Wikipedia

Talk:Betuweroute

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Hobbitschuster in topic Controversy section
Learn more about this page

Choice of Voltage

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Given that Germany uses 15kV and Netherlands has yet to implement any of its proposed changes from 1.5kV to 25kV, it is perhaps unfortunate that they didn't use 15kV on the Betuweroute as a termporary measure. Tabletop 01:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Reassessment by request

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I reassessed the article, and think it class should remain at start for now. By request an assessment report is given below; I have listed main issues, as I think the article is not at the status we can truly bother about details.

  • Introduction. Please conform to WP:LEAD; make sure it comprehensively covers the whole of the article. Also the second line "Several parts of this article are based on a German weblog" should not be in the Lead section. An image o map, preferably inside an infobox placed in the top-right corner would benefit the intro.
  • History. Please make the timeline fully chronological. Is this really all there is?
  • Controversy. The style is very listy and the flow of reading could benefit from more prose like storytelling. Also, refer to the relevance of these controversies, what influence did it have on planning, cost and specifications.
  • Specification. This is a bulleted list. Some introductory lines to contextualise the specification issues is needed.
  • Infrastructure. Same as above, provide some more context and improve flow of reading
  • Route. This needs a map, also very listy, is there no alternative for that long list? The reference to the previous route needs to be explained furhter
  • I would combinen Specification, Infrastructure and Route in one section (as subsections) called e.g. Design (or planning or whatever); splitting them apart seems to intoduce redundancies
  • Important information I am missing:
    • Why/How was this route designed. Where did the money come from, Who owns it, Who pais for it, Who wants it.
    • More elaboration on amount of traffic; and operators, operational costs, operational turnover, etc.

Taken together I think this article needs a considerable amount of work before it can be awarded B-class. I hope this helps. Arnoutf (talk) 14:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

German municipalities

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Betuweroute is purely a Dutch rail line. So I removed the mentioned German municipalities Waldo79 (talk) 07:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The links to betuweroute.nl are all dead. Site doesn't exist anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.77.250 (talk) 12:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Betuweroute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:03, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Betuweroute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:28, 19 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Betuweroute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Controversy section

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The "controversy" section seems to be based on opposition at the time of construction. The claims about river freight being a realistic alternative for the traffic that is currently handled by the rail line seem weakly sourced or entirely unsourced and there seem to be specific predictions in the section which were made in the 2000s but should now be compared to real world data of over a decade of operation of the line. I think at the very least a thorough overhaul of the section is needed. I also think the cost overruns should be discussed in a subsection and if reliable sources can be found as to the why (the claim "tunnels in the Netherlands added to please nimbys drove costs" seems to be at least plausible) that would be a worthwhile addition to the article... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:44, 13 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Betuweroute&oldid=1199938943"