Talk:List of town tramway systems in Oceania

Division of "original" list, removal of duplicate entry

I decided to split this list into three parts because the file size has reached "156K and growing."Ldemery 20:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I have also removed a duplicate entry for Invercargill, New Zealand but have also added geographic divisions for Australia and New Zealand, attempting to make the list more "user friendly" Ldemery 20:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Division

I have split the Oceania, North America and South America list into three parts: "North America", "Central and South America", and "Oceania" in order to reduce file size Ldemery 18:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

"Oceania" vs. "Australia and New Zealand"

I consider it (very) unlikely that previously-unknown town tramways will come to light in, for example, Fiji.

"Very unlikely" does not mean "impossible." There is some evidence that Garapan, Saipan, had a tramway. In fact, one source states that this was an electric tramway. However, another source provided an eyewitness account that that there was no evidence of a tramway at the time of the U.S. invasion in 1945.

It has also been pointed out that Hawaii is a part of Oceania.

Thus, a title more "regional" than "Australia and New Zealand" is needed. Ldemery 18:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

There are two country pages: Trams in Australia and Trams in New Zealand (new), though I am not sure if these can go on this Trams in Oceania article? Hugo999 02:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

This page isn't an "article" per se, but (merely) a list. So the country pages should not be combined with this one. Ldemery 06:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Hawaii moved from "North America" to "Oceania"

Hawaii is an integral part of the US, with political status identical to the 49 other states - but by no stretch of imagination is located in "North America." Nor is it "adjacent" to the portions of US terrority that are located in North America (e.g. as the European and Asian territories of Russia are adjacent). The move appears reasonable on grounds of geography. Ldemery 03:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

In opposition to this notion of geographic grouping taking precedence over politcal grouping it appears that at the List of town tramway systems in Africa article we find that the information on Malta trams is instead listed at List of town tramway systems in Europe#Malta since in that case political grouping takes precedence over geographic grouping. Such inconsistencies seem odd. 67.86.73.252 (talk) 22:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Now that there is a seperate page for United States tramways, Hawaii should be moved there as it is a political, not geographical, grouping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.31.35 (talk) 22:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Fiji

Well must look up any books on the Fiji sugar cane railways, they might mention any urban (passenger) systems there! Hugo999 05:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Reversal of flagicon removal

I have reversed the flagicon removal undertaken - rather presumptiously - by "Andrwsc"

As he noted in a personal e-mail to me - but was too cowardly to note here - "Andrwsc" acted prior to adoption of WP:FLAG into Wikipedia policy.

In other words, "Andrwsc" acted according to a "draft" policy, which has not yet been enacted.

That, in my view, is a high-handed and arrogant act by a "Wikipedia" administrator.

The "current" iteration of flagicons on this list, which I undertook in order to improve "user friendliness," is not "perfect" - but: to quote directly from "WP:FLAG"

"[Flagicons] can aid navigation in long lists or tables of countries, such as for reporting political, economic, sporting or other statistical data, and many readers can more quickly scan a table with many countries with flag icons because of visual differences between flags."

"Andrwsc" did not dispute this - generally or for this list.

I note in addition the passage from "WP:FLAG": "when added excessively, [flagicons] clutter the page and become redundant."

"Andrwsc" does not make this charge for this list. He merely argues - rather weakly - that:

1.) The [flagicons] were attached to section headers, and most sections were big enough that you couldn't see more than 1 or 2 icons on a screen at a time.

--Well, boo hoo hoo. As noted above, the "current" iteration of flagicons on this list is not "perfect". I think they "should" go in the "Contents" boxes rather than the section. But I do not know how to do this - or if it is (yet) possible. "Andrwsc" did not bother to suggest this, so I will assume it is not (yet) possible.

2.) Many of the "flags" were actually coat of arms, and a large number of them were somewhat obscure, so there really isn't any benefit for users to be able to scan the list using them as visual clues for the table of interest.

--Well, (boo hoo hoo)^(boo hoo hoo).

"I'd also note that about 180 new templates needed to be created solely to support these five articles, which is very much contrary to the purpose of templates - normally, each template would have many transclusions on many pages."

I find a certain circularity to this "logic." It would appear that I'm to conclude that each newly-created template will, as if by magic, automatically sprout "many transclusions on many pages."

Or that this has occurred with each template created up to now.

Or something like that.

I note that the "WP:FLAG" essay fails to specify who some of these "many readers" are: those whose first language is other than English. The addition of flagicons was not an attempt at "decoration," but of improving "user-friendliness" - in particular, for those whose first language is not English, and are likely to recognize national (and perhaps sub-national) flags more quickly. In some cases, I was forced to make additional templates - and to use coats of arms rather than actual flags (which are flown / used in some places as flags).

Let me reiterate:

The "current" iteration of flagicons on this list, which I undertook in order to improve "user friendliness," is not "perfect."

Let me also paraphrase a respected colleague: "Perfectionism is the enemy of the good." Ldemery 03:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Black diamonds

Could somebody please tell me what the black diamonds found throughout the tables in this article mean? --TripleThree 09:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

These are an attempt to indicate geographic proximity. For example, Sydney, then below ♦ Parramatta - Castle Hill, then below ♦♦Parfamatta (wharf). Parramatta is a suburb of Sydney, and the Parramattta (wharf) tramway was a separate operation within Parramatta. This idea has not worked out as planned, judging from the queries. Any suggestions for alternatives? Ldemery 06:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I was also curious about these symbols. Unless an explanation can be included on the page itself, then I think they should be deleted, as their significance is not intuitive. --DAJF (talk) 07:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of town tramway systems in Oceania. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060721075351/http://pets.railpage.org.au/pets10b.htm to http://pets.railpage.org.au/pets10b.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060721212528/http://pets.railpage.org.au/pets10c.htm to http://pets.railpage.org.au/pets10c.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060323225159/http://www.pukeariki.com/en/stories/transport/newplymouthtrams.asp to http://www.pukeariki.com/en/stories/transport/newplymouthtrams.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051108020113/http://www.wcl.govt.nz/wellington/trams.html to http://www.wcl.govt.nz/wellington/trams.html

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) 03:09, 3 January 2018 (UTC)