Talk:G-class Melbourne tram

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 01:40, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the G-Class Melbourne tram will actually be based on Bombardier's Flexity 2? Source: https://transport.vic.gov.au/our-transport-future/our-projects/new-and-upgraded-trains-and-trams/next-generation-trams#design
• ALT 1 ... that the Victoria State Government has ordered 100 G-Class Trams, which is the largest order in state history? same source as above
• ALT 2 ... that the Victoria State Government has ordered 100 G-Class Trams, which is the largest local order in Australian history? Source https://infrastructuremagazine.com.au/2022/04/21/contract-awarded-for-australias-largest-tram-project
• ALT 2a ... that the Victoria State Government has ordered 100 G-Class Trams, which is the largest domestic order in Australian history? Source https://infrastructuremagazine.com.au/2022/04/21/contract-awarded-for-australias-largest-tram-project
  • Reviewed: [[]]
  • Comment: First nomination so hopefully I did it all right!

Created by EchidnaLives (talk). Self-nominated at 09:16, 19 October 2022 (UTC).

• The article is new enough and long enough and is free of close paraphrasing. Since this is the nominator's first DYK nomination, no QPQ is required here. The paragraph that mentions the hook fact (the first sentence of the "Design" section) requires a footnote for DYK purposes. However, my main concern with the hook is that it doesn't seem to be a hook that appeals to a broad audience. Specifically, it seems to appeal more to train fans/foamers and may not necessarily catch the attention of non-specialists. Perhaps a new hook is needed here? I could ask for assistance from a train editor like Trainsandotherthings to see if anything else in the article is usable. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll be blunt, the hook here is not interesting to a general audience. It's an unremarkable fact and even I, a train editor, don't find it interesting. What might be usable is "The initial contract includes 100 new trams, which will be the largest order in state history". With that said, I don't see anything here particularly hooky. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Looking at the original hook again, I definitely agree that it is extremely uninteresting. But the largest order in state history could work, especially since Victoria has a lot of history with trams. Maybe something like that the Victorian Government has ordered 100 G-Class Trams, which is the largest order in state history?. That would probably need to be rephrased to work, but it might have potential. Again, this is my first nomination and I am unexperienced in DYK, but hopefully the article can work. echidnaLives - talk - edits 07:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Added ALT 1, same as what I replied with before. echidnaLives - talk - edits 07:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not the reviewer per se, but I have no objection to that hook. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:56, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Trainsandotherthings for your reply. @Narutolovehinata5: what do you think? echidnaLives - talk - edits 22:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@EchidnaLives: If TAOT has no objections then this has my seal of approval. I think the only thing that needs clarification here is to link to Victorian government, since it's ambiguous enough that readers may not immediately get that this is referring to the Australian state. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for your reply. I've added the link. Is this good, or would you prefer if Victoria (Australia) was linked instead? echidnaLives - talk - edits 08:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Maybe change it to "Victoria State Government" without the pipe? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Done, is it good to go? echidnaLives - talk - edits 02:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

To me at least it's okay, but since Trainsandotherthings is the subject expert I'd like to defer final approval to him this time. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

In that case, I'm going to mark this approved. Thanks for working with me on a new hook, EchidnaLives. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

• EchidnaLives the source only says this is the largest investment in locally made trams, so there might have been larger orders for trams manufactured elsewhere.

Getting the ping right: @Trainsandotherthings and EchidnaLives: -- RoySmith (talk) 18:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for seeing this RoySmith. I must of gotten the source wrong, but I'm pretty sure it is true. I'll find a new source soon, because I'm a bit busy right now. Hopefully it is actually true and I haven't just misread everything... echidnaLives - talk - edits 20:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Trainsandotherthings, Narutolovehinata5, and RoySmith:. Well, shit. Unfortunately the claim was from an unreliable source, which was false. It is the largest order constructed in Australia. Sorry about this everyone, I should of confirmed it more, and I will be updating the article accordingly. Would the hook still be good if we just added the word "local" before order, and instead of state history we did Australian history? Thanks, and sorry again, echidnaLives - talk - edits 22:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Could you write that out as ALT2; that'll make it easier to review. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

@RoySmith: Done. echidnaLives - talk - edits 23:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added ALT2a, which uses "domestic" instead of "local". At least to my (American) ear, that seems more accurate. Trainsandotherthings could you approve those? -- RoySmith (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

I think ALT2 and ALT2A appropriately deal with the issues from ALT1 (which I really should have caught myself, but that's why we have hooks reviewed multiple times). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:45, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

References

Photos?

This article really needs a photo (or more) of its subject. Even a mock-up or an artist's conception would help. Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Have added an infobox photo of the tram mockup and will add more into the article. Takerlamar (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Removing hyphen from article name

I am proposing to remove the hyphen from the title of this tram article, as the official nomenclature from the Department of Transport and Planning is not to have hyphens in tram class names. Examples include on their official website [1], the Melbourne Tram Plan [2] and the PTV website [3]. Other common unofficial sources like Vicsig also do not have a hyphen. I'm also proposing to change all the other Melbourne tram class article names in a similar manner, any feedback welcome! Takerlamar (talk) 23:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

@Takerlamar: No objection to this from me, could you also ask this at the Australian Transport WikiProject for a centralised discussion? Fork99 (talk) 04:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Will do, thanks for the heads up. Takerlamar (talk) 01:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 22 December 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus, though there was a suggestion to add redirects from the unhyphenated versions, which received no objection and will be created following closure. (closed by non-admin page mover) EggRoll97 ^(talk) 04:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

---

• G-class Melbourne tram → G class Melbourne tram
• A-class Melbourne tram (1910) → A class Melbourne tram (1910)
• B-class Melbourne tram (1917) → B class Melbourne tram (1917)
• C-class Melbourne tram (1913) → C class Melbourne tram (1913)
• D-class Melbourne tram (1914) → D class Melbourne tram (1914)
• E-class Melbourne tram (1914) → E class Melbourne tram (1914)
• F-class Melbourne tram → F class Melbourne tram
• G-class Melbourne tram (1913) → G class Melbourne tram (1913)
• H-class Melbourne tram → H class Melbourne tram
• J-class Melbourne tram → J class Melbourne tram
• K-class Melbourne tram → K class Melbourne tram
• L-class Melbourne tram → L class Melbourne tram
• M-class Melbourne tram → M class Melbourne tram
• N-class Melbourne tram → N class Melbourne tram
• O-class Melbourne tram → O class Melbourne tram
• P-class Melbourne tram → P class Melbourne tram
• Q-class Melbourne tram → Q class Melbourne tram
• R-class Melbourne tram → R class Melbourne tram
• S-class Melbourne tram → S class Melbourne tram
• T-class Melbourne tram → T class Melbourne tram
• U-class Melbourne tram → U class Melbourne tram
• V-class Melbourne tram → V class Melbourne tram
• W-class Melbourne tram → W class Melbourne tram
• X-class Melbourne tram → X class Melbourne tram
• X1-class Melbourne tram → X1 class Melbourne tram
• X2-class Melbourne tram → X2 class Melbourne tram
• Y-class Melbourne tram → Y class Melbourne tram
• Y1-class Melbourne tram → Y1 class Melbourne tram
• Z-class Melbourne tram → Z class Melbourne tram
• A-class Melbourne tram → A class Melbourne tram
• B-class Melbourne tram → B class Melbourne tram
• C-class Melbourne tram → C class Melbourne tram
• D-class Melbourne tram → D class Melbourne tram
• E-class Melbourne tram → E class Melbourne tram
• C2-class Melbourne tram → C2 class Melbourne tram

– As discussion earlier and on WikiProject Australian Transport, I am proposing to remove the hyphen from the title of these tram articles, as the official nomenclature from the Department of Transport and Planning is not to have hyphens in tram class names. Examples include on their official website [4], the Melbourne Tram Plan [5] and the PTV website [6]. Other common unofficial sources like Vicsig also do not have a hyphen. Takerlamar (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support: per nom and previous discussion at WT:AUSTS, however I think C2-class Melbourne tram is missing from the nomination, @User:Takerlamar. Fork99 (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Comment: Striked support since honestly, it could go either way. A few news articles I found do use hyphens [7] [8] [9] [10], whereas official government sources and some news outlets inconsistently drop the hyphen. Fork99 (talk) 02:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

• Comment: Including the hyphen seems more like ordinary English orthography. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Similar articles such as Sydney Trains K set don't have a hyphen. Whereas something like Transperth B-series train does, however that appears to be both in common and official usage. If consensus is to not move, adding redirects from the non-hyphenated versions wouldn't be a bad idea in my opinion. Fork99 (talk) 02:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Sydney Trains K set seems like it shouldn't have a hyphen. Transperth B-series train seems like it should. "A-class" and "B-series" are used as compound adjectives in the example titles. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:56, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  But why? Is it a gut feeling, or are there established English literary conventions for this? Purely based on orthography, Adelaide Metro 4000 class and 3000 class railcar lacks a hyphen. I feel like the titles shouldn't be based on orthography but what is commonly used by primary and secondary sources. Fork99 (talk) 03:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Other examples: H type Adelaide tram and 7000-series (CTA). Fork99 (talk) 03:17, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Some guidance is provided at MOS:HYPHEN. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Weak oppose, since Fork99 found sources that use hyphenation and that seems more like ordinary English formatting (see, MOS:TM: "When deciding how to format a trademark, editors should examine styles already in use by independent reliable sources. From among those, choose the style that most closely resembles standard English – regardless of the preference of the trademark owner."). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  I don't think the names of types of trams are trademarks though? Fork99 (talk) 20:28, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  Sorry, to clarify the previous comment, what I mean is that I don't think that “A-class tram” (e.g.) is equivalent to the trademark of Alstom Citadis, for example. Fork99 (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  I believe the spirit of MOS:TM also applies for things that aren't trademarks. Wikipedia does not defer to "official" styling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎BarrelProof (talk • contribs) 22:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

  I would say that there is a fairly even mix of use cases with and without hyphens by independent reliable sources. There are examples of uses without the hyphen even among the same outlets linked above by Fork99 above - see the following examples ([11], [12] - note inconsistency even in the same article, [13]). To me, there isn't an overwhelming use with or without a hyphen, just inconsistency at the least. Takerlamar (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

• Comment: An additional note from me that the category pages on Commons do not have hyphens. And thanks for noting the omission of the C2-class - I've added that one in now. Takerlamar (talk) 11:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.