified a number of diagrams by searching for similar symbols in other diagrams, and guessing how to adapt them. But sometimes, I cannot find suitable examples. There are also symbols such as ! and @ which seem to have a special meaning. The symbols \ ~ ~~ seem to be separators.

e.g. 

    CONTgq\BHFq!~HUB1\uxmtKRZ!~HUBc4\CONTf@Fq~~

Is there a comprehensive catalogue of schematic diagram symbols other than the following?

Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:30, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTrolleyPole: This is WP:RDT and the syntax got a lot more complicated after the introduction of {{Routemap}}, which some people are insisting should replace all current instances of {{BS-map}} which is far more intuitive and understandable. As for the individual icons such as   (HST), these should all be in subcategories of c:Category:BSicon. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:57, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Osgoode Hall site for Ontario Line - age of trees - info source?[edit]

Hello ....

For your edit (I believe) "On February 4, Metrolinx began work to remove eleven 100-year-old trees on the Osgoode Hall site" - do you have a source for this info on the age of the trees?

From a LSO website it states - "The trees are the dominant feature of the grounds and have been the greatest source of garden expenses for the Law Society. Contrary to popular belief, few if any of the trees go back further than World War Two, and there has been a lot of turnover over the years. Life is hard for city trees. Many of our trees, including the lindens, honey locusts, and flowering crab apples, date from 1965, ..."

As well, this image from 1934 shows minimal trees.

Look forward to your response and apologies for any Wiki newbie editing mistakes ;) Coreg (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The second Star article cited says "The clearing of the 70-year-old trees came the same weekend as a judge granted an injunction blocking Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency in charge of building the Ontario Line, from removing 11 centuries-old trees on the grounds of Osgoode Hall until Feb. 10." TheTrolleyPole (talk) 03:53, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Star has their facts wrong (as per the LSO article and image I identified) When they say centuries (note plural), they are seemingly assuming the trees were planted (or existed) at the same time as the original portion of the building (started in 1829 and finished in 1832). I will message the Star. Thanks. Coreg (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Saved myself some work ;) ...... I discovered the Star issued a correction to the article which served as the basis for pertinent info in the article you noted - "Correction — Feb. 7, 2023: A previous version of this file said the trees on the grounds at Osgoode Hall were centuries-old trees. The oldest tree currently on the property has been there just over 100 years." ..... I trust you will edit your entry accordingly. Thanks. Coreg (talk) 04:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hamilton Radial Electric Railway[edit]

I have created a new article (User:TheTrolleyPole/Hamilton Radial Electric Railway) to replace the redirect in Hamilton Radial Electric Railway. Could you please delete the redirect and move the new article to Hamilton Radial Electric Railway. I previously received advice that this is the desired procedure to replace a redirect by an article. The redirect is already used by about 9 articles. The target of the redirect (Hamilton Street Railway) has no information on the Hamilton Radial Electric Railway other than to list its name and show one photo. Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:53, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect can be deleted by tagging it with {{db-move}} - simply edit the page and add that template, and it should be done. If not, an explanation will be given. If you want more help, change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}}, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 21:07, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I added {{db-move|1=User:TheTrolleyPole/Hamilton Radial Electric Railway|2=redirect to be replaced by an article of the same name and topic}} to the redirect: Hamilton Radial Electric Railway, but nothing happened. Is db-move suppose to work immediately, or is it processed later by someone or some program? The documentation for db-move was sketchy. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It'll be done by a person eventually. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 03:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

507 Long Branch[edit]

The following article is to replace the redirect of the same name (507 Long Branch):

User:TheTrolleyPole/507 Long Branch

Re: Talk:501 Queen#507 Long Branch TheTrolleyPole (talk) 02:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheTrolleyPole&oldid=1187211382"