Talk:Little Ring of the Moscow Railway

Move

Regarding the recently reverted move to "Moscow Circle Railway" performed by user:Elk Salmon is because the forming of a new company which operates the new railway. It has an official site[1] with English version[2] and uses "Moscow Ring Railway" (MRR) for the company's English name. I am open to splitting the article. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 08:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

May be we should either split the article or wait until this becomes the most common name in English (or at least in Russian - before moving back I checked that the Russian article uses the same name as we do).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

I think it makes sense to split because according to the MRR official project video (in English :D) the freight trains will continue run on the Little Ring network (2:30), it's rational to treat the new passenger service as a separate entity. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 05:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

This is certainly fine with me. If it turns out that the passenger service never materialized, we can always merge them back.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

There is nothing to discuss at all. The railway has been separated from MZD and transfered into joint venture with Moscow government several years ago and currently in a process to entire buy out by Moscow to transfer it to entire GUP Moscow Metro control. There is nothing to split as well. Russian article is drastically outdated. There is also no official english spelling at the moment. Moscow Ring Railway comes from incorrect english localization by web designers. It was originally opened in 1904 as MOZD - Moscow Encircling Railway. Elk Salmon (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

And will or not, it's still doesn't matter. It has a new owner and a name for a few years already. Yet still it's under active redevelopment from scratch. [http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1634361 SSC] Elk Salmon (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't get it. The new office name is "Московская Кольцевая Железная Дорога". My Oxford Starter Russian Dictionary gives the only English definition of "кольцо" "ring" (p.38), so I fail to see anything incorrect of "Moscow Ring Railway" in favor of "Moscow Circle Railway". -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 16:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It's circle that is usually used with enclosed railways in english language. In Russian language it's кольцо. In soviet times it was verbally named as Окружная линия (Encircling line). There is a little probability that it will be used officially when opened. Elk Salmon (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I hope you can provide reliable source to back the claim that "ring" is wrong in the official English name, otherwise as Wikipedian editors, we are in no place to question its rightfulness as long as it makes sense in modern English perfectly. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 01:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

There is no any source at the moment and no official English name. So it's just narrow translation. Elk Salmon (talk) 14:53, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Then it should not be moved.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

And you're agreeing with Elk Salmon's that we can't take the English name from the official site seriously? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 01:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

No, I do not think we should take it seriously.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:01, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Move Again

The official maps of the Moscow Metro, those found on trains and at stations, have the name in English as Moscow Ring Railway. We should rename the article, because now there is an official English spelling widely published on the Moscow Metro itself.

(Finding online versions of the maps pasted on the train walls is harder than it should be, but here is a low-res version that shows the line as Moscow Ring Railway. [3]) Ingafube (talk) 21:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, we do not have to name just because it is official name (and note that the next map might very well have a different name; I had spelling in my passport change twice because these assholes in the Foreign Ministry have nothing else to do but switch between different spellings). What we need to choose is the most common name in English.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Note that half a year ago a different name was proposed above.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:17, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

First, if the Metro Map has it as "Moscow Ring Railway" today, then the article should be called "Moscow Ring Railway". If the company in charge of the project calls the thing "Moscow Ring Railway", then that's also a good clue.[4]

However, let's look at other sources of English usage for the most common name. "Moscow Ring Railway" is used by The Moscow Times,[5] Railway Gazette,[6] Gazprom,[7] The Kremlin [8], and an architect at the University of Sheffield, [9].

To be fair, I did find one source, Railway Bulletin,[10] that uses the term "Moscow Little Ring Railway", but basically "Moscow Ring Railway" wins in English by a long way.

I know stations are provisionally named while under construction, and then these names change, but there is very little English-language material mentioning the "Little Ring" so we really should go with what's on the posters. Those things get way more views than "Railway Bulletin" (yes, even by English speakers).Ingafube (talk) 21:44, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: I am not happy with the way you utilize your admin tool. You fail to provide a single valid source to counter the other sources which support the move. If you dismiss this move request simply because you do not like how koltso translating to ring. I will bring it to admin noticeboard. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 23:24, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome to bring me to AN, but please note that pages should not be moved without consensus, and this has absolutely nothing to do with me being an admin. Note that 6 month ago you proposed a different move and also were very passionate that this is the only title the page can be move to.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

"Московская кольцевая железная дорога" perfectly translates to "Moscow Ring Railway" and sources are using this name. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 07:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

It is Малое кольцо Московской железной дороги, check the Russian article for example. Alternatively, there is Большое кольцо Московской железной дороги--Ymblanter (talk) 07:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The official Russian name is now this: [11]. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 08:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Again, we are talking about the most commons name. I can not exclude that in a couple of years, the most common name would become Московская кольцевая железная дорога, but it is not clear to me that now it already is the most common name.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:17, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh no. I am suffering hallucination. I thought I heard someone said we should not take the Московская кольцевая железная дорога official site seriously. [12] -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 10:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Try to ask yourself why the Russian article has not been renamed, despite Russian Wikipedia being among the top 10 most active WMF projects. Sure, this is because these morons just do not know what is the actual name of the railway in the center of their capital city, right?--Ymblanter (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

And now you do care about ru.wp and you should know it has already been split into the rail network and the passenger service. But when I asked you how to deal with "ring or circle", you sided with Elk Salmon and insisted that ring is wrong, circle is absolutely right, effectively dismissing everything told in that site. When Ingafube moved this article, you, as an involved admin, used your admin privilege to swiftly revert the move and delete the new talk page. You try so hard to discredit all sources provided by Ingafube which point at the very naming of "Moscow Ring Railway" because you echo Elk Salmon so much that "ring" stands absolutely no chance. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 12:29, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I am afraid you are confusing me with someone else. I created this article and called it Moscow Little Ring Railway. I never called it Moscow Circle Railway or anything likel this. I also never user my admin flag for editing the article, which would be, indeed, inappropriate.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Actually, the AfD in the Russian Wikipedia, which is ongiong (ru:Википедия:К удалению/1 января 2016) is an interesting reading, thanks for providing the link. Nothing even close to consensus.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:36, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

If you do not fancy a split, then there is no stopping of renaming this article to the new official name. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 15:31, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

What do you mean by "no stopping"? An uninvolved administrator will decide.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:56, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 7 March 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. The single oppose vote says "too few sources at the moment to determine the most common English usage", yet sources are clearly found in the support vote at the bottom. In particular, the Moscow metro map and the Moscow Times article suggest the proposed name is common in English, and no solid evidence is presented to the contrary. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 09:57, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

---

Moscow Little Ring Railway → Moscow Ring Railway – Based on reliable sources provided by user:Ingafube above. Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 23:24, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Oppose, too few sources at the moment to determine the most common English usage, and this is why we have to use the Russian translation (note that there is also Moscow Big Ring Railway)--Ymblanter (talk) 06:40, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Four sources (Railway Gazette, Gazprom, President of Russia and The Moscow Times) are hardly "few". Again you do not cite a reliable source to say otherwise, so your opposition is invalid. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 06:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Again, last time I opposed a different name, and you did not like it either. I get an impression that you want to move the page does not matter to which target. The fact that two different "official" names show up in 6 month perfectly shows the English name is not established. In this situation, we need to use the translation.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I have been supportive to "Moscow Ring Railway" from the very beginning given the reliable sources we have. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 07:12, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Regarding to your "English name is not established" argument, you're predicting a name change in the future. Wikipedia is not crystal ball. You can't falsify a name because you THINK it is not established. Even if that would be the case, it's not up to Wikipedia to assume that possibility. If most sources use that name, Wikipedia simply follows. If the name does change, we move this page again. I don't see any problem of this process. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 07:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Support The most common name is "Moscow Ring Railway". Here is the official Moscow Metro Map.[13] Thousands of copies of which are seen by millions of people each day, making it the most common English-language source of the name of this line.

This topic is never going to generate very much English-language material, so we might be waiting a very long time before a large body of literature accumulates. However, in addition to the sources above,[14],[15],[16], [17], [18] here's some more. Cushman & Wakefield, a consultancy company involved in the project.[19]. Here's a rare example of common usage in English, by someone not connected with the project, a blogger mentioning the Moscow Ring Railway.[20] Here's a real-estate broker selling property near a future station on the Moscow Ring Railway.[21] An architecture website [22]. A news agency mentioned the name "Moscow Ring Railway" in 2011,[23] so it's hardly a name pulled out of nowhere. This name is even used in Japan, by an architectural design firm in Tokyo.[24] How many more sources are needed?

Ingafube (talk) 16:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Moscow Ring Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151208234752/http://www.rbc.ru/digest/index.shtml?commersant/2012/09/20/33771189 to http://www.rbc.ru/digest/index.shtml?commersant/2012/09/20/33771189
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131603240200/http://www.mos.ru/en/press-center/index.php?search_4=1109&view_mode_4=tag_search&view_module_4=anywhere&refer_id_4=25411&refer_module_4=news to http://www.mos.ru/en/press-center/index.php?search_4=1109&view_mode_4=tag_search&view_module_4=anywhere&refer_id_4=25411&refer_module_4=news

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:02, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Line number

Expand the diagram at the bottom of MKZD site [25] and you can see this line is designated as "line 15" instead of "14". I don't know how Russian Wikipedians think of this, but I always hesitate to number-code any Moscow railway line before its inauguration due to the conflicting sources [26]. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 10:19, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

You already lobbied above a move to an inexistent name, why do you care about an inexistent number?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

First is unofficial. Just used by website editors. Second is official. Elk Salmon (talk) 22:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Time to separate issues

This becoming too messy. This article should stay for historical line built in 1907 and for modern freight operations of Russian Railways on 3rd track. Metro service on scratch built tracks 1, 2 and stations should be moved out to separate article. Elk Salmon (talk) 02:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

This should have been done ages ago.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Per common sense, Moscow Central Circle, stub is ready, linked to Moscow metro article. So now this can be cleaned up. Elk Salmon (talk) 08:13, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:37, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Insufficient information

As a reader with no knowledge of this railway, I think it would be nice to see more information about this line in order to understand it. (1) A comment here seems to say there are 3 tracks, 2 new ones for passengers and one old one for freight; what are the facts? (2) Was there really passenger service for a while? Was it with only one track? What happened to the stations during the century of freight-only service? (3) What was the need for freight service in a ring railway? Is there some particular reason that could clarify this? (4) It would be reasonable to mention the outer ring railway in this article to provide context. E.g., when was that built? Did it ever carry passengers? Those are just 4 simple questions that occur to me. I don't know if it's easy to answer them! Zaslav (talk) 04:56, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Based on what I've seen in various sources: (1) That indeed seems to be the plan, although it may not be 100% adhered to (considering that at night there is no passenger service anyway); (2) The passenger service is said to have operated till the mid-1930s; presumably, the steam loco-pulled passenger trains uses the same tracks as the freight trains, just as it was the case on most mainline railways; (3) Moscow is a major railway hub, so there were always trains coming to the city from one railway (e.g. from the direction of Yaroslavl) and leaving in another direction (e.g. toward Kursk). So the 11 or so railway lines radiating from Moscow had to be connected in some ways, and in fact they are; the Little Ring is only one of the connectors that exist now or have existed in the past. Many of the world's major cities have railways loops or rings around them, in fact. In addition, a lot of industrial areas (such as ZIL) gradually developed along the Little Ring, and they were served by this rail line as well. (Ideally, I should add all this to the article, but I am too lazy to hunt down the sources. Maybe some day...) -- Vmenkov (talk) 02:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)