Talk:NJ Transit Rail Operations

message: The figure of 954 miles is way too high. This sounds like track-miles, not route-miles. Ldemery 22:06, 23 May 2006 
This older Railway Age article cites NJT's route mileage as 471.3. 71.241.104.97 06:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  954 miles way too high 

message: There are plans for a new NYC- Atlantic City direct line.  It will presumably use existing track.  Trackage exists, running northeast to southwest from the vicinity of Old Bridge to Hammonton in northern Atlantic County. Dogru144 00:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Existing right of way foundation for new Atlantic City line

message: Does anyone know enough about fare zones/ticketing to write a section on it?  I know, for example, that you can take a 10 zone monthly from one line and use it on another.  What about if your ticket is to Newark Penn or Hoboken and you want to go to NYP.  How does passing through the fare gates work?Tvh2k 15:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fare Zones

message: NJT is going to be using GE P40BH locomotives for the Atlantic City Express service. These locomotives are being leased from Amtrak. It is possible that they will end up operating on other NJT lines as well. They should not be added to the roster here until NJT decides what NJT numbers they will wear. Ken S. 15:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Electric P40 Locomotives 

message: http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/media-centre/press-releases/details?docID=0901260d80040301
if anyone want's to update the page with this, go ahead. since i don't have the time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fan Railer (talk • contribs) 19:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Dual mode electric locos on order! 

message: I wouldn't add this to the article. Sorry.
There's really no reason to include every closed station that is on the currently active lines, as that is of way too limited interest for a general-interest encyclopedia. They're noted on the individual line templates, like the one here, so they don't need to be on the general map, which is more likely to be looked at by a someone just trying to get the basic overview than by a railfan who'd want to know those things. In other words, there's too much potential for confusion.
Also, while I can appreciate the addition of proposed extensions to the map, all of the ones you included are years away from completion. There's far too much chance for things to change, adding them now would only serve to confuse the general interest reader. (see also WP:CRYSTALBALL) Also, the line work on them is a bit shoddy, especially when expanded fully, and are likely not to geographically-accurate scale, the same as the rest of the map, which was created by tracing a geological survey map. As the geographical accuracy is stated in the map key, it must be maintained. 
So, in short, while a good project, it's not the right map for wikipedia's present-day general interest crowd. Therefore, I've reverted to the previous version of the map.oknazevad (talk) 03:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  September 2009 map updates 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:ALP-44 IMG 1573.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:NJT Arrows III ALP-44.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:NJT PL42AC.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: It would be helpful to have some overview, either in map or text form, of which portions of the system are above vs. below ground (or diesel vs. electric, for that matter, if different). -- Beland (talk) 03:57, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Below/above ground? 

message: Evidently a screen cap of an episode of the ABC Family Channel series Switched at Birth contains a New Jersey Transit caboose. Why isn't this noted among the rolling stock? -------User:DanTD (talk)  02:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolling stock; Cabooses too? 

message: This isn't the greatest map, the text is pretty fuzzy. Is there another version that is free that is available? Liz Read! Talk! 15:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The map is actually an SVG (Scaled Vector Graphics) file, which can be scaled to any size without loss of image quality (unlike photographs, which get pixelated at too-large sizes). However, the map doesn't render perfectly well at 300px wide in an infobox - no map of a system of this complexity will. I spent a while making sure this map is readable at all at 300 pixels wide - the old map was not. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NJT Map 

message: The Passenger Cars table has a 'totals' column that breaks down the exact number of cars. The same should be done for the Locomotives, especially since the Notes section indicates that not all of each type are in service. I do not want to edit the article because I am unaware of the exact number of locomotives in service.Grand Fenwick (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  A 'totals' column should be added for Locomotives table 

message: What is the electrification? Catenary (at what volt) only, or third rail as well? Peter Horn User talk 19:11, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I found the answer in ALP-46. Peter Horn User talk 19:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the electrification