I developped the “Rail transport” structure in Commons because:
- Railway and Railroad redirect to Rail transport in the English Wikipedia
- I suspected some dispute between English “Railway” and American English “Railroad”
- I was not sure that Railways had exactly the same meaning than Rail transport for Commons users.
However, Category:Railways by country remains with many subcategories. So, we should have to decide what to do with this structure, assuming it duplicates the Rail transport structure.
So, I propose to move:
Since “Railways” categories are used to categorize Railway/railroad lines, I suggest to create Category:Railway lines (or another name - see Category:Railway lines). So, Category:Railroad schedules would be moved to Category:Railway line schedules. --Juiced lemon 11:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not very fit in English. So: what is "rail transport" precisely? Does it assume only heavy railways or does it stand for light rail transit forms like metros, LRTs and tramways too? And on the other side: What is the intention for the new categories? In my mind, the old categories "railways in COUNTRY" are for heavy railway systems only. --Chumwa 05:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Follow the link to the English Wikipedia under the section title. Rail transport regards “rail guided transport”. That includes Maglev train and other techniques without physical contact with the rail, but excludes cableways, conveyor belts, toboggans, pipelines, automated guided vehicles, amongst others.
- As said above, “railway” is a redirection to “rail transport” in the English Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia term for “metro” is rapid transit, and this concept includes ligh and heavy railways. What are Category:Railways in Commons is unclear. In my opinion, either we are able to clarify the concept, either we must dismantle the matching structure. --Juiced lemon 08:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the rail transport category system currently is a mess. I also agree with renaming Railways in COUNTRY to Rail transport in COUNTRY - existing categories can be merged into. Category:Railroad can be upmerged to Category:Rail transport. I think before we start any other moves, we should get together the list of renames necessary for this. When that is through we can get back to discussing the remaining mess. --rimshottalk 13:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I support merging categories that use railway and railroad in their name, to equivalent categories that use rail transport in their name instead. That includes the "in COUNTRY" ones as well. Probably soft redirects should be left behind and a periodic cleaning done too. But I also agree that developing a larger list of what all would be affected might be helpful as then AWB might be effectively brought to bear. ++Lar: t/c 18:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- CommonDelinker should work quite nicely, I'd think. I'll prepare a temporary subpage to collect the necessary moves. --rimshottalk 10:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added some category moves/merges. --rimshottalk 10:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added Category:Railcar as well. Note that w:Railcar and w:Railroad car is not the same. Category:Rail car, I think, is about railroad cars. --rimshottalk 10:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All the stuff on the temp page looks good to me. I see no objections.... Can you queue it up for the Delinker bot? ++Lar: t/c 21:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, I have added the heading Batch 1 to all existing proposals. If you add anything new, please make a new heading or a new temp page, as the existing moves have all been double-checked by me. --rimshottalk 13:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Move requested. --rimshottalk 14:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, the moves have been performed. Now these categories need to be cleaned up. --rimshottalk 16:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Batch 1 is done and I'm in the process of cleaning up the results. As you can see on the temp page (Batch 2), I have added Category:Railways by state and the subcategories. There's no question about the renaming of Category:Railways by state, I think, as it doesn't even mention which country it is about. Renaming the railways to railway companies is in line with the other renames performed. --rimshottalk 12:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now that railcars are cleared, we can go on to rail cars, or railroad cars. I have added a request to move Category:Rail car to Category:Railroad cars. --rimshottalk 13:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree to use railroad cars as a universal term for unpowered rail vehicles. As was said at the beginning of this discussion, railroad is American use, not universal english. We should build up a structure starting with rolling stock. Next level would be motive power and something like pulled stock. I guess there are better propositions. I will put a proposition on Batch 2 page. Gürbetaler 01:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't mind using railway wagon instead or railroad car. We could put a redirect at Category:Railroad cars, to be safe. I've changed that part accordingly. I'm not so sure about motor coaches - to choose the name railcars, I went by the wikipedia article. Isn't a motor coach just a bus? --rimshottalk 12:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- “Motor coach” is ambiguous. If we have “railway coaches” to transport passengers, motorized ones in a multiple unit would be named “railway motor coaches”. However, maybe this category is not useful (see Category:Diesel multiple units and Category:Electric multiple units). --Juiced lemon 14:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I see. w:Multiple unit says that railcars are sometimes referred to as multiple units, when they can be coupled. We could add something to that effect in the description of railcar and multiple unit. As for the translation: the German Schienenbus is very much the same as a railcar. There is a word Triebwagenzug, which describes a train made up of motorized units, so that's about the same as a multiple unit. One part of this train is called Triebwagen. French is a bit more complicated: fr:autorail is used for each of these. There is, however, a word unité multiple, which can be used for multiple units. I think that railcars are special enough to deserve categories of their own - we shouldn't let shortcomings of languages hinder us. --rimshottalk 14:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree that railcars are not elements of multiple units, hence are specific rolling stock. My concern was possible subdivisions of “Multiple units” categories, with a particular substructure for motorized elements of multiple units. --Juiced lemon 16:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Life is complicated but language is sometimes even more complicated. Triebwagenzug is a word for a certain type of train, saying it is not pulled by a locomotive. But a Triebwagenzug can be a single railcar, a rake of coaches pulled by a motor coach or a multiple unit. The word Schienenbus is always a diesel powered railcar in Germany (but the Swedish rälsbus can also be electric). Newer series could be MUed and thus became DMUs. In Switzerland, the word was never used, except for the German vehicles, but in Germany the word is now also gone - except for the few preserved ones. This is just to say, language is living and there isn't always an exact match for one word in every language. Railcar or Multiple units are "wrong" categories for motor coaches that pull trains like locomotives do. Triebwagen stands for more than just multiple units, it is also motor coach and railcar. Gürbetaler 23:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- We specify categories according to selected subjects, that is subjects which can be easily defined and understood. Language issues have minor importance. If you need a particular category, define its subject, then we'll find the name if the subject is relevant. --Juiced lemon 00:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, that's what I'm trying to say. I need a category for the photos of Swiss "Triebwagen", which have conceptual elements of multiple units, railcars and motor coaches. Concept and use of these vehicles is different from British or American designs. This is why neither multiple units nor railcars does really fit. Gürbetaler 21:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that “multiple unit” is a shortage for “multiple-unit train” (see multiple unit). So, the components of a “multiple-unit train” are units like trailer units or special units (various types, according to combinations of “power-delivery”, “motor” and “cab”).
Literally, Triebwagen means “motor coach”, or “motor unit”. However, we can have steam, diesel or electric motors. Do you need categories for these types? Railcars are not “motor units”, because they cannot be coupled, except with trailers. And an only “motor unit” don't transform in a railcar. --Juiced lemon 23:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
According to a discussion on SwissRail group, neither multiple unit nor railcar is correct for many Swiss Triebwagen. They are used like locomotives, even for freight trains. They are now in the following categories:
Should we build categories like this:
Sure, this would also include locomotives, but they could be included as subcategroies. Gürbetaler 00:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The term “motive power” is not specific to vehicles. For consistency with “multiple unit”, I suggest:
- However, we need some manifest criteria to discern between motive units and railcars. --Juiced lemon 12:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- There are buckets full of Ian Allen Books that were called "British Rail Motive Power" and contained all locomotives and multiple units. So, motive power is specific to vehicles. And for the rest, why should we discern betwen motive power and railcars? No Swiss vehicle was ever called "Schienenbus". Simply assume, this category doesn't exist in Switzerland! --Gürbetaler 19:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- If there is no need to discern between motive power and railcars, the current scheme for Switzerland is satisfactory, since it's the same one for any country in the world. --Juiced lemon 19:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Categories are not satisfactory, since many powerful, heavy motor coaches are listed either as Railcars or multiple units.--Gürbetaler 00:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Railcars can be powerful [1]. --Juiced lemon 01:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This motor coach wasn't too paowerfull but nobody ever called it a railcar Gürbetaler 22:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Here, Triebwagen=railcar. A motor coach is a road vehicle (see this redirection Motor coach). --Juiced lemon 00:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The site you indicate is from a group of French speaking Swiss railway photographers. They may be a reference for railway photography or for Swiss-French railway terms but sure not for English railway terms. In a long discussion [2] between people from different parts of this world we could establish, that motor coach is a good translation for Triebwagen. However, only British English uses this term, while American English would rather tend to the word motor car. To avoid a mix-up with the American use of the term, which is for long-distance buses, it was proposed to put "rail motor coach". Now it is impossible to find a term that is equally used everywhere. It remains a fact that Americans call coaches passenger cars, points switches and railways railroads. Here are some references for the British use of motor coach for Triebwagen:
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
- And, by the way, this is the word I find in my dictionnary as translation for "Triebwagen". There is no reason NOT to use the term "motor coach". -- Gürbetaler 16:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The English Wikipedia article locomotive lists the different types of railway vehicles which provide the motive power for a train:
- I think we should confine with these terms. We should also define criteria in order to easily classify the railway vehicles between these four main types. --Juiced lemon 21:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The English Wikipedia article is now more complete. --Gürbetaler 23:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Is your rail motor coach a fifth kind of motive vehicles? In that case, I think it would not be easy to sort the motive vehicles. --Juiced lemon 01:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Superseded by discussion in COM:CFD#Category:Railways
- --Foroa (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|