User talk:TrackConversion

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, TrackConversion, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! 12:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC) . Crosstemplejay ^{talk .}[reply]

Developing your user page - it is easy

Wikipedia is a megalopolis and like in any city, interactions are very important. I recommend that you develop your user page so that people who visit your page may know your interests and share in them. It could be a single line telling others of not only your name but what you like or a complex page with every single thing that interests you on it. This is a great way of building up work groups that facilitate the sharing of expert knowledge on articles, talks etc. Happy building!!! . Crosstemplejay ^{talk .}12:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Become a great editor through service

Being a member of the welcoming committee on Wikipedia I encourage you to help Wikipedia in any way you can to increase human knowledge. If you have credible information about a topic with verifiable references please feel free to add to that topic. If there is no article on that topic, why not start it, with time others will add to it and it may even make the featured articles list. By doing this, I have been able to make over 3500 page edits in both new articles, article improvement etc. Furthermore, I encourage you to aim to be a member of the autoconfirmed users [[1]] group as this will greatly improve your Wikipedia experience. You can do this by making at least 10 credible edits on Wikipedia and remaining on Wikipedia for four (4) days. Check out this page for tips. . Crosstemplejay ^{talk .} 12:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding media to articles

Media files, be it images, drawings or sound files are an integral part of Wikipedia's articles. They apart from enriching articles, make them more credible too. You can add media files to both your new articles as well as once you are editing. To do so you can search for it on wikipedia:commons or you can either upload the image if you have it using this file uploader or [commons uploader]. Please be informed that you must provide accurate information about the file being uploaded since they are reviewed and if if is found that the license given to the file is false, it will promptly be deleted. . Crosstemplejay ^{talk .}12:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spotting bad edits and vandalism

As you age on Wikipedia, one thing you will come across and probably address will the issue of bad edits or vandalism. There are several ways of spotting them:

by reviewing articles on your watchlist regularly and looking for bad edits
verifying new changes to pages and articles

If you happen to come across a bad edit you may:

ask an editor you trust to review the work for his/her inputs
you can rollback the change if you have credible information that the edit is indeed bad
request that the necessary change be made on the article's talk page.

Whatever you do, please be very careful about the changes you make, for a rule of thumb, discuss issues you are not sure of first before making changes. . Crosstemplejay ^{talk .} 12:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track gauge dispute

Inappropriate metrication of railway gauge categories.

Please stop this and do not continue until it is discussed appropriately at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains#User:TrackConversion_and_massive_changes_to_gauge_categorisation.

Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 17:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring over categorization

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Category:Minimum gauge railways. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

Please respond at the project talk: page, as linked above. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See project talk. TrackConversion (talk) 17:21, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Metrication of railway line categories

THIS IS NOT VANDALISM - STOP YOUR ATTACKS TrackConversion (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly advice

(edit conflict) For the moment, please stop creating metric rail gauge categories and adding them to articles. I believe you were editing in good faith. Now that this issue has been raises at Trains WikiProject, it needs to be discussed, so that a consensus can be formed. It may be that some categories get renamed, and others get merged. This does not mean that your efforts are completely unappreciated or unwanted. Any questions, please ask me or at the Wikiproject's talk page. Mjroots (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Raised at WP:ANI

Now raised at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Requesting_a_temporary_block_of_user:TrackConversion Andy Dingley (talk) 23:35, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Final Warning

This is your last warning; the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You were asked not to continue with the metric categories whilst the issue is discussed. If you create any more metric rail gauge categories, you will be blocked. If you are blocked, you will not be able to contribute to the discussion, and a WP:CONSENSUS will be formed without your input. Mjroots (talk) 16:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I started Category:Track gauges by imperial unit and was about to revert the categorization to metric /equivalents/. E.g. http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Volk%27s_Electric_Railway&diff=426036271&oldid=425857635 TrackConversion (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The dispute

Thanks for your message. Another admin declined to block you. As you wish to discuss the issues, then I'm content for you to retain your editing privileges. The discussion at WP level should continue. It may be that each category is discussed on a case-by-case basis or they may be discussed in bulk. Mjroots (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure

I havent checked the diffs - so i dont know if its you or others - but I am beginning to associate the articles you touch as having lots of white space (apologies in advance if it wasnt you)- there is not any need to add blank empty lines everywhere - the formatting looks after itself - please take that in AGF - also I am not in the gauge arguments - I come from a rail fan area where such arguments seem superfluous - just remember that localised claims to labels like cape gauge and railroad get up my nose - they are culturally specific and not universal - and should never claim to be of universal usage - apart from that I'll get out of your way - just remember - extra white space is not needed - cheers Satu Suro 04:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I added any white space, not my intention. Maybe give me a link where it happened, so I can have a look at the issue. TrackConversion (talk) 10:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologise - just note if you look at http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Indian_gauge&diff=prev&oldid=426151028 - I have removed the unnecessary white space - whether its yours or someone else - there is no need to add spaces - hope the diff helps Satu Suro 11:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. At least one in that article was inserted by me - when removing an image. Thanks for spotting. TrackConversion (talk) 11:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:RailGauge#530 mm - 21 inch and Template talk:RailGauge#Updates

Where did you need 530mm? BTW {{convert}} or 530 mm (20.87 in) gives 20.87 inches when taken to two decimal places, that is 207⁄8 on a dual measuring tape. Peter Horn User talk 00:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Due to this, I sincerely doubt your question will be answered. Da.squirrels (talk) 18:32, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So this is "moot". Peter Horn User talk 15:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Give the devil his due

Surprise, surprise, User:TrackConversion actually made genuine revisions to the Track gauge article! Peter Horn User talk 00:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pennsylvania trolley gauge

The article Pennsylvania trolley gauge has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Is word for word identical to section Broad_gauge#Pennsylvania_trolley_gauge.

Needless article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. CrossHouses (talk) 01:05, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]