Talk:North–South railway (Vietnam)

Vietnam High‑importance

	Vietnam portal This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains Mid‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	June 4, 2012

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article lacks references.

It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article.

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Vietnam may be able to help!

History of the Trans Indo-China Railway

I have seen several attemps to create ( by American, Australian, Austrian, British, Canadian, French, and German experts a complete locomotive list of the steam and diesel locomotives which have been working on this line. Non of them complete.

One mystery is the Kenia - Uganda Railway Garratt locomotives sold to French Indo-China in 1939. Also the German locomotive builder of Hanomag from Hannover delivered three classes of steam locomotives ( according their factory catalogue ) to Cambodia, but these locomotives seems to have gone later to the Trans Indo-China Railway. Then came the Japanese in June 1940 and many Japanese Imperial State Railways tank locomotives were regauged in Hainan Island ( Samah Motive Power Depot ) from 1067 mm ( 3ft 6in ) Cape gauge to one meter ( 1000 mm ) standard French Colonial Railway gauge and were shipped to Tonkin. These Japanese steam locomotives appeared only after April 1941 in French Indo China ( Tonkin ), but not in Annam or Cochin-China. Then there is a mystery of Burma Railways Garratt type locomotives used at Mandalay - Lashio branch line, which according to one Japanese source, were transfered in 1942 to either Hanoi - Nanning or Trans Indo-China Railway. Then the Imperial Japanese Southern Army`s Railway Department ( allocated then in Sai-Gon ) transfered some steam locomotives from Malaya, and Dutch East India to Cambodia, Siam, and the French Indo-China. All this form one of the last unsolved questions; which locomotives actually where allocated there. Even the French do not know the answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.115.118.82 (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. It's still unclear whether or not parentheses should be used here, but they seem to be inline with disambiguator guidelines at least. Feel free to discuss this more if needed. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

North-South Railway, Vietnam → North–South Railway (Vietnam) — A combination of WP:ENDASH and WP:NCDAB. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 19:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have no problem with the WP:ENDASH aspect. Placing Vietnam in paretheses is more problematic. Generally, practice is mixed over whether such disambiguators should use the comma format or the parentheses format, perhaps because the guidelines at Wikipedia:Disambiguation are a little unclear. They state:
- A disambiguating word or phrase can be added in parentheses. The word or phrase in parentheses should be:
  - the generic class (avoiding proper nouns, as much as possible) that includes the topic, as in Mercury (element), Seal (mammal); or
  - the subject or context to which the topic applies, as in Union (set theory), Inflation (economics).
They also state:
- With place-names, if the disambiguating term is a higher-level administrative division, it is often separated using a comma instead of parentheses, as in Windsor, Berkshire.
Many editors/readers simply don't like the parentheses format when the disambiguator is a place name. It may be better to leave it in the form it is. Skinsmoke (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Perhaps, but the way I read it, it clearly seems more appropriate to use the brackets here since we're not talking about administrative divisions: "North-South Railway" is not a province of Vietnam. See Red River for examples: Red River (Asia) for the river that runs through Hanoi, but Red River, New Mexico for the town-level subdivision of New Mexico. A town is an administrative division; rivers and railways are not. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 21:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nobody doubts that a railway (North–South Railway) is not an administrative division, but a country (Vietnam) is. Rivers are dealt with by a different naming convention, and should use parentheses. Skinsmoke (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Argh, OK, I see what you mean. I was getting stuck on the words "disambiguator"/"the disambiguating term". I guess I wasn't properly disambiguated. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 01:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one! Skinsmoke (talk) 07:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Audio --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 14:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment FYI, to the closing admin, I'll be happy with only the WP:ENDASH fix as per Skinsmoke's suggestion. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 21:08, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A railway is not an administrative unit or constituent part of a state. Normal dab rules should apply. — AjaxSmack 21:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I still agree with this, but I'm so confused now I don't really care either way anymore :D Maybe it's worth starting a thread to amend/clarify the disambiguation policy? --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 21:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Under development

FYI, I'm currently working on this page in my sandbox. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 10:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on North–South Railway (Vietnam). 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:

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) 05:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]