Talk:Rittnerbahn

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	January 14, 2009

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

Low

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

This article lacks references.

Funicular

The article tells us that the rack section of the tramway was replaced by a funicular. But then the gallery goes on to show the following picture of the funicular:

The new funicular

As that photograph clearly does not show a funicular, I have removed the image from the gallery. But I'm left wondering if the editor who wrote the text knew what a funicular was. Is it possible that the picture is a genuine depiction of the mode of transport that replace the rack tram, and it is the article text that is wrong. Anybody know?.

-- Starbois (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this is definitely not the new funicular because

a) it is not a funicular that is being built but a tricable areal ropeway[1]
b) the image shows the cabin of the old ropeway that went from Bozen to Oberbozen (the new cabins: http://www.stol.it/nachrichten/img_show.asp?imgId=96990)
c) there never was a funicular on the Ritten (the tramway was replaced by a ropeway in 1966)

therefore the article needs fixing - which I will do now, --noclador (talk) 17:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying that. I hope you don't mind, but I've replaced your link target (but not text) with a link to Aerial tramway. This is, I think, the correct article for what is being described here. The term ropeway is a better one in my opinion, but the article Ropeway is about a piece of naval equipment. -- Starbois (talk) 18:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all - you're welcome and aerial tramway is fine - as long as people understand what it is all about. In May the new ropeway will be opened, if I have the time I will stop by and take a series of pics for commons; best regards --noclador (talk) 20:51, 30 March 2009 (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. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ritten Railway → Rittnerbahn — The majority of English-language publications refer to this line by this name (the most common of the two official names, the other being Italian, as this part of Italy is bilingual), so WP:EN supports using this Germanic name, not an English translation of it. I am the editor who added (all four of) what are currently the article's only English citations, and all refer to it (in English text) as the Rittnerbahn. Additional English-language sources I've not cited in the article (including travel guides) also support this move. SJ Morg (talk) 07:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The names of railways like this are almost never translated in guidebooks or other publications, so it makes no sense to translate them here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support article was actually at Rittnerbahn until January 30th, then moved without discussion by an editor to the current name. noclador (talk) 12:20, 3 March 2011 (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.