Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Trams/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

An archive of WikiProject UK Trams' talk page between project launch (mid-August) and 31 Aug 2007.

Tram Stops Policy

Tram stops should only be included where there is a specific point of interest near by - i.e. Man Utd football ground on the Metrolink, Old Market Square on the NET etc. Bluegoblin7 08:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC) The policy has been changed following User:JeremyA's comments on the Sheffield_Supertram talk page. The new policy is: Tramstops shall only be included WHERE THE STOP ITSELF has sufficient history or interest for it to be included. For example, if a tramstop was a re-used original one, it May be suitable. Bluegoblin7 12:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, WikiProject's don't set policies. Considering how there appears only to be on participant in this project and I can't find any discussion with regards to tram stops, I suggest current consensus on this issue stands. Like anything else, for a tram stop to warrant an article it should meet the requirements set out in Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Until consensus is developed, this project shouldn't be used to justify ignoring these two core guidelines.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herdings Park supertram stop showed that individual tram stops are unlikely to meet the notability guidelines. This doesn't mean tram stops shouldn't have articles, just that they should meet current guidelines on notability and there aren't likely to be many tram stops where this is the case. Adambro 12:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

And this is why we are saying this: We KNOW that many tram stops don't need articles, and we HAVE read the above deletion notice - and that's WHY WE beleive that only tramstops with a historical, significant or interesting background should be included, or, all should be included in a single article, such as Tram Stops of the Eccles Line, using the Metrolinks Eccles Branch as an example. And, as I keep saying, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, such as joining the project and IMPROVING the articles so that they meet Wikipedia's standards, don't just rant and rave about it: Wikipedia is just an encyclopedia, not LIFE, and it's an encyclopedia for people to learn from, not for everyone to be picky about, just because that one person doesn't like a specific article. If you ask me, these people are vandals, but without actually doing anything specific, i.e. they are removing articles just because they don't like them, and because other people might. And, if you prefer, this can be a GUIDLINE as opposed to a POLICY. Bluegoblin7 16:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not particularly happy with those comments. Participating in discussions about this issue is a constructive way to begin to develop this WikiProject. One of the major aims of a WikiProject is to enable similar articles to have a degree of consistency and this only works through discussions between editors. You should not refer to people acting in good faith as vandals as I suggest you will find such comments to be counter-productive to any ambitions of increasing interest and participation in this project. Adambro 18:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Fine! OK!!! Let's just forget it until someone else has other ideas! And deprive people of information! And, I don't suppose you wish to do anything about it...Bluegoblin7 19:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I must apologise for stirring up this particular hornet's nest. The only reason I dropped the comment on the main page (there was no discussion page then!) was because I had noticed several categories full of tramstops. (I was not aware of the discussions thaht had already taken place.) I opened a couple of pages and found there was little information of value therein. This has already been discussed at length (see links included above) and I think the final 'policy' is the right one: articles should not be created for individual tramstops unless they are individually notable.

WikiProjects CAN set policies or guidelines, but these will be intended for project members attempting to achieve consistent results, and must be in accordance with WP policies and guidelines following discussion and consensus between project members. Remember that other editors need not follow the Project policies (although most do).

EdJogg 23:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

You seem to have hit the nail on the head: You have described what we want to acheiver perfectly - only tram articles where they are individually notable, WHICH IS WAHT I HAVE BEEN TRYNG TO SAY Can we please now leave this discussion, and focus on improving Wikipedia's UK Tram Related Articles. Bluegoblin7 07:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I was agreeing with you, not prolonging the argument. The main reason for replying was to comment about WikiProjects and 'policies' and their scope, so the tone of your reply was unnecessary and, if I may say, slightly hostile. Please DO NOT SHOUT! (See WP:CIVIL)

EdJogg 11:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not 'shouting' as you put it, I am emphasising my points. If you have a problem with how I am responding, then do something about it, report me, ban me, whatever! I am fed up of the negativity of this project. So much for it being a good idea! Bluegoblin7 11:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

For goodness sake, 'take a chill pill'! 'Shouting' is a commonly used euphemism to refer to someone who writes in upper-case: it is generally disliked and will not win you any friends. If you really need to emphasise something, do it more subtly...

The only negativity in this project appears to be coming from you. There is no need to report you or ban you, I can simply stop watching the pages and ignore you. However, that is not my intention – at the moment.

At present you have identified an area that is not well-represented on WP and would benefit from some collaborative editing -- which is good. You have launched a project -- which was good but perhaps premature, having so far attracted the barest minimum of support. And now you are threatening to close the project within a week if no-one joins in -- which is definitely premature.

Stop biting people who try to offer constructive criticism. Looking at your contributions, you have little experience of editing outside the few pages you concentrate on, so please accept that others (such as myself) are trying to help the project by sharing our experience of wider WP issues.

If you want this project to survive, you need to take a step back and let it run its course. Get on with the stuff that needs doing and recognise that it may take months not days to achieve what you hope for -- including the effective establishment of this project. Once the project banners are in place, interested editors will see them and drop by. But remember that some pages receive no edits for months, even years, at a time. Eventually, possibly from outside WP, you will find some more editors who are as committed as you. Then, and possibly only then, the Project will take off and achieve its potential.

EdJogg 12:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you just stop watching me. And do you have a problem if I only edit within one area? If I know things about it, and I am passionate about it, why go and edit a subject that I know nothing about, and could be making up? You don't do it do you? Why was it prematuely started? The page says if it has 5 supporters, it has that. And why close it prematurely? I bet if you look at all the WPs out there, they will have had a lot more supporters, in a lot less time than a week. And why should I change all my banners? That's hardly going to promote the project is it, if it's a tiny one word sentence. And try telling WP:LT that. And, seeing as your problem seems to be with me, and not the WP, or anything else, I may aswell leave wikipedia, and focus on my own tram website, copyrighting all the info, and letting other people miss out. So, goodbye... Bluegoblin7 16:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Why Bother???

Does anyone care about this WikiProject, or do you wish for all the UK related articles to go un-supervised, and end up looking shabby, and having some systems having one thing, and others having none? Surely it would be better to have a unified body to look after everything, rather than letting a select group look after each article that they like, and losing consistency. If no-one else has joined by Sunday 26th August 2007, 1800 GMT, then this project will be proposed for speedy deletion. Bluegoblin7 16:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't be disheartened by the comments from myself and others that have questioned some of the ideas you have put forward for this WikiProject. It should be obvious from the list of editors who expressed an interested and the number of participants in similar projects such as UK railways that there will be many others who share your interest in looking after tram related articles. Give it some time and more people will join in the discussions and work to further the aims of this project but be clear, a WikiProject is not the work of one individual, it is a collaborative effort and until discussions have taken place to formulate some basic ideas for tram articles, this project should not be used as some justification for making particular changes.

I think the problem stems from the fact that your comments at Talk:Sheffield Supertram didn't seem to recognise the limitations of a brand new WikiProject in representing the views of the majority of editors and instead went against the clear consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herdings Park supertram stop. Good luck with this Bluegoblin7, I shall look forward to contributing to this project where time permits. Adambro 18:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou for your encouraging thoughts. I suppose I was a bit hasty with my comments, but I felt that this would make Wikipedia a better place. Maybe in a while when we have more support...Bluegoblin7 18:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a step back and allow it a little more time to develop. You have identified an area that would benefit from the collabarative attention of a WikiProject, and others have agreed. However, even the suggestion of this project is only a few days old and so far it has not attracted much attention (and at least two of the listed participants have stated elsewhere that they cannot be particularly pro-active). Remember that it is holiday time in the UK and some editors will not be around at present.

Lower your expectations: while it would be beneficial if the project had loads of members doing loads of stuff, in reality, the projects I have been involved with are fairly quiet places much of the time; project members get on with improving articles within the scope of the project at their own pace, occasionaly 'calling-in' to the project page for help or advice. Use the project to develop a consistent approach to the scoped articles, to coordinate action and suggest policies -- I suggest you keep editing the tram articles yourself and adding the project banner. Others will see it, come along in due course and join in, hopefully.

EdJogg 22:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been doing this, and noone seems to want to join - they would rather 'do it themselves', as stated by Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons on the Supertram talk page. Deadline revised to Monday 27th August 2007, 1300 Bluegoblin7 11:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Those views were clearly my own and in no way an advice to others. You repeatedly offered me to join after I politely refused. this refusal was made by me alone and should not be taken on behalf of anyone else. There is no reason why this project cannot thrive. As Adambro justly pointed out, your proposal for tram stop articles was politely and appropriately refuted by several users who pointed out a decision had already been made in this domain. This does not mean UKT cannot work on other aspects of British tram transport. Shuld you make the regrettable decision to disolve UKT, bare in mind there is nothing unfruitful about individual work, it can be just as rewarding and you can be helped by other users even without banding together in a WP. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, that was what you implied then. And, I only offered for you to join ONCE, not several times. And I don't care if you don't join - I just see it as selfishness towards other people, who might want the knowledge you have, but won't share collaboratively. Bluegoblin7 10:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I implied nothing more than what I said, you are twisting my words. I have no intentions of undermining your work or refraining you to contributre, keep that in mind. You have offered me to join three times, I suggest you check your contribution list. Not joining UKT does in no way mean I do not wish to share information, even if I do. I am in no way obliged to share anything... It is presomptuous to think that any Wikipedian wishes to share every and anything. I have long standing Wikifriends who will testify that I have gone out of my way to find informatin when it is missing from an article. Not being involved in a WP does not mean lack of collaboration or unwillingness to share, see nothing more than has been said. I assure you, once again, there is no malice in my refusal to join. there is no need to read between the lines as there is nothing implied. Regards, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok then, if you are sure... I will not force you to join, nor do I want to. And now, I suggest that this thread is closed... Bluegoblin7 11:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hear, hear! And as soon as this project has got over its birth pains, we can look at archiving what's already here on the talk page. There's a lot of discussion without a great deal of substance, so a tidy-up in a week or so would be a good idea. (I'll do it, but someone remind me after I'm back from the Great Dorset Steam Fair!))

EdJogg 11:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok then! We'll *nudge* you in about a fortnight! Have a good time! :D Bluegoblin7 11:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Project scope

For the purposes of clarifying the scope of this project, it might be worth listing all tram systems in present operation in the UK. Below is a quick list that I can think of in no particular order, please add to it as appropriate. I do wonder whether it might be more appropriate to have a light rail sub-project of UK rail to cover these and other similar systems. Adambro 19:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

• Midland Metro
• Sheffield Supertram
• Blackpool tramway
• Tramlink
• Nottingham Express Transit
• Manchester Metrolink

Thankyou for this, these will all be covered by the main project, as they ARE ALL TRAM SYSTEMS. A navigation area is currently under construction. Please continue to be constructive! Why not join the project, and add these yourself? Bluegoblin7 19:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I think there is already an appropriate template for these, see {{Britishmetros}}. Adambro 19:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I am aware if the British Metros banner, but, as it states, it is a metro and tram banner, whereas we only cover the modern tram systems, and we also need to add places such as the National Tramway Museum, and the more historical tram systems. See {{UK_tram_systems}} for ours, and feel free to edit it. You find the other templates at Wikipedia:WikiProject_UK_Trams/Templates

project banner

I've added UKTrams as a parameter to {{TrainsWikiProject}}, so articles that are already tagged with it can be flagged as within the scope of this project as well without using a second banner on the page. When you add assessment categories for importance within WikiProject UK Trams, I can add an appropriate UKTrams-importance to it as well. Slambo (Speak) 14:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid i need to disagree with you on this one: nearly all tram related articles are already flagged under the train one, but their primary focus is in fact trams, not trains. So, this parameter should only be used when the primary focus is NOT trams, but trains. Please correct anything you did :D Bluegoblin7 08:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Bluegoblin7, your response makes no sense. The parameter edited by Slambo (who knows what he's doing!) highlights the fact that an article already flagged as coming under the Trains WikiProject is primarilly in the realm of UK Trams. Please note that, by definition, all Tram articles will also fall within the remit of the Trains WikiProject, since that deals with all forms of rail-borne transport.

Once an article is flagged as being part of a WikiProject it is (presumably) highly unusual for it to be un-flagged (at least, I've never seen it happen), and it is wasted effort to replace 'Trains' banners with 'UK Trams' banners, especially as the longevity of the latter project is more questionable.

You are receiving much-needed help from outside parties, please have the courtesy to accept it with good grace.

EdJogg 10:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I know the help, but I feel that it makes more sense to do trams with trains parameter, not trains with trams parameter. And, I AM PREPARED to do the change, so why stop me? As I said, all the controversy arising from this project seems to make me wonder why it is still here... Bluegoblin7 11:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I've experimented in the past with providing a parameter in TrainsWikiProject to specify which WikiProject to list at the top of the box. After discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains and elsewhere, the consensus was to keep it at least a little bit simpler for now and always list WikiProject Trains on the top for that banner. One of the tasks I'm working on behind the scenes is a more flexible structure for the TrainsWikiProject banner that could make decisions like this and the addition of other as-yet unknown WikiProjects (like WikiProject US railroads or WikiProject Narrow gauge railways, for example) simpler in the future. Slambo (Speak) 18:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

can we please agree on something: use trains with trams until it can be sorted, and then use trams with trains instead. either way, its not life, and so does it really matter? also, i dont no how to add 'parameters', so i couldnt add tram to train anyway. Bluegoblin7 18:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Replied to the order question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains. As to adding parameters to {{UK Trams}}, I'd be happy to help as I've done quite a few updates to templates in my time on Wikipedia. Slambo (Speak) 19:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, could you add the parameters that are on WP:TRAINS then, that might come in handy with trams: LT, Trains, UK Trains, Scotland, Streetcars and maybe a few others. Do you mind? Also, can you clean up the template page and some of the templates? Finally, do you have any experience with portals? Thanks, Bluegoblin7 19:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I took another look at {{UKTrams}}. It looks like the class, importance, small and nested parameters were already added and the code to support them looks pretty standard. I've created the documentation subpage and trasncluded it onto the template page following what has now become standard practice, and I created the missing assessment categories. The next time the assessment aggregation script runs (which happens every two days), the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/UK Trams articles by quality statistics redlink on the category pages will be replaced with the statistics table (you can see an example of a statistics table on Category:Rail transport articles by importance). Slambo (Speak) 18:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok. If I need help, can I contact you if I need more help? Bluegoblin7 19:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

UK Trams stub template

Not stirring trouble here, this is from experience when another WikiProject started up...

Has the {{UK Tram Stub}} template been 'approved' by the 'Stub sorting' WikiProject?

I can quite understand why the UK Trams Project would benefit from a stub template, but creation of these is supposed to be tightly controlled. From memory, you would need to identify 60+ articles in (say) 'UK Rail stubs' that could be reclassified as tram stubs. If you can do this, then there should not be too much of a problem. If you cannot do this, or you haven't yet received 'permission', expect to see a TfD raised against the template.

NB - the chosen template name is clear and unambiguous (even if the chosen icon is not!), so it should be acceptable, however the capitalisation is wrong ('stub' should be lower-case) so it will need to be moved sooner rather than later.

NB2 - you seem to have created TWO stub categories ( Category:UK Trams stubs, Category:United Kingdom Tram Stubs). (a) these also fall within the remit of WP:STUBSORT and (b) (from experience) only the cat for stubs is acceptable; the cat for PROJECT stubs is not appropriate for various reasons, but mainly that it will have 100% overlap with the other cat!

EdJogg 10:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why I need permission, when I can just go ahead and make it, and there are articles that come under the category. It's ridiculous! Bluegoblin7 16:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The issue isn't one of "permission", it's one of centralised discussion in the hopes of avoiding such obvious errors as occurred in this case. Alai 17:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

yeh well as ive sai ive left wp as i states above who gives a ******* damn? i used to like wikipedia - no i think its jst using up internet bandwidth. block me, ban me, whatever, certain individuals have really annoyed me. so if you want you can do it. but, it is just a few individuals. i enjoyed editing wikipedia, letting others in n info etc, but now, Whats The Point? Bluegoblin7 17:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC) i've come back, and i suppose that a new stub category is abit much, but still, why do we need to get permission, and its not an obvious error btw. Bluegoblin7 18:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

They were pretty obvious to me; hence the benefit of said centralised discussion (see above). At any rate, I've put these, and a number of other UK transport-related stub types for renaming, rescoping and/or deletion at Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/August/20. Please comment, and help resolve, one way or the other. Alai 22:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, comments that have been made there seem to be good if you ask me, and I have added about 40 stubs, without even exploring ones that are classified under metros. Please continue to support this template! Bluegoblin7 11:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

its a keeper!!! Bluegoblin7 19:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

infoboxes and line diagrams

is it possible to put route diagrams in info boxes? i'm trying to create templates for articles within this projects scope. Bluegoblin7 18:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Transport

Hi. I have noticed that this project is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Transport who can be a parent project and provide assistance with your project if you wish. Thanks. Tbo ¹⁵⁷talk 22:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I think that that would be a good idea. And streetcars perhaps. And, related projects should be bus and train (uk and normal) Bluegoblin7 11:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

According to the main page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Streetcars, this project is already a child project.Tbo ¹⁵⁷talk 11:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I don't know who did that - I didn't. In actual fact, it's more a 'sister' project. Streetcars are US/Canada etc. Trams are UK. Bluegoblin7 12:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Despite the name of the project, the project does cover trams worldwide so it is a parent project in my opinion. Tbo ¹⁵⁷talk 12:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I suppose if that's the case then it can be. Transport can be one to, can't it? Also, if there are any portals on any of these projects, can you please add them to related portals. Thanks, Bluegoblin7 12:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ive put Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Trams as a child project under Wikipedia:WikiProject Transport. Tbo ¹⁵⁷talk 17:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)