Talk:Westrail ADP/ADQ class

Railcar or DMU

Now what is the Westrail Australind? A railcar or Diesel Multiple Unit?

Anyway, currently the terminology and category name are contradicting.--Aaron-Tripel (talk) 07:35, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Not necessarily. In Australia (and also in some other places, eg Ireland), the term "railcar" is used to refer to both of these types of trains. Bahnfrend (talk) 08:25, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Move from Westrail to Transwa

I have moved the article from "Westrail ADP/ADQ class" to "Transwa ADP/ADQ class". Reasons for moving include:

- Consistency with the Transwa WDA/WDB/WDC class article.

- Generally, trains do not have their article titles with a previous operator who ordered it. For example, Sydney Trains M set has the current operator of Sydney Trains, not CityRail who ordered it.

- The present common name for WA's regional public transport network is Transwa, not Westrail.

Fork99 (talk) 03:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with the move. The original name of the article reflected the standard practice for naming Wikipedia articles about rolling stock delivered to one operator, and later used by a successor to that operator. So, eg, the article about the Midland Railway 2000 Class is so named because the class was delivered new to the Midland Railway, even though the class was later owned and operated for more than a decade by its successor, the London, Midland and Scottish Railway. Similarly, the article MRWA F class is so named, even though the class was later owned and operated by the WAGR, and even though the WAGR traded from the mid-1970s as Westrail and the F class remained in service for many years after the introduction of that trading name. The names of the articles WAGR D class (diesel) and Westrail DB class similarly follow the standard Wikipedia practice.

The article Transwa WDA/WDB/WDC class is about a class that was delivered new to Transwa, and therefore that name is the appropriate name for that article. This article is about a class that was delivered new to Westrail. The original name is therefore the correct name for the article, according to the standard Wikipedia practice. Bahnfrend (talk) 13:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

@Bahnfrend: I don't think that the title using the order operator is a standard practice. It's more like a half-standard, some articles follow it, some don't. Although I think that your point about the WAGR and Midland Railway locos is valid, I don't think that it should apply towards a train which is relevant and still runs in the present modern day. Even though it was ordered for Westrail, I think that if an ordinary person wanted to learn about the Australind railcars, they wouldn't type "Westrail ADP/ADQ class", they would type "Transwa ADP/ADQ class". Sydney Trains, NSW TrainLink both follow this guideline in that they use the current operator. Even the retired trains like the Sydney Trains S set which were made three operators before Sydney Trains are still titled under Sydney Trains and not under Public Transport Commission, State Rail Authority nor CityRail. It would be quite difficult for an average reader to find information about an operational or even a recently retired train if it was named under an operator from 20-50 years ago. Even me, who I would consider a nerd about Sydney's rail network, I have no idea who the operator of Sydney Trains was in 1954 or 1978 off my head. If you could link to a WikiProject railway guideline which disproves my argument, I would be happy to revert the move. Fork99 (talk) 11:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)