User talk:Geof Sheppard

Hello, welcome to Geof's talk page!

I will normally post any reply to your message here on this page so that the conversation is all in one place.

Welcome to the Commons, Geof Sheppard!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

File:Salisbury TMD 159003 159017 159022 158887 960012.jpg

Nice photo, with the heritage DMU peeking out at the end. I also liked the St Ives boarding - never seen a sprinter so busy. It's a shame so many of your photos are 800*600 - if they were at least 2megapixel, they could be quality images. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately I need to be careful about bandwidth so I can't post the volume of pictures that I would like if they were all high resolution. Quality or quantity, what a choice! Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

As for that overcrowded Sprinter, this is a typical bank holiday afternoon at St Ives (it was Good Friday 2009). Unfortunately the four-car set that started the day had to be reduced to just two cars in the afternoon. I was aware of this so positioned myself at the right spot to photograph the back cab when it arrived and everyobody was jostling for a space in the train. The high angle added to the impact – having a large LCD display on the camera means I can hold it at arms length and still have a good idea of what is visible through the lens. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Flax Bourton station

Hi, I reverted a few of your image moving to the Flax Bourton railway station category as the images were not actually of the railway station, or even pointed towards it. That being said, I should go and get some better photos of it sometime. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

They really do need to be grouped as Flax Bourton station - a "station" should include all the area of that was covered by sidings, which at Flax Bourton ran from the western portal of the tunnel down to the west end of the cutting. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

rm of Category:Preserved Great Western Railway steam locomotives

Hi Geoff, I was just wondering why you're removing Category:Preserved Great Western Railway steam locomotives from images? It's not an implied supercat on those that I've seen, e.g. File:Dumbleton Hall Nameplate 37427.JPG
Andy Dingley (talk) 10:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I have now finished tidying up the Great Western locomotives – there were pictures scattered across half a dozen different categories! I have checked that they are all in sub-categories of Category:Great Western Railway steam locomotives.

The preserved locomotives are now in sub-classes such as Category:Preserved GWR 4900 Class locomotives so that they can be found either through the preserved locomotives categories or from their class category, in this case Category:GWR 4900 Class. I have also introduced a new dimension of categorisation. Category:GWR locomotives by type groups together locomotives by wheel arrangement, which is useful if you can't tell your 4700s from your 4900s! Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice

I found this oddly fascinating, with the line running so close to the river. Got any more pictures of this part of the line that you can upload for me? :) Lewis Collard! (lol, internet) 21:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

As well as the Looe Valley Line, you will also find pictures of trains running alongside rivers (and the sea) on the St Ives Bay Line, Avocet Line, and Riviera Line. Don't forget to take a look in the station sub-categories such as Lelant and Dawlish. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Livery cats

Hi mate, I wanted to say that I'm concerned that adding images to "class xyzs of wessex trains" etx just because they have a wessex livery, even after franchise passed to First great Western may be a bit confusing. Perhaps we could add livery categories as well as operator ones? -mattbuck (Talk) 14:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and while I think of it, thanks for correcting my Blaenau image as 2 153s rather than a 150. I feel ashamed of myself. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

We certianly need to difuse the big categories such as the ones for Class 150s - these can only get bigger over time, and when they are too big people can't find what they are looking for. I was toying with the idea of going down to, for example, "British Rail Class 150s of First Great Western in Wessex Trains livery" which could then be a sub-category of the two TOC categories, but decided against it (for now) because

1. 1. the names are rather long, and
   2. it wouldn't put all the pictures of, say, 150266 in Wessex livery in one place.

As we are unlikely to get a big influx of new Wessex Train's images now, I think that adding a Wessex category to images already categorised as FGW is the best of two poor options. Adding a note to the description explaining the livery would also help. Mind you, if (when?) the FGW categories get too big, we might need to think about it again. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking more a second categorisation structure, "British Rail Class 150s in Wessex Trains Livery" or "British Rail Class 165s in Dynamic Lines livery" (or maybe just "Trains in Dynamic Lines livery", which may intersect the operator cats. At some point I was planning to go and try and do something by line... -mattbuck (Talk) 07:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

That would work - some of the loco categories are already done by livery. In my mind Commons is largely an image database and so the colour of the train is often more relevant than the operator, which is why it has things such as Category:Blue trains.

I started trawling through these images looking for ones missing location categories (I've found several of Plymouth, lots of Welsh stations, and a few "between stations" west of Bristol). Categorising by line would work for me; I work on the principle that nearly every image should say, as a minimum, what it is and where it is.

Once I get to the end of the West Country train images, my next job is to revist the stations and lines to make sure they are consistently categorised. As part of that I guess the huge Category:Bristol Temple Meads will need some difusing. "Steam trains at...", "Frieght trains at...", "British Rail Class 43s at...", perhaps?

PS is "dynamic lines an official designation used by First Group? I can only find it used by enthusiasts but not in official publications. And what was the livery before that really called? Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems a widely used term, I'd probably go by what the Platform 3 publications say, or RAIL magazine, so London Midland is a livery, as is Silverlink, and FGW Dynamic Lines or I think it's FCC City Lights. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right about needing to diffuse the BRI cat (why the hell network rail didn't use BTM as the TLA I'll never know), and it's a reasonable idea. When it comes down to it, you could go much further, "BRI platforms 13/15", etc. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Bristol Temple Meads reached 477 files in mid-May (and at least 4 more have been added since), but the main category has now been reduced to just 60! I haven't done any geographic sub-categories this time except for the fringes - Bath Road Bridge and Depot; East Junction. Next time (in a year or two?) I would expect that categories such as "old station", "main train shed", "station approach" will be needed.

I see you've started on the livery categories. I'll let you get on with that for now, I'll carry on tidying up the stations down the line.Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey mate. Been working on categorisation of 158s by livery. Do you think that Category:British Rail Class 158s in Regional Railways livery and Category:British Rail Class 158s in Express livery should be separate cats? In general I've tried to avoid renaming a livery when the only change is lettering - eg EMT & SWT share a cat, and ATW trains that use the old W&B livery with Arriva stickers are classed as W&B. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing, your category of DMUs at Temple Meads - technically 220/221s are DEMUs, not DMUs. Maybe it would be better to just organise it "trains at Temple Meads by class" and include all locos and stuff in the came category. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree that slight changes in lettering probably don't need a new category, so the Express livery and the ordianry Regional Railways livery could share the same category. You could persuade me differently if the livery was still in use and lots of photographs being taken of it.

Hmm. That would mean that the Wessex Trains named units don't need seperate categories, but this might be useful so that, say, 153369 could be a sub-category of Looe Valley Line so that the individual images of it don't have to carry that category.

As for the 220s, I was just following the convention of Category:Diesel multiple units of the United Kingdom. I certainly wouldn't offend anyone by calling them a DMMU! The problem with a single category for trains is how to sort them: 08, 143, 150, 153, 158, 220, 31, 37, etc. It's even worse if there are electric units mixed in! Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Try adding a zero to the start of 2 digit ones so they sort under 043 rather than 43, that way it sorts nicely and probably isn't too annoying. I'll collate the RR/Express cats as suggested. Not sure what you're talking about with 153369 - something like Category:British Rail Class 158s in Wessex Alphaline Trevithick 200 livery? Individual liveries like this I've put in their own cat, but kept the parent generic, so it's a subcat of Category:Trains in Wessex Alphaline livery, not Category:Trains in Wessex Alphaline Trevithick 200 livery. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I thought of using zeroes for loco classes: [[Category:Trains at Bristol Temple Meads|043]], but then they are grouped under the number "0", which is not instinctive. The alternative is that they all get listed under "C": [[Category:Trains at Bristol Temple Meads|Class 043]].

153369 is named Looe Valley Explorer and has images some categorised for that line, but that means that you find pictures of Exeter St Davids appearing in Category:Looe Valley Line! Of course, where the livery is unquie to one unit, should the category be "British Rail Class 158 158747 in..." or "British Rail Class 158s in..." :) Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm going for the more generic 158s in ..., as even though it's exactly the same thing, creating a cat specifically for an individual unit seems rather crazy. If you change from just using numbers to Clas XXX then that creates a lot of consistency problems elsewhere.

Speaking of consistency problems, would you like to weigh in on User_talk:Redrose64#Filton_Xc_service regarding Filton Abbey Wood? I added in the Cardiff-Bristol-Manchester XC service, but the stop at Filton causes some problems as to keep it consistent with other stops of the journey it has to be inconsistent with all other services at the station. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Would you say that the Northern 180 livery is different from the FGW 180 livery? The stripe on the Northern one is a different colour, but otherwise they appear the same. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

• 
  FGW
• 
  NO
• 
  NO

A tough one that. I've often had the same thoughts about the Northern Class 142s that work out of Exeter with FGW logos. I think that I would vote for seperate categories because of the missing pink stripe and logo. But it's a close call. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:08, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Would you say the TPE Dynamic lines livery is different from the FGW/FHT one? It's a lot lighter at the top. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Category moving

Hey. Just a thought, but you might find it easier to do category moving via HotCat, Cat-a-lot and CommonsDelinker. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Holcombe

Just so you know Holcombe is techically part of Dawlish, not Teignmouth. The sea wall to the south of it is contiguous with the Teignmouth wall, but its not "in" Teignmouth. The boundary is actually at Sprey Point, where the welcome to Teignmouth sign is. (Which also provides a logical break in the wall, if a less good one).--Nilfanion (talk) 10:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'll make sure the sea wall categories match. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Category removal

Hi, re this cat removal - the green coach is a Mark 2, so why should the image not be in Category:British Rail Mk2 coaches? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Only 3/4 of the coach is in the picture, and what's left is largely hidden by the signal, which isn't categorised. Does this part-view really deserve categorisation? It is seen much better in other views in that series, say File:6024 King Edward I-04.jpg. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Category names to keep simple

Hello, it is better not to add unnecessary synonyms in cat names. Also, unnecessary numbers. Cat names should remain simple. If one knows the first number, no need for the second in the title. --Havang(nl) (talk) 07:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The current 5700 Class sub-categories don't make much sense when seen in their Category:London Underground ex-GWR 5700 Class 0-6-0PTs parent category.

I see. The moves may be done either way, but you have the final choice. We try however at longstanding move request to look for alternative possibilites; one of them is improving the description. I'll move them now. Do you adapt the sortkeys? --Havang(nl) (talk) 14:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Line sorting

Hi mate, just to let you know I've created a few templates to subst to make it easier to sort trains by line.

• Use {{subst:tbyline|class|line}}, eg {{subst:tbyline|158|North Wales Coast Line}} for Category:British Rail Class 158s on the North Wales Coast Line
• Use {{subst:cbyline|class}} for Category:British Rail Class 158s by line
• Use {{subst:trainline|line}} for Category:Trains on the North Wales Coast Line

-mattbuck (Talk) 12:08, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Minehead railway station MMB 10.jpg

File:Minehead railway station MMB 10.jpg Hi, are you sure this is a 115? I marked it as 117 per the en.wp WSR page, which seemed to indicate there was a 117 at Minehead awaiting restoration. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:41, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

If only that SR goods brake wasn't there... if the part of the car hidden by the brake van were visible, it'd be easy.

Class 115 DMBS have 7 passenger doors and a short guard & luggage section (about 11 feet (3.4 m) long); class 117 DMBS have 6 passenger doors and a slightly longer guard & luggage section (about 17 feet (5.2 m) long); cl. 117 DMS have 9 passenger doors (and no guard & luggage section).

If you count the driver's door as no. 1, then doors nos. 2-7 are passenger doors on all three types. After that they vary:

• cl. 117 DMBS - door 8 is the guard/luggage double door, and there are no more after that
• cl. 117 DMS - doors 8, 9, 10 are passenger
• cl. 115 DMBS - door 8 is passenger, door 9 is the guard/luggage double door, and there are no more after that

Note the presence of a grab rail just rear of door no. 8. This discounts a cl. 117 DMS, because on those the grab rail was just rear of door no. 10; but does not discount the cl. 115 DMBS, which had two of these grab rails: just rear of each of doors 8 & 9. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

When examining diagrams and stuff for the above I missed the bl**dy obvious... door no. 8 is a normal height outward-opening door, so is for passengers. If it were a guard's door, it would be inward opening, with its bottom edge some three or four inches above the normal level. Thus, this isn't a 117; I would go for class 115 DMBS. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know all the the WSR's power cars are class 115; the only class 117 cars they have at present are trailers. As far as I know it is car 51852. See en:List of rolling stock preserved on the West Somerset Railway. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll edit my notes accordingly. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Useful template for you

I've created a handy template for trains - {{Ukt}}. Put in as {{subst:ukt|Class|3-digit unit #|Operator|livery|line}}. If you just have a class, either use 3=Operator, 4=Livery, 5=Line; or replace the # with XXX. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and there's now a variant {{Ukc}} for coaching stock - same parameters, but with class replaced by say "3", or "4 DVT", and the 3-digit unit # replaced by the coach's stock number. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

InterCity liveries

Hi, Currently there is a train in InterCity "Swallow" livery in Category:British Rail Class 43s in InterCity Executive livery, although I accept it's essentially the same livery. meanwhile trains actually in InterCity "Executive" livery have been put in Category:British Rail Class 43s in InterCity black livery a name I have never seen used outside commons. The names I have allways seen used are; InterCity "Executive" livery for the trains branded "InterCity"; InterCity "Swallow" livery for the trains branded "INTERCITY" and with the swallow (obviously); an unbranded version used on mixed trafic locos was called "Mainline" livery, see the gallery on en:InterCity (British Rail), I shall now tell the other person involved then leave allone. best Oxyman (talk) 23:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know names so I just went with black/blue intercity livery. It's easy enough to change, I can just task delinker to it. But we should probably work out what liveries they are really. I mean, the InterCity blue livery is really just a variant on BR blue/grey; and all InterCity black liveries, executive, swallow or otherwise, are really just intercities in a black livery of some name. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here's my stab at it...

1. 1. British Rail green livery (locos, MUs)
   2. British Rail maroon livery (diesel hydraulics)
   3. British Rail blue livery (locos, suburban MUs)
   4. British Rail electric blue livery (some electric locos - is this the same as "chromatic blue" used on a few diesels cicra 1964?)
   5. British Rail blue and grey livery (long distance MUs, later all MUs, first HST livery)
   6. British Rail Pullman grey and blue
   7. British Rail refurbished DMU livery (white with blue stripe)
   8. InterCity Executive livery (two greys with red and white stripes)
   9. London and South East livery (jaffa cake)
   10. InterCity Sector livery (the one with the Swallow - locos are now predominatly white)
   11. Regional Railways livery (originally Provincial Sector)
   12. Network SouthEast livery

While we're at it, I'm not sure that we have First Group/FGW blue and purple really sorted out! Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

So which of the InterCity liveries have the yellow stripe on the 43? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

OK I know I said I was going to leave allone but "Sector" livery is the same as "Executive" livery, Sectorisation happened in 82. "Executive" livery appeared in 84, why make up a name for swallow livery when you know the actuall and well recognised name? at least you got most of it right "chromatic blue" was a variant of paint shade used for rail blue in the early years. The cicra 1964 livery was called "XP64 livery" it was used on one loco, a class 47. Oxyman (talk) 06:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what I "know". The English Wiki page has no citations - was 'Swallow' a term that appeared in official documents, or was it just another nickname popularised by the enthusiast press? I'm always keen that we use descriptions if we don't have an official name. Again, the "mainline" name needs to be confirmed. I would be very wary of using it in Wiki as it would then need to be disambiguated from the later Freight Sector livery.

Having slept on it for a day (and then been unable to save my comments yesterday because Wiki went down), I am convinced that the correct answer is that the original HST livery should be called blue and grey. Don't forget that these were designed as DMUs, and DMUs at the time were painted in blue and grey. It's just that the HSTs have a much larger yellow end :) Even if we don't rename the category, it should become a sub-category of British Rail blue and grey livery.

The 'black' livery then needs to be moved to Executive livery, and the one picture of 'the other' livery be recategorised into... Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, so anything black we call executive, anything blue we call blue and grey, I assume the prototype is still prototype or is there some other livery for it? -mattbuck (Talk) 09:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

"The English Wiki page has no citations" Yes but we should know how it works and we should knoe that if there was disagreement it would have been raised there and sorted out there. Instead of trusting that process you seem intent on making it up as you go allong. It seems to me that the wiki page is better research than the alternative of no research. The 'Swallow' name is so well publisised that unless you have a reference that it is called anything else, I can't see why it should not be used. The alternative of "anything black we call executive" is better than is as current as it's not actually black it's grey. I understand your concern about the "mainline" livery and see dificulties with aplying it, but again you are ignoring some research over your favoured option of no research. To be honest I can't be bothered looking for citations and it's pointless anyway as you seem intent on wikilayering in order to make stuff up (nothing will satify you) and doing so useing no citations whatsoever. Oxyman (talk) 11:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Just seen you attempt at a covert message "I think it's blue and grey, but one swallow doesn't make a livery" why don't you bring this to the conversation rather than more wikilayering. Again it's making stuff up, is there a citation for this? I suspect not! anyway it was acompanied by other changes but this isn't worth going into as you won't listen to anything other than what you wish to make up. Many of your comments show lack of actual knowledge in this area yet you refuse to listen to someone that actually knows about this stuff why is that? Oxyman (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I'm just asking! Like a lot of people, I think that robust citations are important if Wikipedia is going to respected as an encyclopedia. If you think we have an answer, then I'm happy for it to be applied. The thing that makes this place so useful is that there are people like you who know some of the things that people like me and Mattbuck don't. And vice versa. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

"I think that robust citations are important if Wikipedia is going to respected as an encyclopedia". What I can't understand is why you don't apply this to your own suggestions and actions, but prefer your own made up names to sourced names. Sorry but I think it clearly wikilayering when you insist on the most extreme robustnes for others sugestions but fail to produce any citations whatsoever for your own suggestions. Please explain your mindset that prefers your own made up stuff to some research. Where are your Citations? I'm just asking! Oxyman (talk) 09:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I was hoping that English Wiki would have them - I haven't contributed to the article that lists BR liveries because other people seem to know a lot more about this (and presumably have more sources of information) that I do. Now can we finish this discussion about the best names for these categories? Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Again you (deliberately) miss the central point, there was some sources but you prefered your own constructed structure and insisted on actual references from BR an almost imposible thing and you knew it! and of course your structure dosn't need any citations! a hyporcritical standpoint if ever there was one. Can we adress the point about some sources being better than no sources please? Oxyman (talk) 11:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Compared with the topics that I usually study there are plenty of reliable references for the BR era. A visit to the library has produced the work of lots of reliable journalists and historians which I have now used to correct and expand the livery section of the article. I'll summarise it here:

1. Inter-City launched in 1966 using the same blue and grey stock as other services, and later added an 'Inter-City' name on passenger coaches.
2. The APT-P was painted in a new grey and grey livery when it was built in 1978. This was the first time that the hyphen was dropped.
3. Executive services were launched in 1983 using refurbished trains in the same scheme. It was referred to as the 'APT' livery at the time. Later it sometimes appears as 'Executive' but this name appears to have been dropped officially in 1985, after which it becomes 'Inter City’ livery. By now it was being used on West Coast Main Line and Gatwick Express services, amongst others, so dropping the Executive name seems sensible.
4. In 1987 the logos were changed to INTERCITY and the swallow introduced. There was no official change to the colour scheme, although the amount of yellow was drastically reduced. British Rail appear to still just call this 'InterCity'; the railway press variously called it at the time 'new InterCity' or 'INTERCITY'.
5. It was policy to only apply this to 'all InterCity trains that meet high quality standards', hence the appearance of older locomotives with no branding.
6. Oh, and some were painted in InterCity livery but carried a ScotRail logo!

Now, what does that mean for categorising liveries in the Commons? Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I am impressed that you have done some research, but I am afraid your references are incorect, I suspect selective blindnes and cherrypicking of statements you argeed with has ocored, in order to POV push. Regretably this is all too common practice on Wikipedia, meaning that citations are often not worth anything, degradeing wikipedia as a whole. For example Brand new class 90 locos were given the mainline livery, how on earth did these not meet high quality standards? http://www.class90electriclocogroup.co.uk/livery_combinations.html Oxyman (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I moved the original livery into blue/grey, let me know when you come to a consensus on what to call the black one and whether the different levels of yellow are worth differentiating. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I am satisifed that the references given are 'correct', that is they were printed in reliable journals by staff members or in books by historian authors. Some quoted BR sources to support them - anyone is welcome to look up the sources that I have cited to see this for themselves.

Of course, this doesn't mean that there aren't other reliable references out there. For example, I don't think I noticed anything notable about the livery of the Class 90 (File:90001 Crewe 1987.jpg shows it to have been launched with INTERCITY branding). I certainly didn't come across the term 'mainline' in any of the quoted magzines or books, although I am aware of it being used in enthusiast circles.

However, I'm not sure how much effort we should put into this for the sake of Commons categories. If you look through the other livery categories, you will find that the use of different logos (or lack of them) is generally discounted. You'll see what I mean if you look at Category:British Rail Class 150s in Silverlink livery which includes both Silverlink and First Great Eestern units in the green and purple colour scheme. The differences are important when we come to the categories by livery, but InterCity, Scotrail and Railfreight Distribution would all qualify as Category:British Rail Class 90s of British Rail.Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not satified that the sources given are correct and as I said you are cherrypicking to falsify information http://arthropoda.southernfriedscience.com/?tag=cherry-picking , I'll explain this to you thurther as you don't seem to have got it first time round, I am not saying that those sources dont exist but that you have chosen the sources you like in order to POV push ignoring contrarary facts , I did not say all class 90s were given mainline livery as new, I said some were, This proves a LIE to the claim that only old loco's were given the mainline livery. There are plenty of images of this including the one on the link I gave you (which no doubt you chose to ignore). There was nothing unusual about the class 90s. many locos were given the mainline livery but not because they were old as your cherrypicked sources claim Oxyman (talk) 09:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I only reported what BR's intention was when they launched the livery. I'm sure people can find other references if they try, as experience shows that lots of varations exist for most liveries.

But I ask once again: what does that mean for categorising liveries in the Commons? mattbuck proposed (9 March): anything black we call executive, anything blue we call blue and grey which I can live with if there are no other proposals. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

"I only reported what BR's intention was when they launched the livery" So now we find out that you have used Weasel words and you yourself kow that the policy changed soon after. therfore again useing cherrypicked sources, the ones that agree with your POV, and by the way most of your sources are from Ian allen which cater for enthusiasts so no better or worse than any other enthusiast stuf. The problem with "anything black we call executive" is it is just making stuf up as you go allong, even your cherrypicked sources say that term was dropped. Probably best to call the black stuff 'InterCity Sector livery' a term you posted first, as they were all luanched dureing sectorisation, or do I need a quotation from british rail to suggest such a thing? I would have agreed to do this all along had you not descended into wikilayering as you did,

Oh and pointing to what has been done in other livery cats is hardly good argument as the cats are inconsistant, again cherrypicking comes into play. If the categorisation was sound I would not have needed to post here in the first place. If the 'black' intercity livery needs references from BR why no references for the other livery cats? I constantly have to grit my teath as more imagianative names appear for liveries, I dred to think what will happen when someone gets arround to say class 08s many of which have unique non standard liveries? Why does item of rolling stok have to have a livery cat? even stuff that has appeared in only one livery? it's all rather a mess. Oh and if you are going to create another livery cat please check that one has not already been created for it useing an imagianative name! Oxyman (talk) 12:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

InterCity Sector livery works for me, but nobody else seems to have used 'sector' in these categories, so is just '...in InterCity livery' even better?

I'd prefer sector to stay as some sort of descriptor, for the livery, as I said before refering to what has happened in the other cats is not good argument Oxyman (talk) 10:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

South Devon Main Line

Hi Geof, I noticed you put a load of pictures into south devon main line categories - we don't appear to have an article for that on en.wp, what exactly are its boundaries? -mattbuck (Talk) 16:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

It's the bit between the Category:Bristol to Exeter Line and the Category:Cornish Main Line. On English Wiki they have recently decided to call it Exeter to Plymouth line, but historically it is the main line of the South Devon Railway. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I ask because I got around to sorting Bristol to Taunbton and Reading to Plymouth back into constituent parts again. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thomas pic

Hey, I grabbed this snap of a "Thomas" at Buckfastleigh this week. I'll probably upload it and a few others from the SDR that day sometime. One thing I'm not sure on, do you have any idea which (class of) locomotive it really is? I think the photos in Category:Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends (real steam locomotives) ought to have the info on which loco has been defaced, its ultimately just an unusual livery :)--Nilfanion (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Most of these are old industrial locomotives, but I'm not sure which this one is. Have you tried the Thomas editors on English Wiki? Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:17, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Categories for individual units?

Hi. Thought you might want to weigh in at my en.wp talk page about potential categorisation by individual unit. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:57, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Categorising cropped bus images

Hi Geof. Regarding cat additions like this, it was originally my intention not to categorise bus images that have been cropped to isolate the bus in another image (having fully categorised the crop) to prevent uneccessary duplication, ie there's no point having both this and this in the Volvo Olympian category etc etc. For such cropped images, I generally include a geographic category if there's some worthwhile scenery etc, but that's about it. Therefore, for the purposes of Category:Unsorted UK bus images I consider any image already in Category:Cropped UK bus images to have been 'sorted'. Can you follow this logic and do you agree with it? If yes to both, I'll be removing all the ones that show up on an catscan intersection search for unsorted & cropped from the unsorted cat. Ultra7 (talk) 16:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense to me. I'm all for anyhing that will reduce the volume of images in categories to a useful number - not too large and not too small. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:13, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Cool. I'll continue on that basis then. Ultra7 (talk) 11:50, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Share your photos

Hello, Geof! I know that I am free to share (to copy, distribute and transmit) your works published here due to free lincences. And I want to upload you photos of buses to the BUS TRANSPORT united photo gallery, but administration of this site requires the consent of the author to publish his photo there. If you agree, just write about it here or you can register yourself there and spend boot from first-hand. Yours sincerely, Sidik iz PTU (talk) 08:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't read Russian, so I can't interact easily with that site. Any images that are uploaded to Wikipedia with a Creative Commons licence can be used elsewhere provided that the author/source is credited and the same licence is applied to the copied image. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:16, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Scotland's Railways Saltire

Hi Geof, I was wondering what source you're using for changing from Scotland's Railways livery to Saltire livery. I think I set it up using the livery names from RAIL, which said Scotland's Railways. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The reference given on English Wiki announcing the livery uses that name: Scotland's new Saltire train livery has been officially unveiled... and the same name is used in other generally reliable publications such as October 2011 Modern Railways. "Scotland's Railway" is the marketing tag line that appears on the side of the trains. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Bishops Lydeard railway station|2010-08-10 12:05

I was curious, why do you categorise a station category by date? I was trying to upload some images to that a month or so back and found it made it a lot harder to work out which images I'd already uploaded. Sorting a date category by date makes sense, as does a train category by train, but I fail to see the logic in sorting a station category by date. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:36, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I have used this for some time to bring older images to the top of the page at avrious stations. I took it a bit further on the WSR stations to see if it helped group images that were taken at around the same time as there seem to be batches uploaded on certain days. It certainly helps me spot images that might not be fully categorised, but I'm still evaluating whether it is worth the effort. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:13, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Using some of your pictures

Hi Geof, I´m a lifeboat-enthusiast from Germany, and I´ve a website (www.grimmi-online.de) with the focus of lifesaving at sea.

And now my question: is it possible to use your photos of the Hurly Burly and the building of the lifeboat-station Penlee on this website? Tell me please, how I´ve to credit the pics. Hope to hear from you, thx in advance.

Greetings from Germany

....and sorry, my English isn´t so good......

--Grimmi59 rade (talk) 21:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Alle Bilder auf Wikimedia Commons können wiederverwendet werden. Sie müßen nur zu zeigen, mir als Fotograf. (Ich finde, daß die richtige deutsche ist. Sehen Sie dies). Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:23, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Railway photos

Thought you might be interested in something Magog the Ogre has set up for me. Any photos which are uploaded in Category:Rail transport in the United Kingdom now end up on subpages of User:Mattbuck/Railways. Thought you might want to watchlist or something. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

3850 climbs out of Watchet

Hello. I voted for "3850 climbs out of Watchet ..." this morning and I thought, afterwards, that you are the photographer : a "~" lacks at the end of your signature which is, consequently, invisible. I hope I'm not wrong. -- Anyway, just a remark about " A Dennis dart operated by Crosville Motor Services in Weston-super-Mare." It needs a slight perpective correction, so as to make the wall on the left and the bus both straight and parallel. I apologise I didn't tell you before but I think you can easily and fastly fix it with Gimp or some equivalent soft. -- Sorry for my English. Best regards. -- JLPC (talk) 20:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take another look at it. I was trying to capture the thunder cloud behind and

did not notice the wall. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Williton station 2012.jpg

I appreciate it helps with passenger movement, but I can't help but feel the place looked better before the bridge was put up. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

It looked terrible at first without the roof, but a little better now. But on busy days you get loads of people standing there taking photographs so (a) passengers can't cross the line easily, and (b) they get in the way of me taking pictures looking the other way! Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:12, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Anglia Railways

Category:British Rail Mk2 coaches in Anglia Railways livery is not the same livery as Category:British Rail Class 170s in Anglia Railways livery. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Anglia Railways always used turquoise and white, but they applied it differently to different classes of rolling stock. Each class only had one version of the livery. To sub-categorise them as "Anglia Railways windowed" or whatever smacks of of over categrorisation - we're forcing people to drill down through too many levels to find the images. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

First group always use pink, white and blue; but that doesn't mean dynamic lines is the same as local lines or city lights. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

But Class 150s have appeared in two different First Group liveries (and have a lot of pictures too) which means the disambiguation serves a useful purpose. Anglia only ever used one livery for their Class 170s (with very few units involved, nor pictures likely to be uploaded) so disambiguation isn't necessary. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

That is not the issue. The point of the categorisation is to distinguish between different liveries - the liveries are different! A naming scheme needs to be consistent: we put all 378 trains in "trains of LO" and "trains in LO" even though for a long time they were one and the same. If two trains have the same livery, they should be in subcats of "trains in livery X". If they don't have the same livery, they should not both be in subcats of "trains of livery X". -mattbuck (Talk) 14:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

"It is essential that every file can be found by browsing the category structure." Are you suggesting that by calling all the variations just 'Anglia Railways livery' then people won't be able to find the images they are looking for? Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

What I'm suggesting is that a category structure needs to be consistent, and if you make exceptions it loses its usefulness. The category structure as I set it up means that different liveries have different categories, on the basis that liveries change over time and aren't restricted to a single TOC. I accept this is maybe not the best method, but it seemed sensible, as it differentiates between, say FGW 150s in "local lines" livery and FGW 150s in the plain blue livery. Now, I accept that when it comes to TOCs which had 1 livery for a class and never changed it, it can maybe become a bit strained, but given the point of the system is to differentiate between different liveries (substantially different anyway, counting for variations in train shape), it seems odd that, for this one TOC, every single different livery they have is declared the same. It's like saying that all SWT units are in SWT livery: it rather misses the point that they're different colours. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Braintree line photos

Hi mate, thanks for uploading the Braintree Line photos. I was very disappointed last month when I found we barely had any and I wanted some for a job interview presentation. These look pretty good. Too late to help with my interview, but sod it, forward the free media bandwagon! -mattbuck (Talk) 01:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I've been doing some surveys on the branch lines a little further into East Anglia so it didn't take me far out of may way. Cressing looks like it is worth a visit at some time, but I'm not sure that White Notley has much to offer.

The main line between Shenfield and Colchester isn't well covered either so I also took in Ingatestone (lovely station!) and Chelmsford that day - watch this space! Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:14, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Get to Cressing before they get around to adding a passing loop! -mattbuck (Talk) 14:24, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Crosville Motor Services

Hi Geof. Today, I've been sorting some preserved buses and coaches from the UK and now I'm wondering if there's any difference between the vehicles in Category:Crosville Motor Services (Weston-super-Mare) and Category:Crosville Motor Services. It looks very much like we've got two different categories for one and the same business, so I thought I'd ask you since you created one of them. De728631 (talk) 22:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

No, there're two different companies. The orignal Crosville Motor Services operated in Wales and north west England during the twentieth century. After deregulation the core business in Wales was bought by Arriva and dropped the Crosville name to become Category:Arriva Buses Wales. More recently a bus enthusiast set up a small coach hire business in Weston-super-Mare and aquired the rights to the Crosville Motor Services name. Things get complicated because one of the strands of his business is a fleet of heritage buses which are available for hire. And this includes some that were originally operated by the original Crosville, hence they get categorised with both companies — Category:Crosville Motor Services for the livery and Category:Crosville Motor Services (Weston-super-Mare) for the operator. There is a full list of the vehicles concerned on English Wikipedia at en:Crosvile Motor Services (Weston-super-Mare). Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Oy, that's more complicated than I had hoped for. But thanks for clarifying it. I'm going to check that list at Wikipedia. De728631 (talk) 18:36, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

165s at Westbury

I'm not sure I see why Reading blockade would mean that 165s came to Westbury. Your description states something about London-Penzance services, but surely these would be operated by HSTs? -mattbuck (Talk) 01:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

While Reading was being resignalled the only operational platforms there were the South Eastern and Berks & Hants bay platforms. Bristol services ran via Banbury to Paddington and West of England services reversed at Westbury to run to Salisbury and then up the main line to Waterloo (pictures will be uploaded next week!). This left Pewsey with no service so alternate-hour trains from Reading to Bedwyn were extended to Westbury.

This was much more customer-focused than the Christmas blocakde a couple of years ago when Pewsey had just a couple of rail replacement buses and the HSTs were banned from the Wimbledon line so had to be further diverted around the Windsor lines! Geof Sheppard (talk) 06:30, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Nice shot with File:Waterloo - FGW 43023 and SWT 444023.jpg. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Line cats

I'm not sure of the value of having a train photo in two different line categories, such as with File:Plymouth 150246.jpg.

Its a branch line service, on the route of the branch line, and at that point the branch uses same track as the main line. Its not unreasonable to have the train "on" both lines. A similar image, File:Devonport 43122.jpg is a main line service, on the route of the main line, and at that point the main line uses the same track as the branch. So logically the situation is similar with both trains.

However, putting main line services on the branch feels outright misleading, while putting branch services on the main line doesn't feel that wrong. Presumably that's because the actual trackbed shared by both lines is the "main line".

I wonder if it would be better to put the trains in only the route the actual service is on. With the original image: If someone is looking for a Class 150 on the Cornish Main Line, will they care about images of Tamar Valley Line services? Depending on the user that might just be noise, because "I need a picture of a Main Line service"...--Nilfanion (talk) 13:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a thorny issue certainly. I tend to use line categories for just the line the train is operating, although that can be tricky - is a service to Westbury from the north on the Wessex Main or the Heart of Wessex? -mattbuck (Talk) 13:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

This is a problem because named services don't always match the geographic nature of Wiki. The Cornish Main Line and the Tamar Valley Line are both are categorised as Category:Railway lines in England, not Category:Train services in England. If we were to have a category for the Gunnislake Branch then it wouldn't be such an issue, but that would mean that pictures of Dockyard - a station which I think is only served by Tamar Valley trains at present - would be missing from the branch line.

Its even more of a problem where there is a long overlap. Matt has mentioned the Heart of Wessex Line, but what about the line from Exeter to Newton Abbot? I often can't tell whether a train is a Riviera Line service to Paignton or a main line service to Plymouth.

So my pragmatic solution is to categorise for the service, but where I think it adds value to categorise for the line too then I will. To not include the Class 153 at Dockyard on the Cornish Main Line would not reflect the fact that there are more 153s at the Plymouth end of the line than at Penzance.Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

An improved "solution" may be more intersection categories; as opposed to restricting the structure to the entire length of named lines. The ECML's category covers everything from King's Cross to Waverley, so includes this and this. As a result of the ECML's categorisation, they are placed in a subcat of Lincolnshire.

If we split the line categories in a geographic manner (as has been done for the A303), we provide better geographic data. It also gives us potential to handle 2 lines on one track as cats like Category:Cornish Main Line in Plymouth or Category:Cornish Main Line (St Erth-Penzance) can be categorised in all relevant lines.

The reason I used quotes is geographic splitting is really a solution to a different issue (the situation with Lincolnshire above), and triply intersected cats (Class 153s on the Cornish Main Line in Plymouth) are overkill with a lot of work for little gain - its not really going to solve this problem. I suppose the question is: Is a Tamar Valley service at Dockyard "a train on the Cornish Main Line" or "a Tamar Valley train on the main line"? Is there a meaningful difference between those two concepts or just semantics? I'm not sure.

For what its worth, the minor stations in Plymouth are used by mainline services (eg the 06.00 Penzance-Cardiff, 14.49 Penzance-Plymouth, 17.04 Plymouth-Liskeard all call at Dockyard).--Nilfanion (talk) 10:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Buckfastleigh station - Southern National 1613 LTA772 and Western National 137 FJ8967.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --JLPC 16:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Washford 5553 shunting.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support --Christian Ferrer 11:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! St Austell - FGW 43012 under Menacuddle Bridge.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support very nice --A.Savin 10:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Carnon Viaduct - FGW 150126 above Mineral Tramways Trail.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Not really crisp but nice mood. --JLPC 17:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Is this right?

File:Dawlish railway station geograph-2444513-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg‎ includes Category:Steam locomotives at Bristol Temple Meads railway station ?

This cat appears on a number of other pages edited at about the same time Chevin (talk) 08:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Copy-and-paste and a lack of coffee! Thanks for spotting it - I'll get it fixed. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Renames

Hello;

I was renaming your Truro station files, as per requests, was wondering if there was some significance to the long number in this file name, or if it can be removed?

"Truro Rail Ale Trail 153377.jpg" to "2009 at Truro station - Rail Ale Trail 153377.jpg"

Lx 121 (talk) 08:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

153377 is the number of the train in the background. Please keep it in. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:02, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Bishops Lydeard locomotive compound - D9526 B end head on.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 18:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Image resolution

I've noticed that the images you upload are typically limited to 1024px wide (there are exceptions, like the QI above). As you are clearly a good photographer, it would be great if you could upload higher res files. I'd suggest a minimum of 1800px wide - with a typical aspect ratio that is above the minimum res of 2MP for COM:QI, and also gives 6x4 prints at 300dpi. In general, the higher the res the more valuable the image to Commons.

Is there any reason for the restricted file sizes?--Nilfanion (talk) 09:21, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I struggle with slow connections so file size is the issue. I have to make a choice between upload volume, image size, and time spent patrolling categories. If I think that one of my images may be particularly useful then I will upload a 2MP image; three dozen of these have been judged as QICs. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:16, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Hendford

Geof:

You have produced a number of maps to illustrate the historic development of some lines. I applaud that as it makes things considerably clearer for the reader. May I respectfully draw your attention to a typo on the Yeovil maps ... it is "Hendford" not Henford. Depending on the software you use this might be easy to rectify or it might be awkward. Kindest regards Afterbrunel (talk) 09:38, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that. I've uploaded a corrected version. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Well done, Geoff, thanks. Afterbrunel (talk) 10:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Minehead - 6960 heading for Bishops Lydeard.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cogload Junction - FGW 43185 (43174).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support OK --A.Savin 14:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Chippenham - FGW 150246 and 150244.jpg

File:Chippenham - FGW 150246 and 150244.jpg I thought Chippenham-Westbury was 2 trains per day in the early morning and late evening. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't believe everything you read in the press! That's the 15:06 from Westbury passing the 15:22 Swindon to Warminster on a Saturday afternoon. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Taunton - CrossCountry 220032 passing FGW 43004.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Just about ok, though mildly unsharp. --Mattbuck 01:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Sand Bay 39920.jpg

I had removed that category in error. I misread and thought is was overcategorization (but bus stops is not necessarily bus shelters). --Dschwen (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Plymouth

Hi Geof. I don't understand why you reverted my edit at [Difference between revisions of "File:Royal Albert Bridge Signal Box viewed from the bridge.jpg"]. The image clearly shows a road bridge in Devon and a signal box in Devon, and therefore belongs in both those categories. Skinsmoke (talk) 08:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I didn't think I did - I thought I cancelled out of the change without saving! I've put it back now. Keep up the good work. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

No problems. It's so easy to accidentally click on that wrong button. Have done it myself. More coffee needed, lol. Skinsmoke (talk) 08:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Plymouth Royal Parade - First 53154 (HIG8433).jpg

File:Plymouth Royal Parade - First 53154 (HIG8433).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Nilfanion (talk) 17:04, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Just an FYI

You may want to look at Commons:UK Train Categorisation, which is a project I'm working on currently. Of specific interest are the line definitions - so far they're mostly all common-sense I think, but I have made two major changes:

• Outer South London Line is not a valid line
• East London Line ends at New Cross, New Cross Gate and Old Kent Road Junction.

I'll get on recategorising trains on these lines later this week. At some point the North Berwick Line will also disappear, but I'm working my way northwards so it will be a while before that happens. Once I'm done, I'll post a complete list of stations and relevant lines. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Useful stuff! I'm not sure why you want to delete the North Berwick Line. Where does that leave Nprth Berwick railway station?

Do you have any ideas for the Cross Country Route? Is it really one line from Bristol to the North? The nature of trains between Bristol and Birmingham, and between Bristol and Derby are somewhat different, especially when it comes to steam and early diesels. But there is also a Category:Birmingham to Worcester via Bromsgrove Line which doesn't quite make sense - most of this is really the category:Cross Country Route which gives us another big overlap like the Riviera/South Devon Main Line and the Heart of Wessex/Wessex Main Line. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:11, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, the North Berwick Line, according to the article, runs from Glasgow to North Berwick, and the article reads as a service line. Most of the distance is the Caledonian Main Line (or something like that) and the ECML, with the North Berwick Branch covering the end bit.

Yes, the Cross Country Route... I will certainly be doing away with the TransPennines, and perhaps Thameslink (apart from Dock Junction to Blackfriars). I've always counted the XCR as its own line, and I'm not too averse to overlaps (although they are annoying), but.... I don't know, perhaps we should create a list of "tbc" lines at WTUKRAIL. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:56, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

The "traditional" North Berwick Line is just Edinburgh to North Berwick. While it mostly overlaps the ECML the trains are very different. I worked through most of the lowland Scotish lines a couple of years ago and put the more easterly bits of this route into the snappily-titled Category:Glasgow to Edinburgh via Airdrie and Bathgate Line and, for the far end, into Category:North Clyde Line. Those EMUs run coast to coast! There are a couple of other lines in the Glasgow and Edinbugh conurbations that are really services rather than physical lines, but I left those for another time.

TransPennie is another mish-mash of services. I've categorised a couple of images from the Category:York to Scarborough Line and refuse to consider them as being Category:North TransPennine. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

FYI I have now recategorised ELL and OSLL images. ISLL will likely be renamed as SLL in the near future, as there's no need for disambiguation anymore.

I'm ok with NBL being EDB-Berwick, that makes a sort of sense. TransPennines are indeed a mess, and I shall work on them at some point. Thameslink probably needs discussion at WTUKRAIL. I shall start one. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:GWR 2800s of Great Western Railway

GWR 2800s of Great Western Railway has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Andy Dingley (talk) 13:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Trains of Great Western Railway

Trains of Great Western Railway has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Andy Dingley (talk) 13:14, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Minehead Lifeboat D-712 Christine at sea.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Resolution very much less than that of the camera used (acc. to EXIF); why? --A.Savin 12:31, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Support QI IMO --Christian Ferrer 08:15, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Doxey - Govia Thameslink 387118-387117.jpg

File:Doxey - Govia Thameslink 387118-387117.jpg To me the livery they're in looks the same as on the 379s, making it NX debranded. It;s hard to tell but the doors look grey rather than the blue of GTR white. -mattbuck (Talk) 08:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! The 387s have nothing to do with National Express so I wouldn't want to call it NX anything. I just looked at what people have used for other GTR units and followed suit. It was one of those 'right place, right time' pictures (making up for just missing a class 68 test run half an hour earlier) so I didn't get much of a look. When it was coming towards me I just registered it as a white Electrostar. As it went past all I could see were the Thameslink logos. I have a suspicion that the doors may be dark green. Geof Sheppard (talk) 09:12, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Use of photo in book

Hi Geof, I am putting together a small booklet about a Bristol Lodekka here in Adelaide (South Australia) and I was wondering if it will be OK to use one of your photos in it to help illustrate Western National livery used on their Lodekkas - naturally with credit to yourself as photographer. The photo concerned is: File:Taunton Bus Station - Western National 1969 (468FTT) and 1935 (VDV752).jpg. Cheers, Steve

Of course you can, Steve. If there are any gaps in what you're trying to illustrate then let me know and I'll see if I have anything else that could help. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:20, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

BR categories

Who does 47541 belong to?

I don't really like the idea of shoving everything BR into the same categories (as regards TOCs). To me, InterCity, Regional and NSE are separate organisations, even if operating under the same umbrella, much as we have FGW FCC FTP operating under FirstGroup. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Matt. I know what you mean, but FGW and FCC seem to be companies in their own right, whereas the BR sectors genrally weren't. They also have fixed pools of stock which (except for oddities such as class 67s and 68s) only work that company's routes. Back in the 80s and 90s there was a lot of temporary movement between sectors - 47541 appears to be a ScotRail locomotive, so what is it doing at Cardiff? A Provincial working from Crewe probably, or is it a Cross Country InterCity service?

If we are to treat the sectors as TOCs then I think we need to consider the strucure that preceeded them too. Rolling stock was allocated to regions in just the same way, so a Class 40 at Exeter would need to be categorised 'Trains of BR (LMR) on the Bristol to Exeter Line'.

BTW, any thoughts on all this individual locomotive categories with just a couple of images in them? e.g. Category:British Rail Class 40's sub-categories? Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, this got lost on my watchlist, please {{Ping}} me for future replies!

I can understand what you mean, though NSE seems to have been much more cohesive an operation perhaps than the others. Still, I wasn't interested in railways back then, so while it does irk me I'll live with it.

Regarding individual unit categories, I'm generally against them, certainly for multiple units, but for locomotives it makes a bit more sense to me as they tend to have a more storied history. But I would never create one myself. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

FGW using your photo

[1] -mattbuck (Talk) 14:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

They get about, don't they? I found one on the BBC News website last year. Geof Sheppard (talk) 17:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

They're all at it now. I've just come across one of my pictures being used to advertise the South Devon Railway's Easter Gala! Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Riverford - L92 down train.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Excellent composition and colors but the sharpness should be a bit better. Nevertheless QI for me. -- Spurzem 08:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Portal cranes on Prince's Wharf, Bristol

Portal cranes on Prince's Wharf, Bristol has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Andy Dingley (talk) 09:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Friendly request

Hello Geof Sheppard, I was looking at Category:Trains by operator and I saw several categories which name starts with "British Rail Class". Since they seem to have something in common but I think I don't have the enough knowledge about this particular subject to get a proper name for the category, could you please try to gather them into a category for me?--Epsilon Tauri (talk) 17:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I've moved them all down to Category:Trains of the United Kingdom by operator by class where they belong. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Plymouth bus station

I'm not sure what to do about this category - the bus station is to close in near future (or it may even have already done so), and Plymouth will be getting a new bus station on a different site. When that new station opens, it will presumably be "Plymouth bus station". I'm thinking the following:

1. Move all content of the old site to Category:Bretonside bus station
2. Have Category:Plymouth bus station be for the new one - with a hatnote to the old.

Does that sound sensible?--Nilfanion (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

My instinct is to move the current content to a dated category (we'd need to check the dates but something like Category:Plymouth bus station (1950 to 2016) and then leave the exisiting one for new content.

I'm rather concerned about the large number of images that have been copied from Flickr recently but aren't yet properly categorised (there are now more than 3,000 in Category:Plymouth Citybus, mostly without location categories. These are going to flood categories such as Buses in Plymouth and Royal Parade, so it may be a good idea to think about other solutions such as Category:Plymouth Citybus buses at Plymouth bus station that can be sub-categories for multiple parents. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:54, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Sounds sensible enough to me on the cat name.

I had been working on that dump of files some time ago, but I drifted away due to other priorities. Its still on my list, and will start at it again. I agree deeper subcats are needed, though I'll probably stop at the level of Category:Buses on Royal Parade, Plymouth.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Two years on and I think I've go to the bottom of the Plymouth 'bus flood'. I've shifted more than 4,500 images into deeper categories. All the necessary streets in the city centre 'triangle' now have 'Buses on xxx Street, Plymouth' categories, as have the hot spots further out. 1,723 buses on Derry's Cross! No wonder it's taken me so long (after a month I needed to look at some more interesting things).

Along the way I deleted four duplicates and found a dozen or so that weren't in Plymouth so I've shifted them out to their correct locations. I also worked through all the Target Travel and First Devon and Cornwall categories, many of which didn't have locations but were also in Plymouth. I'll take a proper look at FirstGroup buses in the United Kingdom and Stagecoach UK Bus sometime as some of these will be local but I don't think there are too many.

I also notice that the editor who transferred all those files from Flikr hasn't been active in Commons for a couple of years so the problem shouldn't recur again too soon. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Great work! Combine a prolific Flickr user with a Commons user who uploads every bus he finds (but only cares about it being a bus, not about where it is) and it gets swamped. There's probably more photos of vehicles in Plymouth than there are of vehicles in London! I've been inactive of late on Commons, I want to start getting back into things soon. I'll probably start with a major tidy up of Plymouth as a whole.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Doncaster to Barnetby Line

Should Category:Doncaster to Barnetby Line be merged into Category:South Humberside Main Line? Mackensen (talk) 19:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I searched all over for the line but failed to find a category or an article in English Wikipedia. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, someone had created it but it wasn't well-linked. I stumbled across it a few months ago. Mackensen (talk) 15:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Camborne and Redruth tram postcard

Hi. I think this image "Redruth Centenary Wesleyan Chapel car 1.jpg" is actually in Camborne. If you look at this link to Google Street View it appears to show the chapel in the image Centenary Wesleyan Chapel {Andrewrabbott (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2016 (UTC)}

File:16-11-15-Straßenszene Glasgow-RR2 7248.jpg

File:16-11-15-Straßenszene Glasgow-RR2 7248.jpg Hi Geof, I just found this random image while patrolling new uploads. So I thought as one of our resident experts for buses in the UK you would want to refine the categories a bit. I keep losing track of the dozens of subcategories for First liveries, chassis and body manufacturers and whatnot. De728631 (talk) 21:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree, those Wrightbus models are so confusing! I've done them now. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

Thank you for moving the "Wrightbus" categories to "Wright X", I've never understood it but I assumed buses that were under "Wrightbus" were perhaps the first ever Wright buses and then they'd changed name or something .... Turns out i was wrong but anyway thank you for moving them all over and for making everyones lives less hard :), Have a great Christmas and a Happy New Year too :), –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 15:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Third rail locomotives

Reversion? What did I get wrong? Apart from living in Strood. ClemRutter (talk) 20:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

The pictures were all of multiple units, not locomotives. I've put all the British 750v DC locomotives in as subcategories so there's shouldn't be a need to trawl for individual British images. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:15, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks.--ClemRutter (talk) 13:44, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Category September 2016 in Berkshire on file Inside GWR 166205.JPG

Hi. I see you reverted my removal of category September 2016 in Berkshire from file Inside GWR 166205.JPG. I must admit I assumed that the inclusion of this category was simply an input error, as the photograph itself gives no clue as to the location, and the caption makes no reference to where the photograph was taken. I've no objection to including the category, but I think at the least it needs a justification in the description, even if it just says Taken between Maidenhead and Twyford or whatever. -- Chris j wood (talk) 10:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I've confirmed the location hinted at in the categorization - it was on a Newbury line service at the time. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

"Plymouth" images

Hey,

I came across File:Going through Plymouth - panoramio (1).jpg and File:Going through Plymouth - panoramio.jpg earlier. I'm confident both were taken in Newport, but I'm not sure how to name or categorise them... Any ideas?--Nilfanion (talk) 13:08, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, they're definitely in Newport - crossing the GWR Usk railway bridge on a (I guess) train heading towards London. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:25, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

File:319011 B London St Pancras.JPG

This train is at St Pancras Railway Station so should this image be in Category:British Rail Class 319s of Southern when Southern trains don't stop there?

This picture is currently in Category:British Rail Class 319s of Southern when it is a Thameslink ( or First Capital Connect ) train as Southern trains don't stop at London St Pancras. Should it stay in Category:British Rail Class 319s of Southern or should it be moved to Category:British Rail Class 319s of Thameslink? Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The convention that we use is that it is still a train "of Southern" whether it is working a Southern service or not. Trains do sometimes go off their usual routes for maintenance reasons (e.g. File:Bristol Temple Meads - Arriva 153312 ecs.JPG shows an Arriva Trains Wales unit leaving the workshops at Bristol) but also when they are hired to other operators, which I think is what has happened here. Where this is common practice we add a "Trains hired to..." category, for example Category:Trains hired to Great Western Railway (First Group). Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:25, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Abus S333AJP.jpg‎

This discussion has been moved to the file's talk page where it is more appropriate. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:26, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Conerning BR logos etc...

I note elsewhere you were involved in a 2011 GLAM project related to the National Railway Museum in York. Do you know who on Wikimedia projects was liaison with the museum? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

My talk page shows messages from Victuallers and Tagishsimon. I hope that helps. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:30, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Thats correct Victuallers (talk) 07:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

When it was?

Hello! I see 2008 in Summary, 2012 in EXIF and 2011 in categories. When it was in fact? Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It was 2012 - the EXIF data in this camera is reliable. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:26, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Plymouth Road

Just to point out that Plymouth Road goes from Laira to Plympton. The first section to Marsh Mills is part of the A374, while the rest is part of the B3416. Almost all of the vehicle photos were taken from a couple spots near the Sainsburys supermarket (in Crabtree and on the A374). As the scope of the road category covers the entire length of the road, it can't have Crabtree or the A374 as a parent, as its scope covers things on the B-road section in Plympton.

Given the sheer number of photos taken on that short stretch, a sub-cat is desirable. However to do that, I think we would need at least two categories for the two sections of the road. I'm not sure on the best way to label categories for the two (or more) chunks.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:05, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

You've probably noticed, I've been slowly working through these big Plymouth bus categories. It's going to keep me busy for a while to come yet!

I don't like the way that the higher categories get swamped by all these pictures which show hardly any background. How about Catgeory:Plymouth Road, Plympton and Category:Plymouth Road, Crabtree, would that solve the problem? Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:20, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed and I think its definitely worthwhile. I also agree that flooding the higher level categories is a bad thing.

I'm not sure about those titles, as they appear to mean two different Plymouth Roads (like Category:Fore Street, Devonport and Category:Fore Street, Plympton) and the road might need more than just those two districts anyway. My thinking is the better approach would be have Category:Plymouth Road, Plymouth (Laira-Marsh Mills) and (Marsh Mills-Plympton) as subcats of the existing one. I'm attracted to that because the same treatment would also work for long distance routes like Category:A30 road in Devon and Category:South Devon Main Line: The A30 could naturally be split into the sections west and east of Exeter; and it might be helpful to break the railway line into chunks between stations/towns.--Nilfanion (talk) 08:58, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

That sounds sensible, and it seems to fit with other the higher (numbered) road categories.

The railway lines are definitely something that I'm aware of. The normal practice is to have sub-categories for stations and significant engineering features, butt hat leaves a problem if a section of line has a large number of photographs taken of it. Hence Category:South Devon Railway sea wall in Dawlish and Category:South Devon Railway sea wall in Teignmouth. There are similar problems on some other lines, especially the heritage routes that attract a lot of attention. One solution might be to make the stations sub-categories of a railway/parish category, such as Catgeory:South Devon Main Line in Ivybridge which would be the parent to Category:Ivybridge railway station and Category:Ivybridge Viaduct. I'd like to have a look around some other parts of the country to see if anything similar has been done on routes that I'm less familiar with. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I've had a quick look around at major linear features, there's only really <route> in <county> format. There's a few <river> in <town>, so some parish-level exists. While county-level is probably sufficient, some areas might benefit from a further breakdown (like the sea wall).

Ignoring the time costs involved, the biggest issue is boundary-straddling subjects, and Ivybridge station is a good example of that. The station is actually in Ugborough parish, so should in the Ugborough not Ivybridge category. That would be downright confusing to users...--Nilfanion (talk) 08:50, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Valley Lines

Hi Geof, what happened to Valley Lines? The whole category's empty now - I know we used to have photos from that TOC. -mattbuck (Talk) 07:25, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Anything before October 1996 was BR, or after October 2001 was Wales and Borders. I've had a trawl through the likely places and can only find one picture of a 143 that fits these dates so I've put that in Valley Line categories Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Affected:

• File:2014 at Lostwithiel station - entrance sign.JPG

And also:

• File:2017 at Bramley station - station sign.JPG

Yours sincerely, ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

1996 scans

I have scanned and uploaded railway pictures from 1996 slides. I dont know the precise date. See Category:1996 in rail transport in London and Category:1996 in rail transport in the United Kingdom (Brigthon and Ashford). There are also some 1996 Eurostars (problem I cant separate the English, French and Belgian Eurostar subcategories) Could you help to catogorise?Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:29, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Description typo in File:Exeter Riverside - FGW 143613 passing Colas 70801.JPG

Hi, just so you know there's a typo on File:Exeter Riverside - FGW 143613 passing Colas 70801.JPG - the image shows 143 603 instead of 613 - 613 was scrapped during Wessex Trains days! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNimiboy (talk • contribs) 14:28, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that - I've corrected it now. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:20, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Wemyss Bay railway station ticket office

I'm not sure this category is very useful. What do you think? The ticket office is only a small part of the interior, and yet that category gets used for any interior shot that includes it at all. We have no category for interior photos that don't include (much of) the office. I think it would be more useful to have a Category:Wemyss Bay railway station interior category or Category:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse category. Possibly a Category:Wemyss Bay railway station platforms category would also help for some photos. -- Colin (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I think there are too many subcategories anyway. There are only about 100 images of the station which is generally deemed okay (I would expect to see subcategories when it gets closer to 200 files). I think that @Rodhullandemu: did these originally about two years ago; I just renamed them for consistency with other railway stations.

The usual way to diffuse a large station category would be to split out the Trains at Wemyss Bay railway station although in this case Category:Wemyss Bay station former goods yard is probably useful too as it a very different area to the main station. Geof Sheppard (talk)

Meanwhile, on Wikipedia

Someone is trying to use your photo of a Pendolino at Hest Bank as the lead photo on w:en:British Rail Class 390, despite some technical limitations (which I'm sure you'd understand) which prevent it from being suitable "magazine-quality", and the availability of frankly much better images. I don't think it's you being uncooperative, but I thought I should let you know. TM. Tony May (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

BR 50 007.jpg

Hi Geof You moved the category of this picture from Category:1992 in rail transport in the United Kingdom to Category:1992 in railway preservation in England. Strictly speaking this is not accurate, at the time of the picture being taken she was still owned and operated by BR as one of a number of locomotives and other rolling stock painted in "heritage" liveries. Which is why I purposefully did not include the image in the latter category. When she was preserved she lost this livery and identity, reverting to her formr BR blue colour scheme and name, Hercules. Cheers, Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:56, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I got the withdrawal dates confused. I've fixed it now. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:01, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Cheers. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

EMR HSTs

As painted by Stagecoach

Just wondering should File:St Pancras - Abellio 43423-43465 (Stagecoach colours).JPG be counted as a different livery? Without all the colours I'd say it's not the same as either existing EMT HST livery. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I did initially think it was the same but if you look at the ex-Grand Central power cars when Stagecoach repainted them you'll notice that they don't have the white area around the guard's van window. I was thinking that they could be 'Stagecoach blue' (aside - why aren't the others 'Stagecoach white'?) but if you catch one standing next to a DMU it is a different shade of blue - you can see it better when you compare the multicoloured areas behind the cabs. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:21, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

• To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
• To perform file name swaps.
• When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Category:Railway station buffer stops in the United Kingdom

I have proposed that Category:Railway station buffer stops in the United Kingdom be renamed to category:Station buffers in the United Kingdom to match all the others in the Category:Station buffers by country category. I note that you moved the category the other way in 2016, so you might have comments - if so please leave them at Category talk:Railway station buffer stops in the United Kingdom. Thryduulf (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

My understanding is that buffers are on rail vehicles and the correct term (in the UK) for fixed devices at the end of a line is either 'buffer stop' or 'stop block'. English Wikipedia also uses this distinction and so it seems appropriate that we use it for the Commons categories. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:36, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:Preserved steam buses in the United Kingdom

Preserved steam buses in the United Kingdom has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Andy Dingley (talk) 18:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Rename request

Hello. I got a bit curious with this edit of yours. You have the file-mover right. Then why would you wait for someone to rename it (I know I should not ask this question. I just got curious that's why asking you as another user of WP)? Thanks in advance. --Pratyya ^(Hello!) 12:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

It's an old habit from the days when I needed someone else to make the moves. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:27, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

File:2007 at St Germans station - notice board.jpg

File:2007 at St Germans station - notice board.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

-mattbuck (Talk) 10:36, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Category:British_Rail_Mk3_coaches_of_Virgin_Trains_West_Coast

British Rail Mk3 coaches of Virgin Trains West Coast has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

YTRK (talk) 09:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Brunel's tide gauge

Geof, is the image you supplied the same as this item in the Science Museum?--Verbarson (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it would be. It is part of the National Collection but that is shared (and moved) around many different museums including STEAM. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:30, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Train liveries

Hello, this is getting confusing. If "a livery category parent should not be an operator category", why is Category:Trains of London Overground a parent of Category:Train liveries of London Overground? Where else should Category:Trains in Elizabeth line livery sit within Category:Elizabeth line that is consistent with other similar categories? I simply don't understand how this can be sensibly categorised. Thanks. Cnbrb (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree, it can sometimes be confusing. As a rule of thumb, a category with "livery" at the end only takes a wider livery category as a parent; they join up with the operator in a Category:Train liveries of Xyz operator if it is appropriate. This is because the same liveries are often used by different operators. So far the Elizabeth line livery is unique to TfL Rail, but take a look at pictures in something like Category:Trains in British Rail blue livery or Category:Trains in English, Welsh and Scottish Railway livery and you'll see why they aren't child cetagories of British Rail or English, Welsh and Scottish Railway.

The {{Ukt}} template can populate four categories for a photograph when it is used

• Class by operator
• Class by livery
• Class by line
• Operator by line

So {{subst:ukt|345|001|TfL Rail|Elizabeth line|Great Western Main Line}} does most of the hard work for you (just change the 001 to whatever the unit number is, etc.). Note that the Elizabeth line is a line, not an operator. Commons:UK Train Categorisation#Catgeory structure explains it in more detail.

To be consistent with the hundreds of other train categories, the category structure for the Elizabeth line livery ought to be

• Category:Trains in the United Kingdom by livery
  • Category:Trains in Elizabeth line livery

And

• Category:Rail transport companies of the United Kingdom
  • Category:TfL Rail
    • Category:Train liveries of TfL Rail
      • Category:Trains in Elizabeth line livery

I hope that makes some sense! Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you - yes, sort of. I am happy to fit in with whatever categorisation scheme is established. I think my issue here was not being able to reach Category:Trains in Elizabeth line livery from Category:Elizabeth line (you have to dive out into the Crossrail parent category and then back in to TfL rail, which seems daft to me!). From your explanation it seems to me that the following would be appropriate - can you confirm if this works?

• Category:Rail transport companies of the United Kingdom
  • Category:Elizabeth line
    • Category:Train liveries of the Elizabeth line
      • Category:Trains in Elizabeth line livery

Thanks for your help Cnbrb (talk) 10:20, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the problem here is that the Elizabeth line isn't an operator but it does have a distinct livery. We don't see that on other lines such as the District or the Central.

Next week (or soon!) we should be able to add Category:Trains on the Elizabeth line, although there probably needs to be a debate about whether that just means Paddington to Abbey Wood or if it should eventually include the Great Western and Great Eastern main lines too. There are examples or both approaches scattered around Wiki Commons.

How about a {{Category see also}} to Trains in Elizabeth line livery at the top of the Category:Elizabeth line? That would give a link out to the livery category without it being in the categooraisation. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mattbuck:

I think a scheme should be devised to make this work - I'm sure you can appreciate how this is counter-intuitive to the average user browsing categories, simply due to a technicality of operator versus line? I've put in a "see also" to get around the problem for now. Thanks. 15:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd say that Elizabeth Line is a service line, not an infrastructure line, and thus it should be "Trains on Crossrail". But probably worth discussion at WT:UKRAIL. I'd certainly limit it to Royal Oak to Abbey Wood and Pudding Mill Lane - beyond that it's all existing infrastructure. I've had photos of trains on it for years now (Custom House is very visible), so wouldn't be surprised if such photos already exist. As for Elizabeth Line as a TOC, to me that should be a rename from TfL Rail, it's still the same company operating the trains, just a new name above the door, similar to how National Express East Anglia categories include its "One" iteration. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:16, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:Tootbus_Bath

Tootbus Bath has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Estopedist1 (talk) 08:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

File:Preston Bus Preston Park and Ride PN08SVK.jpg

Hi Geoff, Hope you're well, Just wanted to enquire regarding File:Preston Bus Preston Park and Ride PN08SVK.jpg, You added "Category:Optare Solo buses in the United Kingdom (SR, M950)" however according to https://www.buslistsontheweb.co.uk/ it's an M960 but wanted to double check with you in case that website could possibly be incorrect, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 16:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Well spotted. I must have misread that one but I've fixed it now. Geof Sheppard (talk) 18:54, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks Geoff. –Davey2010^Talk 19:22, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Category:Alexander ALX400 on DAF DB250 buses in the United Kingdom

Hi again Geoff, Sorry to bother you again, Many moons ago you created Category:Alexander ALX400 on DAF DB250 buses in the United Kingdom however Category:Alexander ALX400 on DAF DB250LF buses in the United Kingdom also exists,
Reading en:DAF DB250 it would appear or my assumption at least is that ALL DB250 models were step entrance and then DB250LF was low floor but everything prior to the LF model would've been step entrance ?, (The DB250 article notes the Optare Spectra and Northern Counties Palatine 2 as being 2 examples on DB250 both of which were step entrance vehicles[2]2)
Category:Optare_Spectra_on_DAF_DB250_buses_in_the_United_Kingdom would also appear to be incorrect as looking closely at those images there's a mixture of step/low floor models
Anyway apologies for this being long-winded I just wanted to get your feedback first in case I may of missed something, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 22:39, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I sometimes wonder how detailed we need to be with chassis variations (the two ALX400/DB250 categories contain only 66 images between them) but the difference between step-entrance and low-floor buses is significant so it is probably worth having two in this case. However Bus Lists on the Web shows that DB250LF have chassis numbers in the same DB250 series as step-entrance chassis (eg DAF DB250 XMGDE02RS0H005431 is given for ABus's first low-floor Spctra), so it would be easy to think a DB250LF was actually DB250.

'Alexander ALX400 on DAF DB250LF buses in the United Kingdom' probably needs to be a subcategory of 'Alexander ALX400 on DAF DB250 buses in the United Kingdom'.Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't know there are differences between the Tridents and the B7TLs, Ironically enough though I do have the same opinion but just with the Plaxton Pointers - Other than the occasional badge at the front or rear you'd never know who made it,

Yeah I noticed that too it seems the LF is non-existent on Bus Lists on the Web,

Wouldn't it be better to move all files from DB250 to DB250LF and then change the 250 category to a redirect otherwise we'd be having 2 categories on the same vehicle ?, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

The DB250 isn't a model that I see too often, but according to the Wikipedia article it seems we need both DB250 and DB250LF for the Spectra (so the latter a sub-category), DB250 only for the Palatine 2, and everything else is DB250LF so categories such as ALX400 on DB250 should be redirected. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Okie dokie I'll move the ALX400/DAF models over as I was going through Category:DAF DB250 which was what made me notice the the 250/LF thing, Anyway many thanks for your help and feedback both are greatly appreciated, Enjoy the rest of your weekend Geoff, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Category:C262_GUH_(preserved_United_Kingdom_bus)

Category:C262_GUH_(preserved_United_Kingdom_bus) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Hullian111 (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

URS 321X

Hello! I recently saw URS 321X in Australia, and added photographs to the category you greatly expanded. No Swan So Fine (talk) 05:10, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading these pictures. You have put them in a country-specific category, so I've moved them into a new Category:UK bus URS 321X in Australia and left a 'see also' link on the UK page. Geof Sheppard (talk) 17:38, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Oakham

Oakham

Hi Geof, whilst doing some categorizing for Oakham station I stumbled across a couple of your files there which needed editing, and thought it was worth mentioning that Oakham is in Rutland rather than Leicestershire. Jokulhlaup (talk) 14:22, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Ashcombe Road WCPLR small railcar

Hi Geof

I would like to use the photo of the WCPLR small railcar at Weston-Super-Mare c. 1930 in a forthcoming book. Might you have a higher resolution file, please.

Here's the link for ease of viewing: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ashcombe_Road_-_WCPLR_small_railcar.jpg

I look forward cohering from you.

Many thanks

Penny Padpad70 (talk) 16:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

No problem, Penny. I should be able to e-mail one to you if you let me have an address. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Temporary bus stop in Exeter.JPG

File:Temporary bus stop in Exeter.JPG

Its a bus stop. Why not categorise it with the buses? Rathfelder (talk) 16:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

"Buses in..." categories are used consistently for buses. There is no bus in this image, just a bus stop which has its own "bus stops in..." parent categories. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:49, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Category:Bus stops in England is a subcategory of Category:Bus transport in England. Category:Exeter bus station is a subcategory of Category:Buses in Exeter. Bus stops are connected to buses. Rathfelder (talk) 18:58, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

The county-level 'Bus transport' categories contain hierarchies for 'buses', 'bus depots', 'bus stops' and 'bus stations', all different topics. I don't mind that Category:Exeter bus station is a subcategory of Category:Buses in Exeter as most of the images are of buses and it would be silly to move them into a sub-category for 'Buses in Exeter bus station'. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:24, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

2022 Picture of the Year: Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) and Gadwall (Mareca strepera) in Nepal.

Dear Wikimedian,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2023 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighteenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and top 5% of most popular images in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just three images to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 1 will end on 14 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2022 Picture of the Year contest.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2023 voting is open!

Read this message in your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because we noticed that you previously voted in the Picture of the Year contest. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2023) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

In this second and final round, you may vote for a maximum of three images. The image with the most votes will become the Picture of the Year 2023.

Round 2 will end at 28 October 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote now!

If you have already voted for Round 2, please ignore this message.

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)