This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Maurice Oly, could you please explain why you have removed the volume and issue data from at least two cites, and then demanded a full citation? They were full citations before you stripped out that data. Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 03:19, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My bad should have left invisible comments. The reason is simple, Modern Railways was first published in 1962 so so the 2010s issue numbers can't have been in single figures, that and Modern Railways does not come in volumes. Maurice Oly (talk) 12:53, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maurice Oly ....Except that the ones you removed the information from was Railways Illustrated, not Modern Railways, so the data is correct. Also the dates need to have the 2011b, or 2011a when they are used with the Short Footnotes citation style, so the anchor for those cites does not get confused. Please self-revert. Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Woops I ment Railways Illustrated not Modern Railways my bad should have checked which magazine it was. With this information corrected I will not be self reverting. Maurice Oly (talk) 14:06, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maurice Oly This is getting tiresome. Railways lllustrated was founded in 2003. I have the copies. The volume and issue data are correct.....and I am sorry, but Modern Railways does come in Volumes. Page 98 of the May 2023 issue states volume 80, issue 896. Sorry. The joy of all things (talk) 15:06, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I known Modern Railways comes in volumes, but Railways Illustrated does not, and I edited No Modern Railways on this article. All the cites I changed were from Railways Illustrated. Anyway I've left invisible comments to explain the problem.Maurice Oly (talk) 15:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maurice Oly STOP, STOP STOP! Look at the ref section on the article? See all those red error messages, that's because you removed the date format 2011b from the dates. Please read carefully and absorb the information:
When you have two articles by the same author and in the same year, then you need to put in dates as |date=2011a or |date=2011b and so on as the anchor for those citations runs via the author and the date. So Paul Shannon did several different articles in 2009, 2010 etc, and the Short Footnotes anchor produces a cite error if the date is not disambiguated. Which is why you annotate a date with a letter to allow the wiki to see the difference between the two.
I wrote the article - I have the exact cites for those articles. Railways Illustrated had a volume parameter at least up until 2020. The March 2020 issue of Railways Illustrated states its volume to be 18 and the issue number to be 3. This makes absolute sense - Railways Illustrated was founded in 2003, so Volume 1 was 2003, Volume 2 was 2004, 3-2005, 4-2006, 5-2007, 6-2008, 7-2009, 8-2010, 9-2011, 10-2012, 11-2013, 12-2014, 13-2015, 14-2016, 15,2017, 16-2018, 17-2019, 18-2020.
Please look at this and realise you are damaging the article by not taking in what I am saying to you. I apologise if I am wording it wrong, but you are creating a mess - please stop. Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh Railways Illustrated used to have a volume number? I've only been buying it since 2021 so I had no idea that was the case my bad. I understand what your saying and I'll stop. Maurice Oly (talk) 16:13, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
