User talk:Willsmith3

Réseau Guerlédan

I found a reference which may gives some credence to the mayor story, but does not state it as fact. Have added it to the article. Mjroots (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added in the locomotives, but need a bit of local knowledge re the names now carried by Jubilee and France. Could you take a look please? Mjroots (talk) 06:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Another query - Are you sure all four locos ran on the Réseau Guerlédan? According the the Fairbourne Railway's [website only two came from the RG. Mjroots (talk) 06:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

No - all four steam locos were built for it, BUT it was only France and Jubilee that ran on the line -the others never shipped there from the UK!- There was a galloping gose railcar (see Fairbourne Article) and a small shunting engine called Odd Job Willsmith3 (talk) 08:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Trains

Hello and welcome to the Trains WikiProject! Thank you for adding your name to our project membership list. Our goal is to build the most comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. As a project member, you may add the project membership userbox to your user page if you wish.

If you haven't done so already, please add our main project page to your watchlist and take some time to review the Trains project manual of style where we have collected guidelines and suggestions on notability and style for a consistent representation of rail transport related material. If you're curious about where to start, we've gathered a few suggestions in the Trains project to do list. If you'd like to specialize in a particular area of study within rail transport, take a look at the current Trains project task forces.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the project talk page or on my talk page. Again, welcome and happy editing! Slambo (Speak) 16:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Will, I see that you are busy updating assessments. Could I ask a favour on future assessments? If you just add an importance=, such as "importance=low", it only goes into the WP Trains assessment; the UK Trains project remains unassessed for importance. What is needed is, for example, an "importance=low" and an "UK-importance=low". Mid, High, etc, could also be used when appropriate; and the UK-importance could be different to the WPTrains importance, e.g. something might have greater (or lesser) importance to us in the UK than world-wide. (Only one class is needed). Thanks.Pyrotec (talk) 18:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries - assessing for both now  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 18:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Skarloey Railway

Hi Will, I noticed you'd added the Category:Talyllyn Railway to the Skarloey Railway article. Could I argue the case for not doing that? I think the category should be kept for articles about the real railway. There's a real danger of conflating the fictional world with the real one, that I think we should avoid. Of course this is not a big deal either way, just wanted to give you my own thoughts on the matter. Thanks again for all your help on the Talyllyn Railway articles. Best, Gwernol 17:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem - edit reverted Willsmith3 (talk) 17:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The links to the locomotive articles make a lot of sense to me. Best, Gwernol 18:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Talyllyn Railway rolling stock

I don't know if you're watching the page, but I've been improving it slowly, and hope to take it to peer review soon, with a view of nominating it for featured list status. Could you have a look and see if you have any comments? —  Tivedshambo  _{(t/c) (logged on as Pek)} 10:47, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Vale of Rheidol Railway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Single track (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Great Whipsnade Railway: Conqueror

You will be able to restore the change yourself when you can source it. Britmax (talk) 14:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Locomotives of the Vale of Rheidol Railway

Thank you for your recent edits to the page Locomotives of the Vale of Rheidol Railway. However, it is best NOT to delete references, as the Wikipedia project is very dependent upon them. If you find that a reference link no longer works, the top option is to replace it with a working reference. If you are unable to do so, you can mark the reference as a "dead link" and someone else will come along when they can and find a replacement. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 18:35, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I am working on it! I am very conscious that some of the information on pages relating to the Vale of Rheidol needs improvements to the referencing and have at my disposal a wealth of rescources to do this. I am committed to improving the quality of all wikipedia articles about the Vale of Rheidol Railway and aspire to get them up to the best quality standard. Some of the references in this particular article were linking to pages on the Vale of Rheidol website which no longer exist.  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 19:10, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Rheidol (locomotive)

I've expanded the article by adding information from Ted Wade's book on the Plynlimon and Hafan. I think it's a good contender for WP:DYK, possibly "Did you know that... a narrow gauge locomotive was regauged and renamed twice between 1899 and 1903, before finally being named Rheidol." Is there anything else you can add before I nominate it? Nominations must be made within 7 days of the article being created, i.e. on or before Sunday afternoon.

Incidentally, a group of us are planning to travel on the VoR on Saturday morning if you're around. Optimist on the run (talk) 20:10, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for that - it is useful article now. I think it is an excellent candidate for DYK. I plan to split the Davies and Metcalfe Rheidol tanks onto their own article soon.

Afraid I won't be around myself on Saturday but hope you enjoy your visit.  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 18:23, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I've nominated it, but gone for a completely different hook that isn't so technical and will hopefully be more interesting to the average reader. See Template:Did you know nominations/Rheidol (locomotive). Now it's just a case of waiting for someone to review it. Optimist on the run (talk) 18:11, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Great stuff! Thanks. Ask for me at the Booking Office on Saturday - There is a chance I may be in.  Willsmith3  _(Talk) 19:13, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rheidol (locomotive)

On 8 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rheidol (locomotive), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Rheidol, a former locomotive on the Vale of Rheidol Railway in Wales, was originally called Treze de Maoi, after the date that slavery was abolished in Brazil? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rheidol (locomotive). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Rheidol (locomotive)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of Fairbourne Railway rolling stock

The article List of Fairbourne Railway rolling stock has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unsourced and most is likely to be original research. IMO completely fails notability guidelines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2022 (UTC)