Template talk:Infobox rail service

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Infoboxes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Infoboxes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InfoboxesWikipedia:WikiProject InfoboxesTemplate:WikiProject InfoboxesInfoboxes articles

Trains

Trains Portal

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

This template was considered for merging with Template:Infobox rail line on 2015 May 2. The result of the discussion was "withdrawn by nominator".

Start/end vs. termini

There's been a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Infobox rail service: "Start" and "End" vs. "Termini" about changing "Start" and "End" because they can potentially cause confusion if a train does not go in both directions. I propose we keep the internal parameters the same for now but change the presentation to say "Termini" instead of "Start" and "End" and list the two together with a line break. I've setup the sandbox code and you can view an example at Template:Infobox rail service/testcases. Mackensen (talk) 16:50, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only if we can have an American English switch for "terminals" in addition; "termini" is rarely used over here. oknazevad (talk) 21:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm American and I use it ;). I wouldn't really consider termini British English--Amtrak, for one, uses it (see Empire Builder route guide). I suppose the template could have a general GB/US language switch. Mackensen (talk) 21:07, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mackensen for setting up the sandbox code. I like the change and think that it's more clear. The only thing I would prefer to have is the ability to state the kind of terminus, such as "eastern" or "northern", but I don't think that the direction is necessary. An example would be "Terminus (eastern): Christchurch" or "Terminii: Christchurch (eastern); Greymouth (western)". Mosamiazaz (talk) 20:11, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rail gauge and electrification

This game up in the good article review for North Coast Hiawatha. Are gauge and el appropriate parameters for this infobox? Those are both specific to physical line rather than the service operating over them. My sense is that we ought to remove these two parameters. Thoughts? Mackensen (talk) 16:29, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bump. Any takers? Mackensen (talk) 23:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, and neither should |owners= be part of it, which also pertains to the line; this information is duplicative (see, for example, all of the Shinkansen service articles, which run on the same track, and are provided with the exact same voltage) and minimally relevant to the service. I believe the way forward is to restrict this infobox's use to actual services (named and famed, long-distance and high-end), and use {{Infobox rail line}} for metro and commuter lines, with the addition of a couple more service-y parameters, if required. Alakzi (talk) 00:35, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a pretty major change, but it could work. Owners is indeed duplicative of line_used. Note that line is actually used for physical infrastructure such as Chicago Subdivision. Mackensen (talk) 02:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing this up again, I think |gauge= and |el= should be removed given that they don't have much to do with a service. Those details should be in the article about the line, and we already have the |line_used= parameter. Mackensen (talk) 11:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stops parameter

Hello fellow Wikipedians! The stops parameter is supposed to be for the number of stops along the route, correct? Should this number include the starting and ending stations? What about for services which have frequencies with fewer stops than others? I assume in that case, the number should reflect all of the stations the service stops at, correct? I just ask because I have seen some discrepancies among articles. Thanks! –Daybeers (talk) 02:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, stops is a silly parameter. It ought to be stations. --Traal (talk) 02:35, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Option for American spelling?

Specifically, is it possible to add an option to use the American spelling "traveled" (as in "Distance traveled")? (Or is that something that can be inherited from the article's spelling directive?) 141.156.49.61 (talk) 02:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]