Talk:List of UK tram systems

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Trams, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of trams and tramways around the United Kingdom. For more information, visit the project page, or sign up here and contribute to one of the many articles within this project's scope.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. [FAQ]
Redirect	This article is on a subject of redirect-importance within WikiProject UK Trams.

[edit] Speedy Deletion - KEEP ME!!!

Why is this any better than Category:Tram_transport_in_the_United_Kingdom ?? - I'm proposing this article for speedy deletion. Ivansanchez 12:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying that it is. But, it still needs to be expanded, and will have things that that page does not. It will have all tram systems etc on it, including historical ones etc. And, when I get round to it, it will also explain about UK Tram Systems and stuff. It is maintained by WP:UK Trams also. This WP is relatively new, so please give the project time to expand and let other editors edit it before deleting it - it will return if that happens. Bluegoblin7 12:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The category page will have all tram systems, as long as they are categorized. There is a full lists-vs-categories discussion on WP:LIST. And there is already a category for trams in the UK, so I see no reason for this list.

Also, please don't make self-references to WP:UK Trams in the article. Looks bad.

If you're going to edit the list to include a full list of trams (even those with no articel yet), it's OK; but I still think that the category is enough. Anyway, I'll be waiting for any other wikipedian to give another opinions before doing enything. Ivansanchez 12:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

speedy delete. I agree with Ivansanchez, this rticle duplicates information on List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom and Category:Tram transport in the United Kingdom. The idea is good but it is has simply already been done; there is no need for duplication. Ivansanchez mentions List v categories debate, this case shouldn't be argued since we are blessed with both a list and a category: hurrah. This case is clear.Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 13:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I might have known you'd say something here.Ok then, we can expand the other ones, but, would anybody mind if I edited the list to make it clearer? I expect somone would. The current list is incomplete, and unclear.But, if we must, we must. And, the category is just a category, with other stuff shoved inside it. It is not just what we need it for. And if you haven't bothered to look, this page corresponds with the navigation template, just for trams, to replace the metro one, which, as said elsewhere, is unsuitable. Bluegoblin7 13:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If you are going to make assumptions on my behaviour i will have to consider those personal attacks if you continue. If you do I'll have to refer you to have someone tell you it's not very nice to do so. I've already told you I'm here to do your head in but that doesn't quite come across as well as: I'm not here to do you head in. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Hang about - I was busy writing this when you all chipped-in.

Everyone so far has missed something very significant - read on...

I was going to say keep since it would provide a (missing) list of historical UK tramways, until I found List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom which highlights how many historical tramway systems in the UK have no presence in WP.

Now I am going to vote Keep for two further reasons:

1. the category contains a mixture of current and historical systems, and it is by no means clear which is which.
2. the parent article for the category is missing, namely Tram transport in the United Kingdom, so this page should be renamed accordingly, and expanded to cover the history of tram transport in the UK, historical systems, their reasons for demisement, heritage systems, and the resurgence of modern systems in the late 20th century.

Very definitely a rename and keep!

EdJogg 13:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Not all categories need an article to go with. Rename and keep a list into an article is ludicrus... why not rename articles to categories, templates to categories and wotnot. The article as it stands is a clear duplication (in good faith) but a duplication non-the-less. What are we judging here? things to be or the article as it stands? Let's be clear, the speedy deletion is about deleting a duplicate article.

I agree with the part about categories:It is exactly what I was trying to get at. Secondly, I agree with the second reason, because, as I said, I may rename and expand it. If anymore people decide whether or not they want to keep it (or not) I will rename it and expand it as per your guidelines but also with the information I wished to get across. Bluegoblin7 13:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

EdJogg supports the maintaining of the article but he did give you a couple of pointers on your talk page. You seem very keen, which is great but calming down and looking at what already exists might avoid situations like these. Whether this article is deleted or not, we're in the situation where a page you've created is under threat (been there, done that). Along with UKT stub type it seems you have problem with guidelines and format. That's fine, we've all been there. If you are so keen you could work toward contributing to articles first then trying to gather them under one umbrella-ella-ella heh heh. you've got it wrong BlueGoblin; look at my created articles and contributions list: I like trams. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

If you look, the stub category actually has OVER 60 stubs that it can use. I don't have a problem with guidlines and format, and I could regard that as a personal attack, and I new what already existed. And I felt that a new article would be complimentary to, or a replacement of, the current ones. I have contributed to many articles, both as a user (Bluegoblin7 not BlueGoblin) and as a non-user. Just because my edit history says one thing, doesn't mean I've done it. And, just because you've created articles, it doesn't make you king of the tram world. And, I don't see how you can say i'm personally attacking you. You've offended me. And, if you look closely, you'll see that it's no longer a speedy deletion. And, I thought i read on your user page that you only made changes etc to pages, not things such as this, because Wikipedia isn't what it used to be. Point made. Bluegoblin7 14:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[Edit conflict] Pleeeese don't wind him up any further! (Applies to BOTH of you!!)

I agree with many of your points, Captain S: renaming AND changing the content is a bit silly - would be best to let this article go and start again. Nevertheless, the page I identified would be useful to WP as there is currently no appropriate page for providing an overview of Tramway systems in the UK. This new page should NOT be a list; although it may contain some short lists within, it should be predominantly prose. (Perhaps BG can concentrate his attentions on creating that page instead of trying to save this one?)

EdJogg 14:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I will start the other page, AND revamp the page with all the tram systems on it:It can be both laid out better, and more information can be added. What does Cpt. S think? Is this 'acceptable'? Bluegoblin7 15:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that under these conditions, dialogue is no longer possible Bluegoblin. I offend you, you do not understand the words I type then communication is impossible which clearly pass over your head as do the words of others on this page. My vote is cast: delete this article. 'Acceptable' is the deletion of this poorly edited duplicate list. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I do understand things that are said, and they don't pass over my head. I have every right to disagree do I not? If a reasonable alternative was come up with, as I feel EdJogg's is, then should it not be better to proceed with it? Not coming to a solution will simply leave us where we are at the moment, and that would never do. Bluegoblin7 10:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Your previous comments clearly show the opposite, that you are replying out of sentiment rather than strict impartial application of rules. This is shown by the fact that your replies are fuelled by the offence I've caused you. What is said is said, for further information read the above. I've formulated my vote which represents one solution. If you can't make a decision this article will be flagged delete with reason being (poor) duplicate of List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories and lists

There has often been a discussion on "there is a catgeory, why do we need a list" and vice versa on Wikipedia. The discussion has almost always resolved itself so far as "Both may co-exist because they perform different functions".

Since we are an encyclopaedia we are duty bound to create the best possible access paths to articles. One such path is the category, another such path is a well constructed list.

Lists are also capable of expansion of the information contained in them whereas categories are not.

I have removed the {{prod}} because I see that value in this list in addition to the category. Fiddle Faddle 16:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

What about the PROD notice not referring to a category but to both List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom and Category:Tram transport in the United Kingdom; original list and category? They both coexist fine at the moment. This list has no value in addition to List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom and Category:Tram transport in the United Kingdom. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 18:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Then I suggest you submit each of them to AfD and see what the community as a whole says. Let me know on my talk page of you do this, please. I will consider each such proposal on its own merits at the time. Cogent and coherent argument is more important than a statement "This list has no value in addition to...". Stating something does not make it so. Considering it and arguing for or against it does not make it so either, but it allows proper discussion and formation of opinion. However, surely the creation of a resource is better than the destruction. Perhaps it will meet your aspirations for Wikipedia better to enhance the article to ensure that it has the value that you do not, yet, appear to perceive it to have. Fiddle Faddle 20:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I have little issues List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom and Category:Tram transport in the United Kingdom. should you read me, you'll see it is List of Tram Systems I feel should be deleted. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 21:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Another approach is to merge, of course. It seems to me that would be a more reasonable option. If you feel strongly about it be bold and do it. Fiddle Faddle 20:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I will not be bold. Why? Because someone will put back where I'm sat and revert me, so are the ways of Wikipedia, we'll go through the lengthy procedure of agreeing before action is performed so no one screws around, including me. There is no reason to merge since List of Tram Systems possesses no exclusive nor unique information that is not already present on List of town tramway systems in the United Kingdom. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 21:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Blanking of this page...

The page has been redirected, making this page obsolete? Bluegoblin7 10:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

It is a history of what happened here. Convention is to leave it as a record. Fiddle Faddle 11:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah. Ok. I wasn't sure! Sorry, and thanks! Bluegoblin7 11:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

We all get better at this as time passes. Your idea was good, it was just not what is usual. Fiddle Faddle 11:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure I will. Thanks! Bluegoblin7 12:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Slightly off topic - can you help with anything on the WP:UK Trams to do list? Thanks, Bluegoblin7 12:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)