Talk:Rail terminology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| See also: WikiProject Trains to do list | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) |
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance within the Trains WikiProject. |
|
Pending tasks for Rail terminology: |
(purge cache – edit this list) | |
|---|---|---|
|
||
| See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo | ||
Contents |
[edit] Here comes the creepy railfan linguist
Hi everybody, this page is awesome. But the regional labels are a tad confusing. You say, U.S. = originated in America and UK = originated in UK—but it's not where it's at. These tags seem to denote usage rather than origin—and that would make actually more sense. Only when we are sure that a particular term is Am.- or Brit.-born, that should be appropriately marked as such (e.g. orig. U.S., UK, etc.); for instance, "light engine" was regarded as U.S. but it actually originated in Britain. Other flags are just puzzling, if not totally wrong (e.g. under "Terminal station"). Thoughts? Best, JackLumber 12:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I have rarely heard it called a terminal station. In the UK it has always been a terminus and collectively they are termini. If terminal station is the North American preference then what is the problem? Regards, NoelWalley 12:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nothing personal :-) that was just an example. Terminal is actually more used than terminus here, but terminus sure is not unknown. Furthermore, both terms originated in Britain (not to mention that site:uk "terminal station" yields 12,500 matches); this aside, the point is that we should distinguish between origin, usage preferences (as in this case), and clear-cut distinctions (e.g. switch vs. points). --JackLumber 12:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, nowt personal intended or received. Can one say? Indeed would one wish to know? did the noun 'terminus' (your example) originate in railway usage in the UK or in the US? Vica versa in the case of 'terminal station'? Could one ever say which was first? All I can say is that (in my extensive experience) terminus and termini are the normal nouns we would use in the UK to describe stations like London Euston and London Waterloo although in the latter case we might add a caveat that there are two through platforms (sometimes, but not always, called Waterloo East) on the line to London Charing Cross, even though both have several through underground station platforms! NoelWalley 20:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Whoa, whoa, whoa! I do have written evidence that both terminus and terminal are British-born. But British usage has come to prefer the former over the latter, that's all. (I guess we're kinda going off on a tangent here. Another example? Why is Mainline listed as U.S.? Don't you have something called West Coast Main Line in Britain?) I just wanted to point out that regional-note-inconsistency thing... --JackLumber 21:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I have started to add Australia teminology to this article because mentioning only UK and US terminolog is to UK/US centric. On the English language edition of wikipedia the sequitur variaties of English are:
- North American varieties
- British English and other commonwealth varieties (in Canada or outside North America, this includes both Australian and New Zealand English)
- Other varieties, such as South African English are non-sequitur, is that right?Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian)
[edit] Add Through routed defintion
Proposing to add 'Through routed' definition and merge the 'Through routed' article (one sentence long) into the 'T' section of this article. --Zer_T 02:09, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Unless someone else can come up with more to add to that article, it sounds reasonable enough to me. Slambo (Speak) 11:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Seems perfectly reasonable to merge it into this. Pgengler 21:10, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see why not. It really should be there. Tanarri Fujitsu 09:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Seeing no objections, I've gone ahead and merged it in. ~ LrdChaos 18:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Maybe "fouling" should be added to the dictionary. It's commonly used and rarely explained.
[edit] Automotive design terminology
Automotive design terminology is up for deletion, if that goes, this should probably be deleted too. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Automotive design terminology. Kappa 17:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed that one earlier today. It seems the deletionists are out in force this month. Slambo (Speak) 18:32, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Generic term for ATO/ATP/AWS/ETCS/...
I missed a generic article about this topic, so I created one: Automatic train protection system. However my native language is not english, so please tell me if that title makes sense. --Kabelleger 18:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rating class
I had originally put NA because this is a list. Since there's some disagreement, I've now put it at Start class. Please review the quality rating scale and reassess as needed. Slambo (Speak) 11:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wiktionary
I did a quick search around the wiki, and don't see any consensus for bulk moving the glossary pages to Wiktionary, so I've removed the tag. Slambo (Speak) 13:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 12:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
