User talk:Wheeltapper

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Wheeltapper, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! - Rgds, - Trident13 00:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Best to just delete attacks on biographies of living people

You added citation needed to an attack on the Christian Wolmar article. Next time it is probably best just to delete attacks that don't have a source. That's what I've done in this case. I left a warning on the user's talk page. Edward (talk) 23:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Croydon Variobahn

An article that you have been involved in editing, Croydon Variobahn , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Patrickov (talk) 03:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Rgi-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Rgi-cover.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin Hauptbahnhof

Hallo Herr Radklopfer, saw your and filelakeshoe's comments, at 5 sources to 1,650 in Google Books why did you not RM the article back? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:59, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because I've been too busy to deal with the edit-war which would presumably break out with the person who is obsessed with creating new names for things. The debate over Praha hlavní nádraží (or is that Prague Central!) descended into outright misrepresentation of WP:UE and the content found in WP:RS. If someone wants to introduce a note of reality to Berlin Hbf then I'm more than happy to support them. If you want to see just how daft the invention of new names has to get, take a look at Koblenz City Centre Station. Or we could tell DB they are wrong about what their station is called! Wheeltapper (talk) 09:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More than understood :), I was more concerned about later discoveries about Talk:Praha hlavní nádraží. I have reverted Frankfurt (Main) Hauptbahnhof, and would certainly support 1,650 English sources over 5 English sources if Berlin Hauptbahnhof was proposed as RM2. Filelakeshoe mentioned your Berlin Hauptbahnhof comments on Talk:Koblenz City Centre Station In ictu oculi (talk) 03:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Railway station types in Germany

Hi Wheeltapper - thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. On the subject of Hauptbahnhof, there have been numerous debates about the correct translation for this. I have also researched English-speaking practice. In summary, "main station" is clearly a literal translation and is not wrong. However, most English-speaking countries call the most important stations in a town or city "Foo Central" not "Foo Main". There are one or two exceptions, but the overwhelming usage is "Central Station". Confusingly many of them are not central either, but the naming convention has stuck. In some cases, the original importance of the station has declined, so they are not necessarily "main" stations either. Because neither translation is wrong and because both terms are used in English, we need to be inclusive in the article in question. Please leave both options in, with a link to central station which provides further clarity. --Bermicourt (talk) 14:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If "main" is a) accurate b) not wrong c) used by WP:RS , while "central" is a) confusing (as you admit yourself) b) not the correct translation c) not attested in sources, what is the point in including central - shouldn't we be about clarity, accuracy and reality?

I've also researched English-speaking practice (using real-world rather than Wikipedia sources), and the idea that English speaking countries use the name "central" is simply not true. It certainly doesn't apply to the UK (see Liverpool, Exeter, Manchester), Ireland, the USA or Canada, I don't think it applies in the southern hemisphere, and it doesn't apply (other than in Wikipedia ) to real-world English treatment of German stations. Obviously I can't quote a source, as no-one is going to publish an article saying "Foo Union/Victoria/General/Piccadilly station is not called Central" any more than they are going to say "Foo U/V/G/P station is not called Purple Blancmange Spaceport". Wikipedia even has a (rather pointless IMHO) central station article which shows this, including things like tram stops and metro stations, but few main stations (no Liverpool Lime Street, Exeter St Davids, Edinburgh Waverley, Toronto Union). Wheeltapper (talk) 12:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Kuwait Metropolitan Rapid Transit System Project

An article that you have been involved in editing, Kuwait Metropolitan Rapid Transit System Project , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. -- Mrmatiko (talk) 20:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited TE33A, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page UIC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Central station

Hi Wheeltapper. I appreciate your contributions to railway articles, but please do not make edits to central station that you know are contentious unless consensus has been reached on the talk page. What the article needs is improving through research and authoritative references. Let's work on that. Regards. --Bermicourt (talk) 07:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OWN. Removal of unsourced, unverified nonsense is not generally considered contentious. Wheeltapper (talk) 08:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vienna Central Station

Hi Wheeltapper. Please do not make any more controversial moves like you did at Vienna Central. You know the topic is hotly debated and there is no consensus and yet you went ahead without any discussion in direct contravention of Wiki guidelines. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:24, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OWN. The previous - undiscussed - move of the article from the WP:UE WP:commonname Hauptbahnhof to the unsourced, inaccurate and downright misleading "Central" was a direct violation of article title guidelines and WP:OR. However the title now follows reliable English language sources, provides consistency with all the other Vienna (etc) stations and is not misleading for the English-speaking reader who is interested in learning about the station rather than what some Wikipedian thinks German-speakers ought to have called their stations. There is absolutely no consensus for the view that we need to devise new names for railway stations in German-speaking countries; indeed, Talk:Zürich Hauptbahnhof came out strongly in favour of using the common name rather than trying to devise a new one. Someone renaming a random German stations's Wikipedia page without discussion does not establish a consensus that the sources for Austria are all wrong! Wheeltapper (talk) 17:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adana Central

Hello, you have once again redirected Adana Central Station to just Adana station. There are several railway stations in Adana therefore the main station is called "Central station", just saying Adana station wouldn't mean that it's a rail station. (Adana Gar in Turkish) But Adana gar (station) may also refer to the Bus station. Therefore Central is the correct version. If you look at other main station articles on wikipedia for Turkey you'll see the same. Cheers (Central Data Bank (talk))

Do we have any evidence that it is called "Central"? This sign appears to say simply "Adana"[1] as does this website[2] Just because there is more than one station doesn't mean that one of them has to be called Central (see Istanbul for an obvious example). In English a "station" is normally a railway station unless otherwise specified (hence "bus station", "fire station", etc). Wheeltapper (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there is quite an amount of evidence. Do you live in Turkey or speak Turkish? Well, anyway gar (station) is usually used to refer to a bus station rather than a train station, due to buses being the primary mode of intercity transport. Therefore "railway station" is always used in Turkey. Also, Central station is used as "Ana gar". (Central Data Bank (talk))

I don't live in Turkey or speak Turkish (but then this is the English-language Wikipedia). Certain users have been trying to create new names which they think English speakers ought to use for stations irrespective of what sources say (see the failed attempt to rebrand Praha hlavní nádraží etc). I have no particular interest in Adana beyond accuracy. Do we have any good sources for the inclusion of the word "Central"? Does "gar" specifically mean central, not just station? Does the word for "central" appear on, say, signs and timetables or in books? Wheeltapper (talk) 10:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can we work together please?

Hi Wheeltapper. Can we find a better way of working than constantly reverting each others edits which is quite time-consuming and runs the risk of edit warring and a ban? There are always going to be some things we disagree on, but equally I'm sure there must be words, phrases and courses of action that we can agree on. This may involve compromise, but that's life. If we reach an impasse, we can always ask for a second opinion. I'm willing to give this a go - how about you? --Bermicourt (talk) 18:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bydgoszcz Central station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

//rozklad-pkp.pl/bin/query.exe/en?| publisher=[[PKP Intercity]] |accessdate=19 Aug 2013}}</ref> (Bydgoszcz Main station,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.booking.com/landmark/pl/bydgoszcz-glowna-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leipzig

Hi. Do you intend to place a RM template on Leipzig Central Station to restore the title? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been off travelling (via London Central Station, then Eurostar to Brussels Cent...oh...) and only just got back. Does it still need doing? Wheeltapper (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gevelsberg Hauptbahnhof, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Salzburg Hauptbahnhof may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

'''Salzburg Hauptbahnhof''' ([[German language|German]] for ''Salzburg Main station''; abbreviated Salzburg Hbf<ref>{{cite web |

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Marmaray may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

|}
contract worth €932·8m was awarded to a joint venture of OHL and Invensys Rail.<ref name=cr3>{{{cite news | url=http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/infrastructure/single-view/view/marmaray-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Markt station

Hi, I'm about to move your article Markt station to Leipzig Markt station. Would that be fine with you (and hopefully everybody else) or should I set up a regular RM? Besides "Leipzig Markt" obviously being the official station name once the station gets opened in December 2013, it seems to me that Markt station should rather be a disambiguation page as there are other "Markt" stations, e.g. "Ahrweiler Markt" along Ahr Valley Railway. Regards, Kleeblatt187 (talk) 21:40, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, using whatever is the official name sounds sensible. We can then await someone suggesting it should be something "English" like Leipsic Market or Leipzig City Thameslink! ;-) Wheeltapper (talk) 13:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done for now and ready for further proposals ... ;-) Kleeblatt187 (talk) 21:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Central station may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

# [[Brussels Central Station]] (''Bruxelles-Central / Brussel-Centraal'' - not to be confused with the city's main international
<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bahnhof.de/?lang=en#station/17620| title=Station profile > Berlin Hauptbahnhof|publisher=Deutsche Bahn |place=Germany|accessdate=23 August 2013}}</ref> Main<

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DSB

Hi and thanks for your interest in the DSB (railway company) article. You inserted a cn-tag about the privatisation of DSB. I also agree that the article needs more information on this process. There is/was definitely a political will to first commercialise and then subsequently privatise the constructed company and large parts of the company has been sold off to other market competitors, such as the Arriva company, which also operates in the UK, as far as I know. There is already some info in the article as is, but it could probably be in need of more elaborate explanations. Alas, if you find it interesting, sources should be plentiful and the article would benefit from some work on this issue. I might indulge later myself, if I find the time.

One last thing. As DSB is already transformed to a public company many years ago, does this not in itself account for the will to privatise?

RhinoMind (talk) 16:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We need to be careful to avoid confusing terminology. In English, privatisation means selling it to the private sector. If it is state-owned, then (by definition) it is not privatised. This confusion often occurs with railways (especially Deutsche Bahn, where even the company itself sometimes gets confused!) because non-native English speakers sometimes say a railway was "privatised" at the point it was changed from being a government department to being a company owned by the state. However in English this would not be considered privatisation - not least because that is how many British nationalised companies were structured anyway. The terminology is also often dependent on the political point someone is trying to make...

As for Arriva, it was founded in Britain as a private company (selling motorbikes), and is still based in Britain. However since it has been bought by a foreign state-owned company it falls into a bit of a terminological grey area. Wheeltapper (talk) 18:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Wheeltapper. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Wheeltapper. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Wheeltapper. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]