User talk:Cards84664/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/NSW Country lines right/Binnaway - Werris Creek

Template:S-line/NSW Country lines right/Binnaway - Werris Creek has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further 30 templates or template redirects for deletion under Country templates part 2. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:15, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:QR color

Template:QR color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further 28 templates or template redirects for deletion under Queensland Rail templates part 1. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Your recent editing history at New York City Subway shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:GoldLinQ color

Template:GoldLinQ color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further 27 templates or template redirects for deletion under Queensland Rail templates part 2. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:00, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/Victoria left/Alamein

Template:S-line/Victoria left/Alamein has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further 29 templates for deletion under Victoria s-line left templates. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

One or more of your templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --TheImaCow (talk) 14:10, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

ADA next stops

I genuinely don't know if we had a discussion to remove the next ADA accessible stops from NYC Subway infoboxes. I agree they may be trivial, but I think there should be a discussion about this, because it might be controversial (instructions to add such information are listed in the WP:NYCS page, so I'm assuming there was a discussion where this was deemed to be important). Epicgenius (talk) 18:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: That section on WP:NYCS has more or less remained unchanged since 2006. If you think users would find this controversial in 2021, I will go ahead and create the discussion. Cards84664 18:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Victoria color

Template:Victoria color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further 35 templates for deletion under More Victorian deprecated templates. Fleet Lists (talk) 03:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Australian closed station style

Template:Australian closed station style has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request also includes a deletion request for Template:Victoria closed style Fleet Lists (talk) 01:38, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Puffing Billy Railway color

Template:Puffing Billy Railway color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further five deletion requests for Puffing Billy templates Fleet Lists (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/CityRail left/City Circle

Template:S-line/CityRail left/City Circle has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. The deletion request includes a further 7 templates for deletion under More New South Wales unused deprecated templates. This concludes the conversion of Australian succession templates to Adjacent Stations, except for South Australia for which I do not have the necessary information. This has involved the deletion of 463 templates throughout New South Wales, Victoria and QueenslandFleet Lists (talk) 02:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC) Fleet Lists (talk) 02:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Keystone Service

I don't think there's any need to have a separate entry for the pre-1988 Keystone Service in adjacent stations. Plenty of Amtrak routes have changed terminal stations, including within the same city; that can be handled with the to-right and to-left parameters rather than a completely separate entry. (It's also misleading to have the 1981-1988 range, when a number of stations were dropped partway through that time span.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:42, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535: I can change those in the range to "Before 1988". I split the parameter just to get the light-blue color, if you think that's not needed I can just use to-left and to-right. Cards84664 18:08, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Also in regards to being dropped partway through, I made note of that already, Radnor being one example. Cards84664 18:48, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think a separate entry is needed just for the color. I'm not sure whether it's best noted in the infobox or the prose (probably the latter) but most of those dropped stops were served only by a single early-morning westbound trip. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:57, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Very nice job on the infobox work to add the additional services section, btw. No need to change any you've already edited, but I would generally put future services above former. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Something of a similar issue with the PTC services. I think it's more confusing than helpful to show the intricacies of the former Bridge Line/Ridge Spur service patterns in adjacent stations, especially since both are still in existence under newer operators. The prose is a better place to describe them; I'm currently working on edits to 8th Street and PATCO. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

About the Roblox user on the 1 Train Page

Hi there,

I just wanted to clarify that ROBLOX dude is not me, and this is my only account. I also do not know who is behind the account either, to also clear that up. I noticed he took the image I had and made it look worse. I legit just looked at the reverted history on that page and noticed a little argument. What I did instead was edit the lighting to appear a bit more realistic while not looking too bright like his. I’m super sorry that this caused unnecessary drama. Reply back when you get a chance.

- MTAEnthusiast10 (talk) 21 February 2021

@MTAEnthusiast10: Thank you for clarifying the issue, I hadn't seen you editing on that article so I assumed there was an account switch. I will take your word for it, and don't worry, no real drama came of it. (Note, did you try using your signature by typing " ~~~~ " at the end of your message here? Cards84664 22:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cards84664: Yeah, after my image got reverted I left it at that and today was the first time I took a look at the view history lol. thanks for letting me know to use a signature, once again I'm kind of new to talking on someone's page. MTAEnthusiast10 (talk) 23:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Re: Youngstown

I got lots of stuff. (Building is from 1922), but I can't get sources till later. Mitch32^{(sail away with me to another world.)} 02:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

These will help you get started (latter is SPS, but should at least give you an idea. Will get more later.Mitch32^{(sail away with me to another world.)} 03:05, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Adjacent stations/Penn Central

Module:Adjacent stations/Penn Central has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:48, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:MUNI S

Template:MUNI S has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mackensen (talk) 03:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Aoimori Railway direction

Hey, thanks for helping out around the articles for the Aoimori Railway Line; however, one thing stuck out to me about your edits that you flipped all of the directions to have Aomori be the beginning of the line and Metoki be the end. This is not accurate, the km posts for the line begin at Metoki (0) and end at Aomori (121.9). Could you please switch the directions back? Thanks ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 13:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mccunicano: Only a portion of the line was flipped. The new template is based on East-West orientation, not origin and km posts as j-route and j-rserv were. Metoki to Hachinohe travels north-east (Kenyoshi Station for example), while Hachinohe to Aoimori travels north-west (Nonai Station for example). The templates are arranged this way because of stations like Kōenji Station, multiple lines travel in the same direction, while the km posts might be in opposite directions. If one line is counting up in the direction of Chiba while a concurrent line is counting down in the same direction, it's best practice to do this elsewhere for consistency. Cards84664 14:15, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

That seems unnecessarily confusing to most readers or users of the line. Why would the directions need to flip at Hachinohe in this case? That all just seems really arbitrary. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 14:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mccunicano: The template is set up geographically so wrong-way concurrencies don't appear in the templates. But now that you mention it, the Aoimori Railway does not have any of these concurrencies, so I guess a Metoki to Aoimori orientation will be fine. I'll fix that for you in a bit. Cards84664 14:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I was trying to figure out what you were talking about in regards to a concurrency. Perhaps it was the Shimokita service? Glad we're on the same page now. Cheers, ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 14:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Cleveland Lakefront Station page revert and Amtrak Connects US

Hi Cards, I noticed you reverted an edit I recently made to Cleveland Lakefront Station that noted that the Empire Service and Pennsylvanian trains were planned for extensions to Cleveland as part of the Connects US plan, in addition to the notes that other (currently unnamed) trains would be brought to Cleveland in the future. I would like to question why the edit was reverted as an 'incorrect and uncited' post, as I did cite the full report in the page's services section as my citation for that edit in particular, and I believe I had referenced the specific pages (pages 55 and 56 of that report) where it said the Empire Service and Pennsylvanian would have select round trips extended to Cleveland in the page. (Note that on Page 56, the explicit wording used is 'an extended Pennsylvanian increases mobility for Central and Western Pennsylvania', and that on Page 55, the wording used is "Extend 1 New York City – Buffalo Empire (Upstate) round trip to Cleveland". I ask largely because I want to understand if I am misunderstanding the wording they use for both of these segments, and if I should have read them in further detail before making the edits to Lakefront Station's page in particular. Additionally, while the images used in the PDF are not particularly high quality and made my note of service to Ashtabula not a quality source, the Northeast and Midwest corridor maps do both showcase Ashtabula as a station stop, which I was about to upload to the page to support the citation before I found it reverted. I would greatly appreciate your input on this matter, since I believed the edit had correctly relayed the proposed service to Cleveland that Amtrak has laid out in their Connects US vision plan, and made it clear that proposed service to Cincinnati and Detroit would be new trains. Thank you. Pokemonred200 (talk) 17:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Pokemonred200: My bad, I did not see that third section you edited. I'd still leave off the adjacent stations and service notes, as that is still speculation. Cards84664 17:55, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I understand. I do believe that the maps I linked provided enough detail to make it worthwhile to leave in Adjacent Stations as a proposal since it came from an official map, though ultimately given it's in the early planning stages, the details given on those maps could be very different should progress be made on those plans in a year or two Pokemonred200 (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion of Interest (PA Routes)

Hello, I tried to "ping" you but it may not have worked. At your leisure, please see this discussion: Talk:List of state routes in Pennsylvania#"Clearly Existed". Thanks. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 01:45, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Undoing my update. MTA use of lettering

Didn't you know that MJ stood for Myrtle-Jay?

The MTA lettered some lines like that on purpose.

M stands for Myrtle Avenue line QJ means Queens-Jamaica line J stood for Jamaica line (JJ was the Jamaica local) RJ meant the train ran on the R line in Brooklyn and then on the Jamaica line in Queens.

When the QB and QT were in use the Q stood for Queens since the northern terminals were in Queens.

They ran out of specific letter which is why the KK/K was used.

Of course all this ended when the use of 2 letters was discontinued.

You should include this in the various articles. Allan (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@IRT1904: If true, the information needs a reliable source link added. We can not add trivia if it doesn't have a source with reasonable proof. Cards84664 19:23, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Colours

I didn't even know the PDF you sent me actually existed; the one I had downloaded showed the colours in PMS, so I converted them to hex # and only assumed they were right; the document you sent me didn't come up in the search results, so didn't think it showed the same as what was written. Edgar Searle (talk) 02:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Re: Harrison Street

I really wish you hadn't, especially cause I had started a sandbox for it.....it's fine though. Also, don't be offended, but I think that navbox is way too much information overload on one navbox. I know mine for the NY Division is rather large but it's readable at the minimum. You'd be better off delinking all those red links like I did in mine. The concept of the navbox is supposed to be basic access, not information provider itself. I know you mean well, it's just a bit problematic. Mitch32^{(sail away with me to another world.)} 20:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mitchazenia: I agree on the readability part, how does it look now? Cards84664 21:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Better but I'd still personally take out all the sub details. Way too much going on. I know what you're trying to go for, but that information is better for lists and articles. Mitch32^{(sail away with me to another world.)} 21:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, the Carlton Hill Branch hadn't been killed until 1966, it was Carlton Hill->Rutherford->Hoboken from 4/2/63 to 9/30/66. Mitch32^{(sail away with me to another world.)} 21:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mitchazenia: Correct, however Main Line trains went directly from Hoboken to Passaic at that time. Cards84664 23:18, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mitchazenia: I get what you mean now, I've cleaned up the key. Cards84664 23:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Main Line was through Passaic until 4/2/63 yes, but the Carlton Hill Branch remained as a branch passenger line until the major cuts on 9/30-10/3/66. So technically Rutherford was still a junction until September 30, 1966. Mitch32^{(sail away with me to another world.)} 02:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

B&M services

I see you're starting to add former B&M services to station articles. Would you be okay with me taking the lead with that? The Boston area is my primary research interest, so I have the knowledge and the timetables for it. (I also want to reverse the direction of the Lowell line services - otherwise it gets weird with the GLX stations.)

Also, I'm inclined to use the MBTA designation for any services that were MBTA-subsidized, even those prior to the purple branding. There's no singular date that we can say "everything after this was absolutely MBTA", given that the Penn Central line purchase, the purple branding, the Penn Central equipment purchase, and the B&M line/equipment purchase were all at different times. There's a pretty clear demarcation between pre-subsidy closures and after-subsidy closures. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:36, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Should the Lowell line be flipped just along the GLX or the whole line? I'm using a 1929 B&M timetable to insert the former stations, and I'm verifying each branch line with the map included in the timetable. The map has table numbers along the lines similar to Canadian National. I've only seen the Central Mass being affected by the ownership transition, so I can switch that back to MBTA in the infobox. Cards84664 21:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535: I'm not limiting myself to B&M, I'm also checking that some MBTA stuff isn't missing. Cards84664 21:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I think I'll swap the whole Lowell Line - both Boston-Lowell and the NH service swing enough west that it's clearer that way, and the only weirdness will be with the Wildcat. Please don't add "missing" lines like the one to West Medford - we should not show former stop patterns on existing services. The only former versions of existing services shown at existing stations should be branches (like the Woburn Branch at Winchester) and former extensions (like Gardner at Fitchburg) - and both only at the last station before the change.

@Pi.1415926535: Would it make more sense if Tufts University was listed as a former stop in a way similar to Maysville station? Cards84664 23:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

No, there's simply not a need to list it. The station listing is not for listing every service pattern that ever existed - it's for the most essential navigation. The station listings at Lowell Line and Boston and Lowell Railroad are to show every station that's existed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, do note that until 1959, the Woburn Loop was the primary route for Boston-Concord and Boston-Lowell services; only a few locals (including Stoneham Branch) and some expresses went via Wilmington. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:30, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NYCS Jamaica west M

Template:NYCS Jamaica west M has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:27, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Pyongyang Metro logo

Template:Pyongyang Metro logo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Did Q28 make a mess today? 01:40, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Unused S-line templates nominated for deletion

Please see this TFD nomination, which involves one or more templates that you created. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:57, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Tagging templates for speedy deletion

Hello, Cards84664,

It would be helpful for admins who patrol speedy deletion categories if, when you tag a template for speedy deletion, you could link to a TFD discussion where the decision was made to delete a template or provide further explanation about why a template should be deleted. You can link to a TFD discussion using Twinkle. Because templates are substituted or utilized in a more complex way than simple articles, deleting a template can have ramifications beyond the simple deletion of the template page.

Without seeing that these deletions have been approved or tagged by an editor I'm familiar with who prepares templates for deletion, I'm likely to pass on them and let an admin who works with templates handle these requests. I just wanted to explain why these tagged templates might sit in the CSD category longer than other pages that have been tagged. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: My bad, they're invocation templates that have become obsolete. For example Template:PE lines Template:PE color and Template:PE stations have been replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Pacific Electric. Cards84664 19:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Okay. I still might leave them for another admin like Plastikspork. I will say that I took care of some of the ones you tagged that were simple, like broken redirects. Those, and any that you tag for G7 as page creator, are easy for any of us to handle. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:33, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

• For things like Template:AirTrain color, "unused template" is not a reason for speedy deletion (this has been proposed and rejected many times). Use WP:TFD. I will revert your G6 taggings. —Kusma (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

That's what I was concerned about, Kusma. I'm used to seeing templates that have gone through a TFD discussion before being tagged CSD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:F Liner color

Template:F Liner color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:F Liner lines

Template:F Liner lines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:F Liner stations

Template:F Liner stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Izuhakone color

Template:Izuhakone color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:33, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Izuhakone lines

Template:Izuhakone lines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:33, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Izuhakone stations

Template:Izuhakone stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:33, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:TWR color

Template:TWR color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:TWR lines

Template:TWR lines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:TWR stations

Template:TWR stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tama Toshi Monorail color

Template:Tama Toshi Monorail color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tama Toshi Monorail lines

Template:Tama Toshi Monorail lines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tama Toshi Monorail stations

Template:Tama Toshi Monorail stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:UP lines

Template:UP lines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:UP stations

Template:UP stations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:UP color

Template:UP color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/UP left/main

Template:S-line/UP left/main has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Module:Adjacent stations/Long Island Rail Road

Hey, I noticed you created Module:Adjacent stations/Long Island Rail Road and I was wondering what was the difference between that and Module:Adjacent stations/LIRR? I'm not familiar with the subject but both link to the same article and use the same name. Gonnym (talk) 09:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Gonnym: LIRR has the MTA logo, this is not ideal for former services/lines pre-MTA. Cards84664 14:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

For example, compare Hillside station (LIRR) and Stewart Manor station. Cards84664 14:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mackensen: Would there be a way to manually invoke a title change on the article or the module itself? If so I would like to merge these modules. Cards84664 14:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Cards84664: I don't think so; I'd say it makes sense to keep separate modules in this situation. Mackensen (talk) 15:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Then a better name is needed for both modules. They can't both be titled with the same name. Gonnym (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Another question, what time frame exactly is Module:Adjacent stations/Long Island Rail Road for? The link used is History of the Long Island Rail Road#Pennsylvania Railroad ownership, 1900–1949, however Module:Adjacent stations/Pennsylvania Railroad exists so that can't be it. Gonnym (talk) 15:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Gonnym: No that is correct, The Pennsylvania Railroad owned the Long Island Rail Road, but it was kept separate and had its own spot in the timetables at the time.

In terms of naming, how about "LIRR" and "LIRR former"? Cards84664 18:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I guess that solves the name issue. Thanks for explaining the difference between all 3. Gonnym (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LIRR left/City

Template:S-line/LIRR left/City has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 08:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LIRR right/Ronkonkoma

Template:S-line/LIRR right/Ronkonkoma has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/Odakyu left/Odawara

Template:S-line/Odakyu left/Odawara has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/Odakyu right/Odawara

Template:S-line/Odakyu right/Odawara has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/Charleroi Metro right/3

Template:S-line/Charleroi Metro right/3 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:42, 24 January 2022 (UTC)