This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Rail-interchange. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, I’ve been cleaning up articles relating to Chongqing Rail Transit, and I’d like to request to convert all “branch” in the anchor to lowercase. Thanks!
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Changing the Ballarat, Bendigo and Geelong line links to the "V/Line rail service" pages rather than the "railway line" pages (see this diff). In particular, Bendigo has an article discussing the track on the "railway line" page, and one on the actual service on the "V/Line rail service" page. – Pizza1016 (talk | contribs) 01:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
If an icon function were added to the module then the templates based on the module would be able to replicate almost all of the functionality, although a lot of module subpages would need to be filled out. Jc86035 (talk) 17:38, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. If memory serves, there was a hugely underwhelming response to the last proposal to Luafy this template. Better luck this time.
@Useddenim: If you can understand most of the code in Module:Adjacent stations/MTR without reading the documentation (which is unfinished anyway), then there shouldn't be much for more experienced coders to maintain since the module is basically complete other than the aforementioned icon function. I didn't write the module by myself (it was created by Szqecs), and given that such a module necessitated subpages containing data tables it wouldn't have made sense not to replace the other functions that the S-line templates perform as well. Jc86035 (talk) 05:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
For all PortlandMAX Light Rail lines (Blue, Green, Red, Orange, Yellow, WES), please change the rail color box to {{TMTC bullet|size=3}} template. I recommend size=3, but I'll let you determine that. Examples below:
Edit: actually yes, the bull isn't allowing for the use of the link param. Sorry for being annoying. {{rint|portland|red|bull|link=MAX Red Line}} = --Truflip99 (talk) 19:01, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 2 September 2018
Before the change can be made, it must be established who, when and why the TriMet logo was changed from WP:NFCC. CouvGeek, you can't just arbitrarily upload a file and claim that it is PD. Useddenim (talk) 03:29, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
@Useddenim:The main TriMet logo is PD and on commons. I merely took the icon out and uploaded as its own. Ask the uploader there for their determinations on why they considered it PD. There's a dupe of the same logo (although with slightly different colors) uploaded by someone from dewiki on commons, so obviously I am not the only one who thinks it's PD. Many files that were originally tagged as non-free are later converted to PD since they are too simple to be copyrighted to have non-free tags. I've had similar changes approvedtwice on a similar template by different admins template editors without resistance, so I am requesting this to be reconsidered. CouvGeek (talk) 03:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
I have just made a list of stations here: (List of Baku metro stations) and I'm wondering if anybody is willing to help create a rail-interchange template for the 3 lines? It seems to be one of the few metro systems without any symbols for the lines. Thanks! Mattximus (talk) 01:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 23 September 2018
add {{{link|Proastiakos Thessaloniki}}} at the alt/link fields of both Π1, Π2, and pr (as it stands now, clicking the icons redirects to the images as opposed to Proastiakos Thessaloniki)
I take away your template editor privilege, in accordance with the last sentence of WP:TPE#Wise template editing(or you make a corresponding request at WP:PERM/TE)
You promise to thoroughly test all proposed changes in future
Add the Hartford Line commuter rail system with c:File:Hartford Line logo.png. It looks like 18 pixels works best, and "hartford" could probably be used as the parameter. I have never done one of these requests before, but I put it in the sandbox. Not sure what, if anything, I need to do. Thank you! Daybeers (talk) 00:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, been busy with real life responsibilities! I'm not sure if I've tested it correctly, as I've never requested one of these edits before. If you tell me what I need to do, I'm more than willing to make it happen. Thanks! –Daybeers (talk) 02:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Partly done: Changed the link. I have no opinion about the link text but if someone does prefer that more, they can further-complete this request. Izno (talk) 17:06, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I've no opinion about the alt text either, so happy for that to stay as is and treat this request as done. (The link itself is an icon.) Certes (talk) 17:12, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes. And made the update. Your edit changed the target of the link icon, but it is explicitly listed in the documentation, so yes, there was a reason to. Useddenim (talk) 18:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 11 November 2018 (1)
| marta =[[File:Logo of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority.svg|{{{size|70}}}px|link={{{link|Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority}}}|alt={{{alt|{{{link|Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority}}}}}}]]
This is for the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), the principal public transport operator in the Atlanta metropolitan area of Georgia (U.S. state). The size will give the logo a height of 11 pixels (equivalent to bold text).
Please remove in-template documentation, and add <noinclude>{{subst:#ifexist:{{subst:#invoke:string|replace|{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}|/sandbox$|plain=false}}/doc|{{{{subst:void}}documentation}}}}</noinclude> (= the basic way of adding documentation). Current Template:Rail-interchange/doc has list as is in the parent template now (so no visible changes when subpage is used). Reasonable: when doc is outside, it is easier to maintain & update. DePiep (talk) 07:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Why so? A simple {{subst:#ifexist:{{subst:#invoke:string|replace|{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}|/sandbox$|plain=false}}/doc|{{{{subst:void}}documentation}}}} would do. For example, the editlinks are missing from the documentation. Documentation should not be part of the edit restriction. -DePiep (talk) 17:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
That's debatable. Given your past history of disruptive edits and questionable BSicon design, I'm not sure that you should be making changes to the documentation. Useddenim (talk) 18:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Arh, so this kept you occupied for six years to the day? Better use that energy to improve edits. Such as: why the weird /doc construct?, and clarify why you attack me for removing a redundant list while you did the same to the other list? -DePiep (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
@DePiep and Useddenim: I think the weird structure is probably from my 2015 attempt to prevent the parser limits from being reached by the transclusion of the documentation sub-pages. The structure obviously became redundant when the full list was no longer shown, but no one seems to have minded in the intervening years. Jc86035 (talk) 19:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I see, a good solution -- back then. Leaves open the question why is was not removed today by Useddenim, as was exactly what I requested/proposed. Instead, I got a jab. -DePiep (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
... and then create one good /documentation page combining doc data from both pages. Not that difficult. Where do I ignore that? If only you had performed my simple request, I could have made the doc page OK (really bad code now). Anyway, you are wrong wrt "ignoring", and assuming BF. And oh, could you retract your six-year old frustration in PA form? Thanks. -DePiep (talk) 20:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure how blanking most of a page is not bad faith editing; but nonetheless, I've changed the {{Documentation}} call. Useddenim (talk) 22:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Useddenimthis edit(-summmary) is sloppy argued. Good documentation leads to the right detail asap -- which is what the additions did. On top of this, "poorly formatted" is an unfounded judgement (more like: "I would have done it differently", ie so what). I suggest strongly to revert (=add again). In general, please slow down on too early judgements, and try to consider the background of an edit. -DePiep (talk) 13:34, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 11 November 2018 (3)
For Taiwan (| tw), please replace the following images with Wikipedia versions. These files, hosted on Commons, are not free images in home country and are to be removed from Commons.
@Galobtter: I think you misunderstood. The current files are on Commons and to be deleted. Please replace with the images on the right, which are identical copies on Wikipedia. Szqecs (talk) 15:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
This is for Brightline in South Florida, the first privately run intercity passenger train service in the US in over three decades. The size selected is the same as Tri-Rail. Jackdude101talkcont22:29, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Done I've gone ahead and added it, as objection is unlikely and a full discussion is unnecessary bureaucracy in my opinion. Let me know if anyone disagrees with the proposed change, or just start another edit req. Courtesy ping to Bellezzasolo. Enterprisey (talk!) 03:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
For some reason your change didn't go through, so I've made the change. I'm fine with it, I just generally leave 48 hours on edit requests that haven't been discussed. I really need a Reddit style !remind me. ∰Bellezzasolo✡Discuss12:08, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
The rail-interchange symbol currently used for Miami Metrorail (rapid transit) is also used by Metromover (people mover) and Metrobus, all of which are run by Miami-Dade Transit. Since the symbol does not apply to Metrorail exclusively, I think it would be appropriate if the other two were added. Jackdude101talkcont07:44, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
I implemented the overall change, but I modified it a little so there is a #default param as well as alt params for each link. Also, you left off the opening [ of the File link. Primefac (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
@Jackdude101 and Primefac: This it's why it's best to sandbox the proposal instead of dropping code blobs into talk page threads. That way the proposal may be tested properly. See my comments in various sections above, particularly those where breakage had occurred as a result of incomplete testing (or no testing at all). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
I totally agree, and if it were anything other than some minor coding points I would have asked for sandboxing. In this particular instance, though, I didn't think it was necessary. Primefac (talk) 20:30, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 24 November 2018
@Ncboss: Do you actually want all the routes to display LRT? The general convention is that the label displays the line name (for example either Black or Black Line etc.) Useddenim (talk) 14:03, 2 December 2018 (UTC)