User talk:Fork99/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Welcome

G'day Fork99, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; they have helped improve Wikipedia and made it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions. Some resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page

Editing tutorial

Picture tutorial

How to write a great article

Article titles

Manual of Style

As a contributor to Australian articles, you may like to connect with other Australian Wikipedians through the Australian Wikipedians' notice board and take a look at the activities in WikiProject Australia and associated sub-projects. Wikimedia Australia your local chapter organises editor training workshops, meetups and other events. If you would like to know more, email help@wikimedia.org.au.

If you are living in Australia and want to subscribe to location based notices, you can add location userboxes to your userpage.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Or you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Thank you for signing up! JarrahTree 08:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

The use of line names in the article lead for station names.

I noticed that you have been changing the names of lines in the leads of a number of articles from line to Line. I have just noticed that [[1]] shows as an example "Include only the lines that the station is situated on. (eg. Wolli Creek would have only the T4, T8 and South Coast lines here and also in the train line template below.) " thus it should not be capital letters. This has been discussed quite a bit in the past and that was what settled on at the time.Fleet Lists (talk) 11:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Also where you changed the style name by changing "intercity" to "Intercity" the color in the infobox was lost as the template only recognises "intercity"Fleet Lists (talk) 11:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the info. There are stations that do use “Line” (which is why I assumed it was the standard) that I did not edit and have never touched, but I can’t remember which stations had that. I didn’t mean to change the intercity thing, my bad! Fork99 (talk) 11:56, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

That Line and line thing has been argued about for years - it is totally confusing.Fleet Lists (talk) 12:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Post on Talk Page Response

Hi Fork99, I've just seen your post on my talk page. I'm still relatively new to Wikipedia, so I'm still getting to grips with what is considered unnecessary and what should be included in page edits. Thanks for letting me know so I can improve the quality of my edits.

Happy Editing,

Jh15s (talk) 11:14, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Freshwater Ferries

Like you I have my doubts that the replacement will take place this year - we are not saying that it will happen - just that there are plane to do it - if it has not happened by the end of the year we will need to review the situation in both the Freshwater and Manly ferry services articles where it is shown with a different reference.Fleet Lists (talk) 11:58, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

@Fleet Lists: Totally agree, I wouldn't remove it completely either because it's not confirmed yet. As it says, it's possible. My main concern with that section was that it was a bit confusing, so that's why I put a confusing/clarify tag to it. No worries, all sorted for now. Fork99 (talk) 12:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

TAHE

Please note that we have decided in Talk:Transport Asset Holding Entity of New South Wales to leave the "of New South Wales" out of the ownership in Infoboxes.Fleet Lists (talk) 12:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Fleet Lists: Yup I already know, I've already fixed all of the ones I did. Continuing to work through them. Fork99 (talk) 12:32, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Swan Hill

An article that you have been involved in editing—Swan Hill—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jonathan O'Donnell (talk) 00:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Western Sydney Airport train

Hi, i just was making the map when you removed it. It is now complete MetroManMelbourne (talk) 09:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Easy access

for soon, but not yet, Faulconbridge railway station is being built.
Think I saw another one, somewhere .... hmmmm Dave Rave (talk) 11:46, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Great Journeys New Zealand official logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Great Journeys New Zealand official logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:19, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Bee card (New Zealand) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bee card (New Zealand). Thanks! Marshelec (talk) 06:00, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@Marshelec: Hey, I’ve added some more secondary references including from 1 News, Scoop, Stuff, ODT News, Whanganui Chronicle, Greater Auckland (a public transport advocacy group) and am in the process of making the edits you suggested. Thank you for reviewing my article, it’s my first one :) Fork99 (talk) 06:18, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Please ping me when you have done what you reasonably can to improve the referencing, and I will review the article again. It would be great to get this published..Marshelec (talk) 02:20, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

@Marshelec: Could you please review the draft again. I've removed almost primary sources where possible, replacing them with news articles and reviewed all of the failed verification sources. I've also done some minor content changes as well. Cheers, Fork99 (talk) 01:59, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bee card (New Zealand) has been accepted

Bee card (New Zealand), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Marshelec (talk) 03:26, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Single handedly

Cleaning up oz rail articles, there is not a barnstar big enough for that! Thanks JarrahTree 03:20, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Administrator (Australia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central Coast Council. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Note to self: already fixed. Fork99 (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of automated train systems, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rio Tinto.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Note to self: already fixed. Fork99 (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on The Strand Station

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Strand Station, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Note to self: already fixed. Fork99 (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Fork99

Hi. Are you going to try revert my own personal sandbox page for vandalism or something? User:ClaudeSM/sandbox ClaudeSM (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikiproject you may be interested in

Hi, there is currently a proposal for an Australian Transport Wikiproject. I thought you may be interested due to your edits and interests in transport in Australia. The proposal can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Australian Transport. If you are interested, add yourself to the Support section of the page. Thank you! JML1148 (talk | contribs) 10:36, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

@JML1148: Thanks, I’ve expressed my interest there. Fork99 (talk) 10:41, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

— Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 16:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Template categorization

Hi. Just stopping by to let you know while it is appreciated you are categorizing templates, this edit of yours was done incorrectly and caused the category to be included in this weekly database report. It has been fixed here.

Categorization of articles can be tricky enough. Catting templates is even trickier and more tedious. Care must be taken to not damage the function of the template, because it can potentially affect so many other pages.

Generally, in most cases, if there is a /doc (documentation) subpage, then that is where the categories should be placed, and they must be placed between <includeonly>...</includeonly> tags or they wont work. If there is no /doc page, then the template may be directly categorized, but this time the categories must be placed between <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags. This is to prevent the categories from getting transcluded along with the template. When this happens, it causes any and all articles using the template to become miscategorized. I.e. they are placed in the same category as the template itself. Subsequently, any template categories populated with articles, will then get rung up in the database report mentioned above, Much of this and other important things about template catting are spelled out at WP:CAT#T and WP:NOINCLUDE.

Thanks for your time. Cheers! --DB1729^talk 16:34, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I realised that about placing categories on the doc page after, when dealing with other templates. But I didn’t remember about this one. Thanks for the heads up @DB1729. Fork99 (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Great:) Happy editing and have a great rest of your day! DB1729^talk 16:40, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bbb23 (talk) 15:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for creating all of those redirects. I’ve been looking through your page creation history and trying to patrol most of them. Great job! I’ve also nominated you for redirect autopatrolled so your redirects are automatically patrolled. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 12:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

"Public transport in Hamilton" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Public transport in Hamilton has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 22 § Public transport in Hamilton until a consensus is reached. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:25, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

"Public transport in Canterbury" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Public transport in Canterbury has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 25 § Public transport in Canterbury until a consensus is reached. Silcox (talk) 05:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Albury line

It's all to do with opening dates...

• Craigieburn and Albury services use the Albury line. To complicate things, the Albury line has converted to dual gauge, from Jacana to Seymour, and to standard gauge after Seymour, while the Albury service no longer uses the actual Albury line between Melbourne and Jacana.
• Shepparton service is on the Tocumwal line.
• The standard gauge interstate services (XPT, etc) use what is referred to as the North East Standard Gauge line (which, like the Western SG line, is actually made up of multiple individual lines)

-- ThylacineHunter (talk) 16:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

It was fun

creating WP:AMH and so far, with WP:AUSTS is ok, there is a lot to go yet... to get to square one... JarrahTree 14:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

why oh why - when there is an opportunity, it is let go? transport=yes, and no importance - now someone has to go in and assess... why oh why? JarrahTree 00:34, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: Do you mean why I didn’t put in the importance? Didn’t realise I needed to, but it seems like, for example: Talk:Queanbeyan railway station was automatically assessed as ‘low importance’ because the parent Australia WikiProject already assessed it as so. Let me know what I can do if there’s any fixing needed. Fork99 (talk) 00:40, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

maybe I have misread the text of the edit - not making sense... a project tag in 'rater' has the name - melbourne=yes and if you check it has the possibility of adding the melbourne-importance=low. Just leaving it free of the qualifying importance part - it looks like 'low' in the view of the template box, I am now off in real life will look at it again tonight... JarrahTree 00:43, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

real life sort of makes like chaos JarrahTree 05:21, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

as for lack of articles about components of per-way, (cuttings, and whatever) bah humbug. If we had the range of editors with wider views, there are heaps of articles that have not been written. It is all a matter of views of what is, sitting or standing in the cab of an operative locomotive of any type 50 years ago or more is something that someone under certain ages now, would not even comprehend. Interestingly enthusiasts of that era are dying off and the funerals are fast and not much space between.

For understanding cuttings - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Railway_cuttings_in_the_United_Kingdomand example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maesbury_Railway_Cutting and - the issue is that due to the depth, they are also sites of geologically important insights into the associated geology. The engineering reasons for the resultant abt railway in Western Tasmania, were weighing the advantages and disadvantages of tunneling or whatever... consider that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Railway_cuttings is hardly representative of the subject/topic - it is but the pin prick on the bottom of the elephant. JarrahTree 05:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: well by all means we can add info to the article, but if we can’t, then I think it should be merged with the railway line’s article. I’m not proposing deletion or anything. Fork99 (talk) 05:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

If only - it is a matter of time energy and effort - there are more items of railway operations than I could cover if I had any of the above... JarrahTree 05:44, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I think the issue us that it looks ok when the box is closed - when opened for editing - there is no transport importance=low in there - I would always defer to having a transport importance=low rather than nothing... but then a 'red' talk page tag is where my editing comes from - as I believe the whole assessment process is supported by tagging - even in the default of the 'low' - I once told a million plus editor that I felt that creating cats and arts in/on the main space and leaving nothing at all in/on the talkpage was a bit like topping up the radiator, but avoiding the oil in the engine completely... my sense of trim project tagging with the assessment covered is in the belief that so few do it, the larger project benefits by anything that reduces the vast sea of unknown importance... JarrahTree 10:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I think

I have stuffed up - I think I need help - the part of the category -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australian_Transport the assessment section - I was trying to add a section related to the category

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Transport_in_Australia - any thoughts?

My rationale is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australian_Transport/Assessments

Any advice or help appreciated... thanks... JarrahTree 10:16, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh my, sorry, completely out of my expertise, I’m not very good at templates or tables either. I see you’ve tried to enlist the help of @ThylacineHunter, hopefully he can help! Fork99 (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

NSW railway stations category

I'll run this by you first since you seem to live in NSW. How about this: Category:Sydney Trains railway stations is created as a subcategory of Category:Railway stations in Sydney, which already includes Category:Sydney Metro stations as a subcat. This new category would match up with List of Sydney Trains railway stations. I think it's weird that there is a category for Sydney Metro stations but not Sydney Trains stations and this would fix that. Are there any stations in Sydney that are not part of Sydney Metro or Sydney Trains?

Category:Railway stations located underground in Sydney is renamed Category:Sydney Trains railway stations located underground, as this seems to exclude Sydney Metro stations already.

Another new category called Category:NSW TrainLink railway stations is created to match up with List of NSW TrainLink railway stations, and that would be a subcat of Category:Railway stations in New South Wales. This would include stations within Sydney on the TrainLink network as well such as Central railway station, Sydney. Category:Regional railway stations in New South Wales and Category:Railway stations in the Hunter Region can be kept. Steelkamp (talk) 06:37, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: Yeah I do agree with all of your suggestions.

Um, I would have to say technicallyyyyyy under the act that defines “Greater Sydney” (Greater Sydney Commission Act 2015), Wollondilly Shire Council, Blue Mountains City Council and Hornsby Shire Council are in Greater Sydney, therefore all NSW TrainLink stations (inclusive) between Menangle Park railway station and Bargo railway station on the Southern Highlands Line, all Blue Mountains Line stations between Lapstone railway station and Bell railway station, New South Wales, and on the Central Coast & Newcastle Line: Cowan railway station and Hawkesbury River railway station are in Sydney. Fork99 (talk) 06:48, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: Thankfully for our intents and purposes, the Central Coast Council isn’t in Greater Sydney. I just found another technicality though, Helensburgh railway station sometimes gets a few extra Sydney Trains services a day that extend past the usual terminus of Waterfall, which definitely is in Greater Sydney. However Helensburgh is in the Wollongong City Council area, which isn’t in Sydney. Fork99 (talk) 06:53, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

By the way, just as a gag, this was how we found out if we were under “Greater Sydney” or “Regional NSW” lockdown restrictions back in the day lol. Fork99 (talk) 06:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. Those stations seem to be in Category:Regional railway stations in New South Wales. Is that incorrect? Maybe they should be in Category:Railway stations in Sydney. Another good reason to categorise by system rather than geographical area. Steelkamp (talk) 06:56, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: Yeah I’d say so then. Feel free to ask me if you need any help or anything, and tell me how the category discussion goes if I forget about it. Fork99 (talk) 06:57, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Ok. I'll create the discussion soon. Steelkamp (talk) 07:01, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: So I had a little look around, it seems like metropolitan Victoria and South East Queensland, they already categorise railway stations by their LGA, which is alright in my opinion. They also do naturally have categories for regional stations as well. Yeah, I completely agree with all the suggested changes, as I believe places like Melton and Deer Park which only have V/Line services, are in Greater Melbourne. Fork99 (talk) 07:24, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Note to self: Turns out the Greater Sydney act mentioned above has been superseded by the Greater Cities Commission Act 2022, which defines 6 cities, 3 of which are considered to be Greater Sydney. Fork99 (talk) 23:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Oppose, the train operators change periodically (a proposal to recast the network again is under consideration), the physical locations don't. Jeistyphade (talk) 02:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jeistyphade: Hi, you’ll also need to take this up with @Steelkamp, as they’ve already done something similar for Transperth railway stations. The rationale is that city boundaries can change over time, while also these rail networks actually extend outside of the city boundaries, so it would not make sense to say that, for example, Mandurah railway station to be in a category called “Railway stations in Perth”, because it’s undeniably not in Perth, but it is on the Transperth rail network. Anyways, renaming categories is a fairly simple process, there’s a process called Categories for Discussion, of which here are the discussions for the Perth related categories: railway stations and bus stations. Fork99 (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

"ARHS ACT" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ARHS ACT has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 7 § ARHS ACT until a consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeistyphade (talk • contribs) 01:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"ARHS NSW" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ARHS NSW has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 7 § ARHS NSW until a consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeistyphade (talk • contribs) 01:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"ARHS Qld" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ARHS Qld has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 7 § ARHS Qld until a consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeistyphade (talk • contribs) 01:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"ARHS QLD" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ARHS QLD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 7 § ARHS QLD until a consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeistyphade (talk • contribs) 01:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"ARHS Vic" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ARHS Vic has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 7 § ARHS Vic until a consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeistyphade (talk • contribs) 01:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"ARHS VIC" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ARHS VIC has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 7 § ARHS VIC until a consensus is reached. Jeistyphade (talk) 01:01, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

rollback

Hi Fork99. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or RedWarn.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 16:48, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Re: Minor edits

Hi Fork99, I saw your message about minor edits. Thanks for the information, I need to update that site more :) Trainandbus123(talk) 11:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

@Trainandbus123: No worries, I also recommend using edit summaries; they don’t need to be extravagant or anything, something as simple as “fixed typo” or “added info about x” is reasonably good enough (but more detail doesn’t hurt). Just helps out other editors who might want to review your edits. Happy editing, and if you need any help, you can refer to some of the welcome links I placed on your talk page. Fork99 (talk) 11:42, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Fork99. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Steps such as checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline are mandatory and will take a few minutes per article.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any required steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 13:59, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

East Perth → Perth?

Hello, Fork99! Is it better if I change the term for East Perth as simply Perth (but still linked to East Perth station)? This is because (1) when referring to the stops of the respective capital cities, it uses the capital city names instead of the station name, e.g. Central → Sydney, Southern Cross → Melbourne, and East Perth is the only exception. (2) Per official website, Journey Beyond does not refer to East Perth as its stop, but simply Perth. (3) For Adelaide, there exists an Adelaide station, but the term used is Adelaide to refer to Adelaide Parklands. If Adelaide can, why not use the city name to refer to East Perth, even if there exists a Perth station? RPC7778 (talk) 09:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@RPC7778: Hey! Good question, we now have a WikiProject Australian Transport that these sorts of discussions go at.

I'm from Sydney myself, just my own personal opinion here: I think the actual official and common names given by the respective state governments' transport authorities is preferable to a name given by a private company (Journey Beyond), who like to pretend that some of these stations are in the city centre and not a taxi ride away (such as Adelaide Parklands Terminal and East Perth). If you live in Perth for example, you don't ever call East Perth station by simply just Perth. Because when you say “Perth railway station”, people should assume that refers to the station in Perth CBD (city centre or downtown if you're not from Australia) that only has Transperth's narrow gauge suburban railway lines (+ the Transwa Australind) passing through it with 9 platforms, however if what you actually mean is “East Perth railway station”, that's a completely different station outside of the CBD, which has three platforms, two for narrow gauge Transperth suburban electric train services and one for standard gauge Transwa and Indian Pacific (Journey Beyond) trains.

Similar logic applies for Adelaide Parklands Terminal but slightly different situation there, however for Melbourne and Sydney, when you do say Sydney station, it can be assumed to be the main city station which is correct in these cases. I still would prefer something like “Melbourne (Southern Cross)” rather than just one or the other, and same for Sydney, “Sydney (Central)” rather than just “Central”, “Sydney”, etc. Just so readers understand that that station is indeed for the city of Sydney, but's called Central station, etc.

@Steelkamp: would you have to anything to say about this, since I believe you're from WA? Fork99 (talk) 20:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: by the way, this is in relation to the adjacent stations module in the infobox of station articles NOT the relevant articles' names. Sorry if that was unclear above. Fork99 (talk) 21:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

omg. all that.... why oh why. look at a map for heaven's sake....JarrahTree 00:21, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what edits this conversation is talking about, but if your referring to the station, such as in the adjacent stations module, I would use "East Perth". If your referring to the city, such as in the lead of Indian Pacific, I would say Perth. Steelkamp (talk) 00:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: In short, is it fine if I change "East Perth" to "Perth" (but still redirects East Perth station) because of my reasons above, or still better to leave the module as it is? RPC7778 (talk) 00:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I would have the text of the link have the same name as the link itself. Like "East Perth", not "Perth", because that's misleading. Steelkamp (talk) 01:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Actually, now that I'm looking at Module:Adjacent stations/Journey Beyond (I assume that's what your talking about), I see that Melbourne is actually Southern Cross station, Brisbane is actually not even a station, and Adelaide is Adelaide Parklands terminal. I now think it's ok to pipe East Perth station to Perth, considering those other cities are piped as well. We can consider the text to be referring to the city, and the link referring to the station. Steelkamp (talk) 01:19, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Steelkamp: yes the conversation is about that module. Sorry if it was confusing above. Fork99 (talk) 05:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

travelling

my response times may end up being days or weeks, trust all is well, goes well and whatever... I was very disappointed to see the cable cars included (both proposed and not constructed btw) but have neither the time or capacity to have an in public discussion about either... keep up the good work!! JarrahTree 04:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: They were in a subcat called something like “Transport in Tasmania” and/or ”Proposed transport infrastructure in Australia”. Fork99 (talk) 04:31, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

I am out of ping range very soon (next couple of minutes) please do not !!

See my attempt at documenting similar acts of earlier shots at futility Great_Western_Railway_(Tasmania) - take care, I'm gone! JarrahTree 04:36, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

grrr so many damned edit conflicts in the next item - please email sometime... JarrahTree 01:35, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Actually I have found the issue - your edit summary at East Perth railway station:

that East Perth should also have a third side platform for the standard gauge terminal? I'm not sure why we sometimes pretend the terminal isn't part of this article, what's the purpose of the article at Public Transport Centre

East Perth railway station is with that title very confusing for a start - The suburban station using narrow gauge is an island platform connected by an overhead walkway - and in effect a separate operation from that of the east perth interstate terminal standard gauge - with its one very long platform - should/could/perhaps not be considered in the same breath as the suburban item.

To question the reason of the public transport centre is another conversation another time. This might not answer your ping to steelkamp, but at least it is an explanation as to why I left the omg response which I struck out.JarrahTree 01:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@JarrahTree, @Steelkamp: the actual concern that @RPC7778 raised was the adjacent station modules' names for city centre stations, and whether it should be something like Southern Cross (Melbourne) or just Melbourne, as the common name is Southern Cross, but from an interstate perspective, it might be considered as Melbourne's station per se. Please continue this conversation at the one below at User talk:Fork99#East Perth → Perth? Fork99 (talk) 05:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry that this was confusing, RPC and I had already talked about this somewhere else at User talk:RPC7778#Great Southern adjacent stations edits. Fork99 (talk) 05:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

whiteman park

I have had an association with the transport history organisations there - if you want help re anything to do with them just ask... on wiki or off JarrahTree 11:35, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

https://bluemountainstoursydney.com.au/attractions/scenic-railway/ nobody mentions the gauge true, a close look at the photos would suggest it is accurate JarrahTree 12:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, not currently something I'm working on at the mo, but noted! Fork99 (talk) 06:03, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Re: I have sent you a note about a page you started

Thanks. The work that's been done separating "Melanesian Cup" and "Melanesia Cup" looks good to me. Aridd (talk) 12:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The current ANI

Your point is well made. May I suggest you now adopt a wait and see approach. In general the less one says at these gatherings the more likely one is to prevail. It's important not to be seen as in any way hectoring the editor being discussed. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Timtrent: Yeah nah (sorry for my Aussie slang) all good, I think it should be up to admin deliberation now for what needs to be done. I think I've said what is needed to have been said. Fork99 (talk) 11:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel Seavey (September 1)

This AfC (Article for Creation) decline note was manually deleted (20:56, 3 September 2023 (UTC) by Fork99) to remove an annoying rendering error on my user talk page. It was also previously strikethroughed and nowikified for reasons explained in replies in this section. The diff for Taking Out The Trash's original post is located at Special:Diff/1173347888. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 21:31, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Taking Out The Trash: hi I'm a new page reviewer myself, I requested a history merge because of the page's edit history as someone seemed to have mistakenly deleted Daniel Seavey or Draft:Daniel Seavey. Then someone mistakenly recreated an unnecessary draft page. I've done it like that to ensure that this page doesn't get deleted. Sorry that it's a little confusing, I'm not sure of the exact order of events myself. Fork99 (talk) 21:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Please continue any further discussion at Talk:Daniel Seavey#Feedback from New Page Review process to keep it all centralised. Thank you, Fork99 (talk) 01:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Taking Out The Trash: also if it's ok, I will be striking through and nowiki-ing your post since I don't want to be in a category for Teahouse new editors. Thanks, Fork99 (talk) 01:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Fork99,

New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Acceptance of apology.

A while ago, an incident involving the two of us happened, after which you apologized and I didnt respond. So I know that its been a while, but I was looking into wiki awards and found something interesting that I think would be an appropriate response. I hope this can easy the tension between us. OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) Questions? has extended an olive branch of peace.

---

OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) Questions? 05:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant: thanks, hope you've been doing well :) Fork99 (talk) 14:24, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Australian Roads

Several days ago you made an edit to Template:WikiProject Australian Roads that used parameters that were already on that page (note 2 and three associated parameters). This causes the page - and the 1800 or so articles that use this template - to appear at Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. There are a few editors, including me, who check this category page periodically to correct articles with duplicate parameters, but apparently none of us know how to do it correctly, or have the confidence to attempt it, for the page you edited because it has stayed that way for several days. Can you fix the duplication? Thanks. Ira Leviton (talk) 14:16, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ira Leviton: I just had a look at the edit history of Template:WikiProject Australian Roads, but I don't see any edits from myself? I also don't recall ever touching that particular template or to be honest, any templates at all recently. Could you provide any relevant diffs? Thanks, Fork99 (talk) 14:31, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Oops - my mistake. I clicked on the wrong name. (You edited one of the roads that used this template.) Just ignore or delete my message. Ira Leviton (talk) 14:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ira Leviton: Haha all good! Hope you get whatever it is needed fixed! Fork99 (talk) 14:42, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Changes to UITP page

Hi Fork99,

Thanks for bringing the CoI issue to my attention. I am a colleague in the UITP team and have been tasked with updating the Wiki page to reflect reality. A lot of it is quite outdated, and my revisions were completed to reflect that. I thank you for leaving in the President's name change as that was the most crucial element.

Though I'm hoping we can come to an agreement on some of the changes. For instance, you have reverted the main body text, which includes the location of our offices. You have left in now closed offices such as those in Moscow and Bangalore and it is important for us a non-profit members association that we do not mislead our members or give the wrong impression. There is also a reference to King Leopold II which does not really reflect the organisation's global identity now. In addition, there are many broken or non-existant links which I sought to remedy.

I am hoping that in reverting the changes with some adjustments that this will be acceptable, and am open to a discussion on being as transparent as possible.

Best, BeD.uitp BeD.uitp (talk) 07:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

@BeD.uitp: Sure, there's just another thing if it's okay with you that I will also remove.

The body of articles shouldn't have external website links, and should either ideally be correctly cited as a reference, or placed in the appropriate ‘External links’ section at the bottom of the article or just omitted entirely. Placing such bare links like this may also be seen as advertising, which states “Adding your website to Wikipedia will not help with search engine optimization, because Google and other search engines ignore links on Wikipedia. In line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked. When in doubt, you may go to the talk page and let another editor decide.” As the article already links directly to your website's homepage in the infobox and at the bottom of the page, there's no need to add links like https://www.uitp.org/topics/metro/ within the body. Fork99 (talk) 07:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

@BeD.uitp: Also where possible, please try and cite secondary sources rather than your own website, per the Wikipedia policies/guidelines at WP:NPOV and WP:RS. Thanks :) Fork99 (talk) 08:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

That works indeed and I'll keep it in mind in future. Thanks a bunch! 194.78.23.210 (talk) 08:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions

Hello Fork99,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages.

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 18:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)