User talk:Bk1 168

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

Policy[edit]

Dear editors, I will impose a new policy for my discussion page:

Entries that are repeatedly posted here without any evidence for their relationship to reality are not relevant to Wikipedia, because Wikipedia describes how the reality is, not how it could be or how it should be etc. Especially I will remove any entries about changes of railroad gauges, about transcontinental tunnels/bridges, about changes of railroad electrification systems or about correlation between nordic/meditarrenean race and railroad technologies, unless they come with a link to a serious web page that supports the entry.

On the other hand, I am glad about new and interesting discussion, that have at least some relevance for improving Wikipedia.--Bk1 168 (talk) 17:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome![edit]

Some cookies to welcome you! Face-smile.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia, Bk1 168! I have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Thanks for your questions on the IRT Flushing Line talk page! If I can be of more help please ask. Acps110 (talkcontribs) 23:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! I am active in some other Wiki-based projects, so I should know the basics about how to use the media-wiki-software, the common concepts of Wikiquette etc. But I do have to learn the specifics of the en.wikipedia.org-Wiki, where I have just started some minor activities. What might interest me is how to perform a translation of an existing article in another xx.wikipedia.org to the English Wiki.--Bk1 168 (talk) 08:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk pages[edit]

Whilst I might sympathise with yoru comments here, we only very rarely re-factor or remove comments from talk pages, even if the point of the comment is clearly not going to go any further in terms of the main article. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. The problem was, that we really had comments that just repeated the same statement over and over again, without adding any new aspects or any evidence. So for me it is already a very rare exception. But I'll be very careful when considering removal from talk pages in the future, or leave that to others. For my own talk page I will actually follow the policy stated above.--Bk1 168 (talk) 11:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for your hard work - even when your patience is being worn down :-) bobrayner (talk) 23:06, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I must admit that 80% of my effort for the English-language Wikipedia was checking and deleting or silently accepting edits of 121.x.x.x. So indeed I was starting to sympathize with users who deleted partly legitimate edits by this 121.x.x.x, just because the filtering of his/her edits consumed so many resources that could be useful for actually enhancing the Wikipedia, much more than the few enhancements of 121.x.x.x. But he/she is banned for three months now, so lets do something useful during that time. ;-) --Bk1 168 (talk) 21:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I think our friend may have returned: [1]. I don't want to take any formal action yet, let's see if they are being more constructive. bobrayner (talk) 11:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Absolutely. It must have been quite easy to get a new IP address and bypass the ban. And his/her edits are quite the same as before.--Bk1 168 (talk) 12:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

rail gauges[edit]

Proposed gauges and current gauges are not same. 58.138.45.84 (talk) 03:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Proposed and current gauges

  • Afghanistan: current no railway networks - proposed 1676mm, 1524mm in the northern part, 1435mm in Iran-Herat
  • Canada: current 1435mm - proposed 1676mm
  • United States: current 1435mm - proposed 1676mm, 1524mm in the Bering crossing
  • Norway (north of Narvik): current no railway networks - proposed 1524mm
  • Spain (RENFE, except AVE): current 1668mm - proposed 1435mm
  • Portugal: current 1668mm - proposed 1435mm

58.138.45.84 (talk) 03:29, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I thought you are blocked? Please, leave your broad-gauge-conversion stuff away from Wikipedia, unless you have really strong evidence.--Bk1 168 (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
new railway lines in no railway area, change from standard to broad, and change from broad to standard 58.138.45.84 (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Afghanistan and Bering crossing to be broad: Russian gauge/Indian gauge direct connection in Alaska and northern Afghanistan, Bering Strait Tunnel will be Russian tunnel, Alaska, Canada and the continental United States changing to Indian gauge.
Spain, Portugal, Nigeria and Gibraltar crossing to be standard: Spain and Portugal changing to standard gauge, Spain-Nigeria via Gibraltar Tunnel standard gauge rail link.
1435mm is too narrow for US and Canada. 1668mm is too wide for Spain and Portugal. Iberian gauge (1668mm) should be eliminated.
58.138.45.84 (talk) 23:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Rail networks in the US and Canada should be fully rebuilt. 58.138.45.84 (talk) 23:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Are you a computer program that just posts the same stuff based on rules over and over again, without responding to the contents that the other person in the discussion is posting?--Bk1 168 (talk) 08:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
direct connection between 1520mm and 1676mm

Russian gauge/Indian gauge direct connection 58.138.25.165 (talk) 05:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

looks like I am right with my assumption. ;-)--Bk1 168 (talk) 09:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Afghanistan[edit]

Proposed gauges and voltages in Afghanistan:

  1. North part: 1520 Russian gauge and 1676 Indian gauge with 25kV 50Hz alternating current
  2. Central part: 1676 Indian gauge with 25kV 50Hz alternating current
  3. South part: 1676 Indian gauge with 25kV 60Hz alternating current
  4. Iranian border (Iran-Herat line): 1435 standard gauge and without overhead lines

220.210.143.190 (talk) 01:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

not relevant, no evidence. --Bk1 168 (talk) 05:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Brazil[edit]

In Brazil, 1600 network should convert to 1435. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 11:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

not relevant, no evidence.--Bk1 168 (talk) 11:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

United States are first in the Americas with High Speed but Brazil will have the fastest high-speed trains in Americas. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 01:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Maybe. You can hear a lot of plans: United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, maybe Chile or Venezuela, maybe Central America etc. If any of these projects will be finished, chances are that the maximum speed is higher than Acela. But I think we can't tell today who will finish first, so it is not clear now that Brazil will have the fastest trains in the Americas. It is very possible, but that's not enough for Wikipedia.--Bk1 168 (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
maximum speeds in the Americas:
  1. Brazil
  2. Mexico
  3. Argentina
  4. United States
  5. Canada
  6. Chile
  7. Venezuela
220.210.143.190 (talk) 10:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Brazil up to 400km/h, Mexico up to 350km/h, Argentina, United States, Canada and Chile up to 250km/h, Venezuela up to 200km/h. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 10:58, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Maybe. If these numbers were true and Mexico finished earlier than Brazil or Brazil would change or cancel plans, Mexico would become the fastest. It is highly unclear, if, when and how these projects are completed. So it is too early to say that Brazil will be the fastest.--Bk1 168 (talk) 18:11, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
In the tropical area, trains can reach 400km/h on the standard gauge tracks or 200km/h on the meter gauge tracks. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 01:53, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
In the tropical area, trains get faster more easily. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 02:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Brazil will reach 400km/h, soon. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 01:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Brazil will reach 400km/h until 2016. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 02:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Brazil will choose 1435. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 02:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

1600 sleeper coaches are not available. 220.210.143.190 (talk) 02:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

@tabletop alias 220.210.143.19 alias 58.x.x.x alias 121.x.x.x: that is all purely speculative and irrelevant for Wikipedia.--Bk1 168 (talk) 19:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello again,
Do you think that tabletop is the same person as those IP addresses? They are interested in similar subjects, and I have disagreed with tabletop repeatedly, but I thought the editing styles were different. Our IP friend is attracted to articles like Breitspurbahn which tabletop has never edited. 121.102.47.215 posted on Tabletop's talkpage and got a skeptical response. But if you think it's worth investigating further, I could... bobrayner (talk) 14:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I got the impression it's the same person, but you do have some evidence against that assumption. I find it hard to tell. Skipping some of the typical interests is off course good to help confusion. Btw. the IPs were from so different areas of the world, which is in it's own way amazing. The earlier 121.x.x.x was from Japan.--Bk1 168 (talk) 22:13, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Iceland[edit]

Currently, 1435mm gauge rail network is proposed for Iceland. 121.102.122.122 (talk) 10:36, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Absence[edit]

Hi,
You haven't been around for a while. I hope you come back; you did some work. Hopefully, eccentric railfan IPs didn't wear you down; but if they did, they're gone now. bobrayner (talk) 09:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry I am still watching a lot of articles and will write again. It is just the usual thing that there are phases with more and less activity.Bk1 168 (talk) 21:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Bk1 168. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Bk1 168. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)