Jump to content

Talk:Mountain railways of India

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMountain railways of India has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 3, 2010Good article nomineeListed
June 8, 2017Good article reassessmentKept
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 6, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that three of the five sites of Mountain Railways of India (pictured) are included in the UNESCO World Heritage List?
Current status: Good article

Requested move 11 September 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved, without any prejudice for future discussion. —usernamekiran(talk) 15:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Mountain railways of IndiaMountain railways in India – Should use "in" not "of". Please see the category name, Category:Mountain railways in India168.233.220.6 (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As the article stands now, perhaps, although IMS more sources used "of" even before the UN designation. Once the pre-partition railroads are added, it will make far less sense. Anmccaff (talk) 22:21, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
...and? This is about the railroads, which existed well before UNESCO was a bad dream. This strikes me as an argument in favor of change, to avoid that particular confusion. Anmccaff (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.