Talk:Train
Claims in this article.[change source]
Some claims in the article are incorrect. For example The last car you will see on a train is called the caboose.. I hope to source some information in this article shortly from children's literature but being careful to check it for false or outdates claims such as that. Thankyou. == User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 21:25, 1 October 2022 (UTC) User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 21:25, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- @User:Djm-leighpark When you see something that is wrong or outdated, please replace it with a better explanation instead of just deleting the sentence. If there is a false explanation about how trains run, you can add an updated explanation instead. Or maybe if it's true for many trains but not all, then explain that. Lights and freedom (talk) 05:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Lights and freedom: I can see you find a good faith problem with my contributions. Because no diff was provided I have determined it is "too hard" to sort out the specific problem and I've reverted a whole set of contributions. If I have removed a specific sentence by mistake I apologise. But the start point is to revert my changes, even if this goes to what in my opinion is a bigger mess. If you have a specific point on a specific item I would have been very willing to discuss it, but that said I have other things to do. It is not that I make do not make mistakes and throughout those set of changes I have tried to very specific changes with cited explanations with a lot of trouble to find online resources. But with that vaguewave comment I have little option but to revert. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 06:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC) User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 06:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Lights and freedom: As a result of your criticism of my set of edits you will observe I have reverted them in totality. I genuinely believe these were a significant net benefit to the article with the removal of a fair bit of unsourced and at times incorrect information. In terms of the example at the start of this thread this was in the context of The last car you will see on a train is called the caboose. which I removed on Special:Diff/8523599 with the summary: Remove absolutely misleading sentence. The concept here is likely that the last car on unfitted freight trains was usually a caboose (brake van), but on todays railways this statement would be the exception and there is no source for it anyway. Actually En:Caboose would have this as an (Amercian) (freight-only) terminology of a practice that has been out-of-date for maybe 40 years that is not sitting in the freight section, and it might currently be undue there. There might however be an argument there is a similar concept in (older) passenger trains. So I was reluctant to move it. However I was keen to subsection the types of train section and prioritised getting the start of that section into order with no issues. One sentence I am aware I may have unintentionally lost was "Some trains look like a special bus that can only drive on rails" ... I felt I'd lost it last night in a possibly in a cut-and-paste move and have been a little concerned about that because that was an accurate statement. Overall the set of changes I made probably entailed 100 to 200 decisions and plus 3 or 4 supporting online book editions located and placed as created wikidata items. I am probably aware of 10, 20 or more imperfect decisions in the recent changes. And ways of creating and sourcing some sort of balanced history section are whizzing around in my head. Not to mention the discipline of attempting to write Simple English which I find four or five times harder than native English prose. I've responded by walking away from Simple English for a bit in the light of your good faith criticism and imposed a self-block for a couple of days on the Djm-leighpark account. I have used an alt. account to add this statement as a little of the reasoning may be helpful. I do not anticipate adding further to this discussion while Djm-leighpark remains on a self-imposed block. Obviously people may re-instate my contributions in totallity or in part and I may or may not return to contribute to try to improve the article or perhaps raise {{disputed}} and/or {{fact}} on alleged incorrect and unsourced items. Thankyou. -- Djm-mobile (talk) 12:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC) (for Djm-leighpark)
- I think your work here is good, especially the updates about how trains have changed, and the addition of references. I may have made a mistake when reading it, because you didn't remove much, only the part about locomotives or prime movers, and about the caboose. Even if some trains today don't have locomotives/prime movers, the article should say that all trains in the past used them. I don't know if the caboose is important to the article, but for some reason every child in the US seems to learn that the caboose is the last car in a train. So mainly my concern was about the locomotive, but I don't know much about trains myself, so you can add whatever you think is appropriate about that. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga: No rush, and I don't think your edits are bad. Just letting you know. Lights and freedom (talk) 23:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Lights and freedom: Thanks. I'll bring back my changes but hope to look at the above comments over the next few days. Thanks. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 23:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga: No rush, and I don't think your edits are bad. Just letting you know. Lights and freedom (talk) 23:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think your work here is good, especially the updates about how trains have changed, and the addition of references. I may have made a mistake when reading it, because you didn't remove much, only the part about locomotives or prime movers, and about the caboose. Even if some trains today don't have locomotives/prime movers, the article should say that all trains in the past used them. I don't know if the caboose is important to the article, but for some reason every child in the US seems to learn that the caboose is the last car in a train. So mainly my concern was about the locomotive, but I don't know much about trains myself, so you can add whatever you think is appropriate about that. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:47, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Lights and freedom: As a result of your criticism of my set of edits you will observe I have reverted them in totality. I genuinely believe these were a significant net benefit to the article with the removal of a fair bit of unsourced and at times incorrect information. In terms of the example at the start of this thread this was in the context of The last car you will see on a train is called the caboose. which I removed on Special:Diff/8523599 with the summary: Remove absolutely misleading sentence. The concept here is likely that the last car on unfitted freight trains was usually a caboose (brake van), but on todays railways this statement would be the exception and there is no source for it anyway. Actually En:Caboose would have this as an (Amercian) (freight-only) terminology of a practice that has been out-of-date for maybe 40 years that is not sitting in the freight section, and it might currently be undue there. There might however be an argument there is a similar concept in (older) passenger trains. So I was reluctant to move it. However I was keen to subsection the types of train section and prioritised getting the start of that section into order with no issues. One sentence I am aware I may have unintentionally lost was "Some trains look like a special bus that can only drive on rails" ... I felt I'd lost it last night in a possibly in a cut-and-paste move and have been a little concerned about that because that was an accurate statement. Overall the set of changes I made probably entailed 100 to 200 decisions and plus 3 or 4 supporting online book editions located and placed as created wikidata items. I am probably aware of 10, 20 or more imperfect decisions in the recent changes. And ways of creating and sourcing some sort of balanced history section are whizzing around in my head. Not to mention the discipline of attempting to write Simple English which I find four or five times harder than native English prose. I've responded by walking away from Simple English for a bit in the light of your good faith criticism and imposed a self-block for a couple of days on the Djm-leighpark account. I have used an alt. account to add this statement as a little of the reasoning may be helpful. I do not anticipate adding further to this discussion while Djm-leighpark remains on a self-imposed block. Obviously people may re-instate my contributions in totallity or in part and I may or may not return to contribute to try to improve the article or perhaps raise {{disputed}} and/or {{fact}} on alleged incorrect and unsourced items. Thankyou. -- Djm-mobile (talk) 12:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC) (for Djm-leighpark)
- @Lights and freedom: I can see you find a good faith problem with my contributions. Because no diff was provided I have determined it is "too hard" to sort out the specific problem and I've reverted a whole set of contributions. If I have removed a specific sentence by mistake I apologise. But the start point is to revert my changes, even if this goes to what in my opinion is a bigger mess. If you have a specific point on a specific item I would have been very willing to discuss it, but that said I have other things to do. It is not that I make do not make mistakes and throughout those set of changes I have tried to very specific changes with cited explanations with a lot of trouble to find online resources. But with that vaguewave comment I have little option but to revert. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 06:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC) User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 06:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Glossary section trial[change source]
I am finding a lot of cases where there is a need to introduce terms to the article and trying to do it too much will interrupt the flow of the prose. A Glossary section may be a way around this. Simple English has one Glossary-type article I've found, namely Glossary of astronomy, and /i don't think I've found any with a glossary section. I'm very aware I'm not trying to define every rail related term, just those essential for the train article. I'm also actutely aware Locomotive in particular has its own article so should only described to the minimum extent here. I wouldn't be fully happy with the glossary being in a separate article as this would mean people jumping off to another article to see the definitions. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 19:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC) User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 19:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think that would be a good idea. It is allowed on enwiki: en:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Glossaries#Embedded glossaries Lights and freedom (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)