Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Transport

Good article reassessment for Calais

Calais has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Naming of ferry articles

I see very common use of initials such as MV, MS, DEV, SS in the names of articles about ferries. Historically these were commonly used but is this consistently applied for modern operating vessels? I see from Ship prefix that it's probably outdated. I'm keen on tidying up naming of NZ ferry articles DEV Aratere, MS Kaiarahi, MV Kaitaki, MS Strait Feronia, MV Connemara, MV Livia and MS Kaiarahi. Was going to suggest the articles get named <ferry operator> <name of vessel>. Quilt Phase (talk) 05:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

• The articles are at their correct titles. For reasons explained at WT:SHIPS. Mjroots (talk) 17:47, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (stations) has an RfC

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (stations) has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Tomiĉo (talk) 10:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:California Department of Transportation#Requested move 12 August 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:California Department of Transportation#Requested move 12 August 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:40, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Dscussion about MOS:COLORand how it applies to maps

There is a discussion about MOS:COLOR and how it applies to maps within WP at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Should_MOS:COLOR_be_updated_to_clarify_if_and_when_color_hues_may_be_used_to_convey_information_in_maps? Noleander (talk) 14:10, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Ridership data centralization

I was wondering if there's a way to centralize ridership data so it only has to be updated at a single point instead of page-by-page. For example, is there a way to pull specific data (current ridership numbers) from List of Washington Metro stations to each individual station? Could also enable better usage of historic data and more dynamic stuff like in-system per station rankings Jspace727 (talk) 12:36, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Metrorail (Miami-Dade County)

Metrorail (Miami-Dade County) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Merge pedelec into electric bicycle?

One person has commented for and one against. I would like to close the discussion so it would be great if one of you could comment at Talk:Electric bicycle#Merge pedelec into this article? soon thanks Chidgk1 (talk) 05:00, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Freelance model

This has been unsourced for a decade 19 years. One of the creators has been blocked. I tried to find relevant sources and I could only locate two that didn't involve fashion models. Before I propose it for deletion, I'd like to know if you can add reliable sources. Thank you in advance. Bearian (talk) 22:47, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

I don't see any point in the article. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:17, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more! Mwsmith20 (talk) 10:29, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Freelance model

The article Freelance model has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced for 19 years. Very few relevant sources show up on BEFORE searches.

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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 10:34, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Discussion about WikiProject banner templates

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

• "This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale."

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say "priority" instead of "importance". This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower ^{Huddle • Handiwerk} 19:51, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)

Good article nominee - Te Waihorotiu railway station

I have nominated Te Waihorotiu railway station for good article status. If anyone has a chance, could you please consider reviewing it? Thank you. DDMS123 (talk) 06:58, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Update: It's currently being reviewed. DDMS123 (talk) 00:15, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Transport-related Wikidata items - relations with outdoors activities

With a group of OpenStreetMap contributors concerned with outdoors activities (hiking, cycling, mountain biking, climbing, etc) we try to maintain cross-references with Wikidata, starting with routes, with route networks and with route operators. We hit a lot of consistency issues in the related items in Wikidata, and also in the transport-related items. Concepts such as routes or networks should arguably be usable in both domains, but they currently cannot. We have reached out to WikiProject Ontology and they are giving good advice, but some modifications would impact Transport articles. For instance, Q61509 (travel) seems to conflate the general action of moving around (including outdoors sports) with the more specific action of going places (including tourism). We'd need the former to be "higher up in the concept hierarchy", probably with transport being one of possible means, so that route and network can be defined for any kind of travel/déplacement/Fortbewegung/desplazamiento, and that travel/voyage/Reise/viaje stays where it is now. That would allow things like "Cultural Routes of the European Council" to be defined as a collection of routes that is not specific to a transportation means. There are quite a few wikidata items that have similar ontological issues. Any thoughts on this? How could we address this without breaking too much stuff? StC (talk) 17:32, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

RDTs vs system map images

Jinan Metro in China has both a static route map, which is detailed and comprehensive, and a RDT template, which is a bit of a technical tour de force but severely distorts the network. The same applies to Jinan SkyShuttle.

I think there's room for both in the articles, but Useddenim (talk · contribs) keeps removing the static map entirely in favor of the RDT only. What's the consensus here? Asamboi (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Pure opinion on my part: RDTs have always been a bit of a joke because they're completely unreadable. When they're small enough to be useful they're okay, albeit largely redundant to a static map and a few links, but anything with more than two short lines is, indeed, a technical tour de force that severely distorts the network. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 03:37, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Herman Melville

Herman Melville has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Pakenham line

Pakenham line has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:28, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:GreenWay § Requested move 5 January 2026

An editor has requested that GreenWay be moved to GreenWay (Sydney), which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. Qwerty123M (talk) 11:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:GreenWay#Requested move 5 January 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:GreenWay#Requested move 5 January 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 06:45, 6 January 2026 (UTC)