Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Northumberland Park Metro station#Requested move 30 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 14:24, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sendai Subway Namboku Line#Requested move 15 February 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 19:49, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I feel that it is fairly evident that there are two main types of route diagram templates: service descriptions and physical line descriptions. When reviewing route diagram templates for commuter services (at least in the US), these are service diagrams: they depict current, former, and future stations/stops and connecting/adjacent passenger services. The exception to this, are the RDTs in the Chicago area (Metra and the South Shore Line). I look at these templates and I find them completely bloated with every track connection, river, stream, bike path, and highway that can be crammed in there.

I confess, I may have been the one to start all of this back in November 2008 when I created the template for the Union Pacific / West Line and added unlabeled freight-only track connections as landmarks. I added more “landmarks” to these templates over the years and have even suggested that other editors do the same. Looking back, I think this was in error.

So this leaves me wondering what should and shouldn’t belong in these? Should we include landmarks (such as highways or rivers) or not? Connecting freight tracks don’t have any relevance to the passenger services, but what about bike paths that passengers might utilize? Are they relevant or does that make the RDT into a guide??

What are others’ thoughts? Lost on  Belmont  ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 02:40, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

My view is that service diagrams should be limited to the stations and plausible connections, while physical lines should include all the various current and former connecting lines. Example:

• {{Raritan Valley Line}} (physical line)
• {{Raritan Valley Line (service)}} (commuter rail service)

I think highways add clutter and I don't like including them. Rivers can be a different matter since we often have articles about the bridges. Mackensen (talk) 02:47, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

We should only include those that features that are significant in the context of the route. What this means in practice depends in large part on the scale of the route - for example significant for the Brighton Main Line is a much higher bar than for the Slough to Windsor & Eton Line. Thryduulf (talk) 04:30, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It's a good point to raise. For my two cents, I'd note that some guidance on this question has been offered at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Transport, working on the approach that there should be a distinct approach for service diagrams vs physical railway line diagrams. Tomiĉo (talk) 10:15, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

An editor has requested that Conductor (rail) be moved to another page, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:34, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi all! You are invited to comment at Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Singapore LRT stations/archive1. We're still looking for a few more eyes before deciding if there is consensus to promote the topic. Aza24 (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

What class of locomotive is show in this 1909 picture? Mjroots (talk) 14:46, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Has a very British look to it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 15:49, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

It might have been built by a British firm, but that headlight on top of the smokebox is very un-British. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

There's also a black and white version of the photo. Mjroots (talk) 22:11, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chimney_(locomotive)&action=history --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:03, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

I've semi-protected for a month. Hopefully that will force discussion at talk. Mjroots (talk) 06:34, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

The lead of the article mentions a certain William H. Hay and his book Railway Engineering, both bearing a striking resemblance to William Walter Hay and his book Railroad Engineering. I'm not really familiar in this subject so can someone please have a look at this. —Opecuted (talk) 10:05, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Commonwealth Engineering#Requested move 5 March 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Qwerty123M (talk) 07:14, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I've just created Approach release as a redirect to UK railway signalling#Approach release, but I've just realised that I don't know if this term is exclusive to British practice? If the term is specifically British but the concept isn't we should probably have a link from that section to wherever more global content is. Thryduulf (talk) 23:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

As described, it's not familiar to me from North American practice (I'm primarily familiar with the Pennsylvania Railroad, although I just glanced at Phillips' "Railroad Operation and Railway Signaling", which is a generalist work and didn't see anything that fit the bill). This may reflect eastern North American use of speed signaling, where the necessary reductions in speed in advance of a terminus or low-speed diverging route are already built into the interlocking aspects. e.g., on the PRR, a route over a slow speed (15 mph) turnout could be signaled as Clear to Approach Medium (approach next signal at medium speed, 30 mph) to Approach Slow (reduce to medium speed and approach next signal at slow speed) to Slow Clear (proceed through interlocking at slow speed; displayed on dwarf signal).

"Approach locking" in American practice refers to something quite different, a mitigation of time locking. If the circuitry for approach locking is installed, a signal lever cleared, and then returned to normal can be fully unlocked for conflicting movements without time delay unless the track circuit(s) approaching that signal are occupied. Choess (talk) 04:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, this is a bit long but it gives all the context. Currently in Mexico the Tren Suburbano branch is being built from Lechería railway station to AIFA railway station. The branch was expected to be part of the Tren Suburbano system, which is operated by Ferrocarriles Suburbanos, a private company with a concession until 2073. Last year, it was announced that the branch's operation was waived (it is unclear if forcibly or not) to the Secretariat of National Defense. Until that point, it was still assumed it would still be part of the Tren Suburbano system because it is expected to go to Buenavista railway station, operated by Ferrocarriles Suburbanos (Module:Adjacent stations/Ferrocarril Suburbano says "Lechería-AIFA", but it has always being announced that this is a "Buenavista-AIFA" service). Yesterday, some pictures were published online showing that the Tren Suburbano logo () is not part of the signaling, but instead the Tren Interurbano logo () appears, which is operated by the federal government. The system's red color is still used in the stations and signaling, though.

At the moment, there are no official statements beyond it is expected to be operating before the FIFA World Cup. I assume the most obvious answer is to wait until everything is confirmed, but do we have examples of train stations operated by two different operators or with such mixed operation? Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 15:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Plenty - for example the majority of urban Japan! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll review them. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 00:29, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm hoping these requested moves will not be as controversial as the Northumberland Park ones. Anyway please see Talk:Darlaston James Bridge railway station for the discussion. Difficultly north (talk) Time, department skies 18:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Comeng (train)#Requested move 17 March 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 10:28, 17 March 2026 (UTC)