Jump to content

Talk:High-speed rail in Turkey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Explanation of edit

[edit]

I made this change [1] for two reasons - firstly to link to KTX-II rather than the link to a temporary article - when article "KTX-II" exists it will not then be necessary to change all the redirects to Korea Train Express#New Rolling Stock.

I put the images next to the relevent sections because 1. That's the general way to do things. 2 On some browsers the long list of images without breaks causes display problems.Shortfatlad (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

[edit]

[2] rational - HSR-350x is a korean prototype and seems unlikely to enter series production anywhere, also can't find any evidence for KTX-II being produced at EUROTEM plant, or that the train will be used in turkey, or is on order for turkey.

If anyone has the info please supply details. Thanks.Shortfatlad (talk) 19:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copvio

[edit]

[3] compare http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/world-infrastructure-market-august-2010.html

If the info is relavent it need to be rewritten.Sf5xeplus (talk) 20:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Plans for TCDD

[edit]

Greetings, the Ankara-Konya high speed train is now in active service since August 21 2011. We may have to modify the map accordingly.Citation (in Turkish): http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/18535829.aspFah112778 (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, I checked the TCDD (Turkish railways) and noticed they had an official .pdf file for High Speed Rail in Turkey. Here it is (5th page, red and green lines) http://www.tcdd.gov.tr/Upload/Files/BannerFiles/2023brosurmail.pdfFah112778 (talk) 18:23, 1 December 2011

File:TCDD HT65000 exterior-1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:TCDD HT65000 exterior-1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free file problems with File:TUVASAS-ROTEM HSR-350X.jpg

[edit]

File:TUVASAS-ROTEM HSR-350X.jpg is non-free and has been identified as possibly not being in compliance with the non-free content policy. For specific information on the problems with the file and how they can be fixed, please check the message at File:TUVASAS-ROTEM HSR-350X.jpg. For further questions and comments, please use the non-free content review page. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 10:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/ankara-istanbul/
    Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 20:56, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
RESULT
Failed GA, no response from nominator to issues raised

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:High-speed rail in Turkey/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Spinningspark (talk · contribs) 12:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


References
  • The external links tool is showing numerous deadlinks and connection problems in the references.
  • Further comment on referencing is not really possible until this is fixed.
Images
  • File:TCDD HT65000 high-speed train.jpg gives another commons image as the source. I think what you mean is this is a derivative work. It should be marked as such and the original linked. You can use Commons:Template:Derived from for this purpose if you wish.
  • The map is marked as "own work". More likely is that the map was created from a template map outline. If so, the image information should say so and link to the template image. If it is genuinely own work then the uploader should be able to state the database the map data came from and the application used to render the image.
Lead
  • "...started building high-speed rail lines...The first section of the line..." Contradiction over whether their is one line or many.
  • The last part of the lead starting at "The Marmary tunnel will..." needs copyediting for grammar and clarity.
  • Almost as much has been written on the Marmary project as on the rest of the high-speed network. Yet the Marmary project is only one small section in the article. This is completely out of balance. I suggest expanding the centre paragraph in to two paragraphs giving more detail of the individual lines and perhaps also mention the train sets, which have a section in the article, but are not mentioned in the lead.
  • The lead says construction started in 2003, but I am not seeing this date in the body of the article. Ideally it should be added to the body, but if not, a cite should be provided in the lead.
Ankara – Istanbul high-speed line
  • "The first high-speed railroad to be built in Turkey will connect the county's". It is not clear that the first line being spoken about is the Ankara–Istanbul line (except from the heading structure). It would be better to explicitly state that this is the Ankara–Istanbul line and move the information that this is the first high-speed line to the top of the section on the line.
  • "Sincan and İnönü, scheduled to open in 2006". We are now well past 2006 and this is under the title "Lines in operation". It should now be open so the article should say that. If it is trying to say the project was late, then say that explicitly. There seems to be numerous examples of this ambiguity in the article. The whole article needs checking for it, not just this one instance; there is another example in the very next paragraph. It looks to me as if the article needs thoroughly checking that the information is all up to date.
  • "not been completed yet by the time of opening". Not good English.
  • "the existing track between Ankara and Esenkent is used until..." For correct English replace "is" with "will be". Also, this needs merging with the following sentence so that they say something coherent and up-to-date.
  • "This section has been opened in 2010". Change "has been" > "was" (or you can say "has been open since 2010")
  • "First test runs in April 2007". This section is supposed to be open, so that is an ambiguous comment for the final sentence.
  • "Eskisehir station infrastructure works have already started". This is unsourced. The word "already" is superfluous and ambiguous and would be better replaced with the date work started.
  • "The Ankara to Eskişehir section officially opened on 13 March 2009". This contradicts the table that says the Sincan – Esenkent part was not opened until 2010.
  • "On 13 November 2009, a high-speed train derailed near Eskişehir." This is out of place in this section. Is it really relevant to the article at all?
  • "In addition to 11 sets of CAF used in Ankara-Eskişehir and Ankara-Konya routes, TCDD had bought 7 Siemens Velaro sets to be used in Ankara-İstanbul line which is planned to be open by the end of 2013." used in Ankara...routes > used in the Ankara...routes. TCDD had bought > TCDD has bought. "planned to be open by the end of 2013", it is now 2014, so what happened?
  • "to be supplied in 5 years". This is time sensitive; five years from when?
Ankara – Konya high-speed line
  • "212 km of new track is constructed". Should be "...was constructed".
  • " Phase 1 was the 100 km section and Phase 2 was the 112 km section". These sections have not previously been mentioned. Perhaps "a section" rather than "the section" would be better.
  • "same CAF trains" > "the same CAF trains"
  • TCDD should be given in full and linked on first mention.
  • 1 hour and 15 min journey time is stated twice. Once saying it is the journey time and once (uncited) saying it is now less but will be achieved in the future. The information should only be given once and should not be self-contradictory.
Lines under construction and planning phase
  • "...half of the budgeted investment has been done by 2013". Wrong tense and poor construction. Possibly "...half of the budgeted investment was spent by 2013". "...and is planned...", this would be better as a new sentence "The line is planned..."
  • "1 billion TL". The currency article should be linked to "TL".
  • "...in long term" > "...in the long term"
Ankara – Sivas – Kars high-speed lines
  • "Plans are revised due to that previous plans..." > "Plans were revised because previous plans..."
  • "Tender is completed in 2012." Wrong tense.
Ankara – İzmir high-speed line
  • "The travel will take 3 hours and 20 minutes." Odd construction
  • "The works are expected to start in 2012 until 2017" > "and last until 2017"
  • "The construction of line is planned in three phases" > "...the line..."
  • "Polatlı – Konya the 120 km mark". Does that mean "...to the 120 km mark"? Otherwise, I don't understand what it means.
  • "The line uses first 120 km." > "...the first...". The period after "km" should be removed
  • "8.000 Meters" (two places). We do not use the period separator on English Wikipedia (MOS:DIGITS). The article should be consistent in its number format, and other 4-digit numbers in the article have no separator. "Meters" should not be capitalized.
  • "will be tendered", capitalize sentence.
Lines in the approval phase
  • "Istanbul-Eskişehir section of Istanbul-Ankara high-speed line will utilized for Istanbul-Antalya high-speed line." > "The Istanbul-Eskişehir section of the Istanbul-Ankara high-speed line will be utilized for the Istanbul-Antalya high-speed line."
  • Konya – Antalya line, has the same problem as above, needs articles.
  • Diyarbakır – Trabzon line, needs to be written in complete sentences.
  • Future extension plans. Turn into a simple sentence, the colon is pointless in a list of one item.
High-speed train sets and production facilities
  • EUROTEM, what have the see alsos in this section got to do with Turkish railways? They seem pretty much irrelevant.
See also
  • Some of these entries are already linked in the article and should be removed from see also.
Notes
  • I don't really see the purpose of note 1. Why not make that the heading in the tables then there will be no need to force the reader to go to a note to understand what the table means.
  • Likewise, note 2 could probably be incorporated in the text somewhere and then the whole section can be dispensed with. SpinningSpark 12:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC) to 18:43, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

My copyedits

[edit]

Hi, good work by the contributing editors. I've run through it. Closed, not open en dashes for routes from–to (not from – to) – see dash un Wikimarkup "Insert:" first button under your edit box.

It does need a thorough run-through to improve the English, although it's not bad at the moment. TONY [[User talk:Tony1|(talk)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC) ]] 03:13, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on High-speed rail in Turkey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated section

[edit]

The "Design and construction" part of the "Ankara–İstanbul high-speed line" section refers in the future tense to a line which has been built. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.59.219.122 (talk) 11:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on High-speed rail in Turkey. 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) 14:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Engineering Section seems problematic

[edit]

The engineering section seems problematic. It states "All high-speed railways being constructed in Turkey are double tracked, electrified, without level crossing, having ETCS signalization and meeting ATS, ERTMS, ATMS, SICAS and ATP standards.[3]"

The reference [3] is to a document that is not available on-line, so it can't be confirmed.

Its states "being constructed". Does this therefore mean only new high-speed lines from now on? And if this does includes high-speed lines currently operational, does it mean "dedicated high-speed lines"? The Başkentray which is part of both the Ankara-Istanbul and the Ankara-Konya lines appears to be a multi-use line (high-speed, conventional and freight) with level crossings (https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide/transportation/press-release/turkish-state-railways-modernise-36-kilometre-section-through) and, after the Marşandiz Accident, has been shown to definitely not have an ETCS standard signalling system.

Also, "ETCS signalization and meeting ATS, ERTMS, ATMS, SICAS and ATP standards" doesn't mean much. The ETCS is the signalling and control component of the ERTMS. You could describe both as being Standards, to which the signalling system is built. The ETCS includes ATP and ATS which are not standards; the ERTMS is a type of ATMS which is not a standard; and SICAS appears to be a Siemens product.

157.167.65.180 (talk) 14:15, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Yüksek Hızlı Tren

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was no consensus. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge Yüksek Hızlı Tren into here as there is so much overlap. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly support I proposed this a while back but didnt get the merger through. They should be merged, absolutely. --Central Data Bank (talk) 17:33, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Central Data Bank Is it possible to add here a link to your earlier proposal? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was a while ago, I dont even remember where it is anymore. Central Data Bank (talk) 21:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. "High-speed rail in Turkey" article focuses on infrastructure, while the "Yüksek Hızlı Tren" article focuses on operations. Despite their similarities, I think it would be more accurate to keep them as separate articles. --bluetime93 💬 20:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since YHT is the only high-speed rail service in Turkey, it would be fine to add more infrastructure information to its page. If Turkey had multiple high-speed operators (like the UK or France) I would say to keep them separate. But all the info on "High-speed rail in Turkey" can be displayed on the YHT page as well.
Central Data Bank (talk) 21:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluetime93 A while ago you said "not sure" - could you please consider whether you now support or oppose and let me know? Chidgk1 (talk) 13:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Although it is the only service in Turkey, I think it would be better to keep it separate from a technical point of view. -- bluetime93 💬 14:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I highly support the merge, since everything on this page can be included within the YHT page - even the technical aspects. Also falls into line with WP:Merging criteria of duplicate and overlap. Until a second high-speed rail operator begins in Turkey, the two pages are just overlaps. Cheers. Central Data Bank (talk) 10:13, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy to split it again in future if another high speed rail operator starts - but as far as I know that is not likely in the next few years. If anyone knows otherwise please let us know. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So does that mean you oppose the merge or are there other points of view you have (for example prospective rail tourist point of view)? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:11, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
By the way I have attempted to get more people to comment by asking at the projects but no success so far Chidgk1 (talk) 05:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Misleading 2nd sentence?

[edit]

"TCDD has branded its high-speed service as Yüksek Hızlı Tren (YHT) which currently operates on three lines" might make the readers think that YHT is operated by TCDD wheras it is operated by TCDD Taşımacılık.

Or they might get the impression that TCDD Taşımacılık is a subsidiary of TCDD which as far as I know it is not.

Any ideas for improving the sentence and also maybe adding clarifying hatnotes to this article and the Yüksek Hızlı Tren article? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should we use excerpts? Move some text?

[edit]

To reduce duplication between this article and Yüksek Hızlı Tren should there be excerpts? If so what?

Also should some text be moved between articles - for example the sections on "Operation and rolling stock" and "High-speed train sets and production facilities" should maybe be moved from here to there.

And maybe the sections "Lines under construction", "Lines under planning" and "Related infrastructure projects" should be moved from there to here? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

YHT should focus on the trainsets used and service provided (number of trains, frequency, stations etc...) while High-speed rail in Turkey should focus more on the history of high-speed rail as a whole as well as the physical infrastructure and routes. I have begun to improve YHT here (WIP and no where near finished) It will take me several days at least. (Central Data Bank (talk) 14:25, 31 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]
Ah I just made a change to YHT before I read this - hope you can keep it. I will not make any more changes to YHT for the moment. Unlikely others will, but just in case you might like to place the ‘in use’ tag and perhaps link to your draft from the article talk page. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds good. But do you know who decides the high-speed routes and how they decide them? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:27, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Yüksek Hızlı Tren (2nd proposal)

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was not to merge. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see above I proposed this a year ago and only 2 other editors commented, with @Central Data Bank strongly supporting and @Bluetime93 saying “Although it is the only service in Turkey, I think it would be better to keep it separate from a technical point of view.” I presume Bluetime93 was referring to a Wikipedia technical point of view. Although I don’t know that anything has changed from that angle I wonder whether the benefits of merging might outweigh that.

Over the past year some different people have edited the articles, so I have notified them in the hope of getting more opinions.

I think a minor benefit would be to get rid of the “Yüksek Hizlı Tren” title, which must be meaningless to most enwiki readers new to the subject. The major benefit would be to reduce duplication and thus make the info easier to read and keep up to date. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support keeping them separate: Yüksek Hızlı Tren is the branded name of the service, just like TGV in France and Acela in the US. So I would support this merge ONLY if High-speed rail in Turkey is merged into Yüksek Hızlı Tren. However, moving Yüksek Hızlı Tren to YHT would be another option I would support, as to make it more uniform with other english wikipedia articles about non-english train names. Not to mention YHT seems to be the more common name for Yüksek Hızlı Tren services in Turkey. However, Yüksek Hızlı Tren MUST stay under its own name or under its abbreviation, YHT. However I would also agree with @Bluetime93 in that High-speed rail covers more of Turkish highs-peed rail than is relevant to YHT (for example, pre-YHT high-speed rail attempts, including higher-speed turkish rail in the 1990s and early 2000s). So my decision will be leave both articles as they are. (Central Data Bank (talk) 11:50, 31 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]
@Central Data Bank In that case could you possibly comment at the above two talk page sections? Also I have no objection to you renaming Yüksek Hızlı Tren.Chidgk1 (talk) 14:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support keeping them separate. If my comments in the Talk:Turkish State Railways Transport#Merge proposal" discussion are taken into account, I believe the articles should remain separate due to the distinction between infrastructure and operations. However, if a decision is made to merge the articles, it would be more appropriate to prioritize the High-speed rail in Turkey article, even though it is technically incompatible. --bluetime93 💬 12:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bluetime93 In that case could you possibly comment at the above two talk page sections? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge per arguments above. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 14:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@XtraJovial In that case could you possibly comment at the above two talk page sections? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:High-speed_rail_in_Turkey&oldid=1259579496"