Wikipedia

Talk:List of railway accidents and incidents in India

(Redirected from Talk:Uttar Pradesh train accidents)
Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of Indian rail accidents. 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) 07:21, 18 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

July 2017 copy edit

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

In my copy edit, I tried to keep list entries concise and in a consistent format. A couple notes:

  • As with most articles, facts should be reported in the past tense.
  • en dashes are used for separation (or disjunction), see MOS:NDASH
  • With a Mumbai–Bangalore train, you don't have to also say it was travelling from Mumbai to Bangalore. That's indicated by the en-dash in Mumbai–Bangalore.
  • I didn't think it was necessary to have yearly sections from the 1980s, and reorganized with sections for groups of approximately 15 entries for manageability. I left the 2010s as they're still being added.
  • If the entry had its own article, I put that at the front of the entry, without piping, to make it easier to recognize and to aid in navigation.
  • Be careful of WP:OVERLINKING. It's largely unnecessary to link or even mention India since that can be assumed from the context of the article. Otherwise, just provide links the reader is likely to follow, such as links to more specific articles.
  • Be mindful of tone. Wikipedia's voice shouldn't say something is lucky or unfortunate or ironic; such would not be encyclopedic tone. Just state the facts from reliable sources, and let the reader make their own determination. For similar reasons, I changed rammed to collided as the former could be taken to mean it was intentional.
  • I linked a lot of trains where I could find them, and added a few incidents that had their own articles. There are also some at List of level crossing crashes#India but they are unsourced.

There are probably two main issues in this article:

  1. Lack of references and/or footnotes. It looks like the three entries in External links are actually sources which cover multiple list entries. It may need to be reorganized, with them moved into a "Sources" section and then adding refs which point to them with page notes. I marked unsourced entries which did not have their own article with.[citation needed]
  2. Inclusion of list entries. With a list of this scope, covering accidents on the world's 4th-largest rail network over a period of more than 150 years, it might not be worthwhile to list every single accident. I would suggest listing only notable accidents, those which have or could have their own articles. Or perhaps accidents resulting in 10 or more deaths. It would be good to agree on a standard for inclusion, and state it in the lead of the article. I marked several of the accidents having no reported casualties with.[relevant?]
  3. Of lesser importance, I felt some of the entries could have been a little more specific. Instead of simply saying there was a "train accident" it would be good to mention if the accident was a derailment, a collision, a fire, bombing, or something else. I marked some of these with.[specify]

Definitely a worthy list, but needs a little work to bring it up to standards for verifiability and notability of list entries. – Reidgreg (talk) 22:24, 10 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

I share the concerns you have put out. One way to overcome it is to have a table/last paragraph before the contents in the main page, outlining the standardization used throughout the article.
  1. I support creating a separate 'Sources' section. Many of the current references are unorganized. In fact, the first link under the external links (or the source from where it is derived) is a lot more reliable than many of the references.
  2. This is the exact point that I had issues with, an year ago. Random unverified editors adding new incidents that were insignificant to be called a train disaster. Though I agree on 10 as the minimum fatalities as an inclusion criteria, we might disagree on what can be deemed 'notability'— an explosion that significantly damages the structure of the train but somehow causes extremely low fatalities or only non-fatal injuries or a combination of both.
  3. Agree. An ideal way to organize the incidents would be a tabular format, similar to the list of air disasters. But then again it would be problematic to new editors who're not well-versed with scripts.

Cheers. Vignyanatalk 16:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure why we are collecting so many incidents that fail WP:NLIST. Do we even require the article? Capitals00 (talk) 12:26, 13 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Adding Reidgreg here. Hi Capitals00, every major country has a list of its own (List of rail accidents by country). It's up to the editors to understand WP:N and make additions to the list after an incident. That's where we need a set paramerer on the casualties so that editors can know whether an incident merits a place on the list. Mark the trainDiscuss 13:54, 21 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Nothing new to add from my earlier comments; I still think it's a good list to have. The inclusion criteria should be stated in the lead per WP:LEADFORALIST. I probably didn't want to unilaterally set those conditions myself so left it for editors of the article to decide. It should probably be an "or" situation – 10 deaths or [other notability threshold]. If an accident has its own article, it should be on this list. Another way to try to inform new editors about meeting inclusion criteria would be to put it in an editnotice which will appear as a pink text box above the edit window. Hope this is of some help. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:27, 21 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

References added

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hi All, I have added these (compiled) sources to support several accidents lacking citations.

Cheers. Mark the trainDiscuss 16:40, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Also included Chronology of major rail accidents Mark the trainDiscuss 16:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Indian rail accidents. 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) 17:08, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_railway_accidents_and_incidents_in_India&oldid=1239170622"