Talk:R68 (New York City Subway car)

message: I tried repeatedly to engage the editor in discussion. failing that, I investigated his contribution history, which led me to file a sockpuppet report, which has since been borne out, nad the editor, and numerous socks, are now banned. This may not fix the page forever, but it should make delaing with this stuff easier. That said, I would be fo the betterment of this page to work out a proper History section, with citations. Reliance on the 'If you add it, you cite it' excuse got this mess going, as I've stated. A little effort from involved editors could avoid this entire mess. Use the cites I found at the bottom. Find more. But fix this so that it doesn't keep happening, and all involved will be happier. ThuranX 23:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Resolution

message: Not all meet WP:RS, but may be good for backgrounds and jumping points for clearer research, the first, while thoroughly outside WP:RS, is a good first person account of rail history for at least the period in question:
*http://members.aol.com/bdmnqr2/carhistory.html
*http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1215/is_6_205/ai_n6134826
*http://www.nycsubway.org/articles/history-nycta1980s.html
That's three articles in about 10 minutes, not counting the sidetracking i got on about the Shimabara rebellion from this article, , which highlights the need for citation, because peopel are watching. ThuranX 01:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: sources

message: Are Ying Dor and Ying Dor 2 socks of Carlton? If not both, is one an illegal impersonator of the other? waht's the deal. Should a a Checkuser be filed? ThuranX 06:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ying Dor, Ying Dor 2, and the CarltonMSN problem 

message: This article says "Because 75-foot subway cars take time to load and unload passengers and cannot fit into the entire B-Division lines, more recent orders returned to 60-foot subway car.". HOWEVER, according to the 2008-2013 MTA Capital Program, the fifth 75-foot subway car (R179, according to the document) order is proposed, meaning that the quote above could be false! They are intended to replace R44 (75-foot). However, this is a proposal, no one knows if it will be ordered or not.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Takuma Ishizeki (talk • contribs) 01:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  5th 75-foot subway car (R179) is coming up according to 2008-2013 MTA Capital Program Document 

message: People need to stop undoing, there are facts on subchat with R160s all on the Q and R68/As back on the N.--IGeMiNix (talk) 01:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: SubChat is a message board. Please use Reliable Sources. Thanks. Acps110 (talk • contribs) 01:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Acps110. Non-official sites, forums, statements from railfans or transit workers, and amateur photographs and videos are NOT acceptable to use on Wikipedia. IGeMiNix may need to be blocked. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 13:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: As a rule, we have taken to using the Datta/Man datasheet for this site. The assignments on the JoeKorNer, while the actual assignments, are not necessarily what is actually occurring. Because of the often great difference between the reality and the official assignments, we have been using the previously mentioned Datta/Man datasheet. The official roster goes into substantially more detail than is true as trains must, for federal purposes, be assigned to a line. That said, Does the N's fleet consist only of Siemens R160Bs and R68As? No. Alstom R160As and R160Bs with Alstom propulsion run on the N all the time. In reality, when trains are sent out for an N/Q, nobody cares if it is an R160A, R160B1 or R160B2. In reality nobody cares if it is an R68 or R68A when they are preparing trains in the morning for the B/N. Because of the looseness of these assignments we have historically used the Datta/Man datasheet. 
96.232.72.179 (talk) 03:44, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing is R68s and R68As are not treated as one fleet. There are not the same cars and therefore, cannot operate together on one train, unlike the R160As and R160Bs. There is no need to worry about where the R160s goes since they can operate together, but R68/68As have to be put into special consideration, just like in July 2001 when the  was introduced. It took all the R68As at Coney Island while the  local was only R68s. The JoeKorner datasheet is more reliable than the Datta/Man one because the latter is just a bunch of mumbo jumbo from railfans and car assignments as not as loose as you might think, like the recent swap at Jamaica Yard that made the  exclusively R160s and the  exclusively R46s. There has been no sightings of R68s on the N, just R68As since the recent car assignment change took effect. The N still uses mostly R160s. 69.117.185.58 (talk) 14:08, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  R68s on N 

message: To all railfans, please stop adding to this article that the R68s are running on the . Although this seems to be the case based on the numerous photos and videos posted on sites like NYC Transit Forums, Subchat, and YouTube, we have a strict policy where we use the MTA's official line-by-line assignment roster, posted on TheJoeKorner.com, to say which cars run on which services. Amateur pictures, videos, or statements from railfans or MTA workers are not legitimate enough to include on this site. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a railfan site or service guide. There will always be some exceptions from the JoeKorner datasheet, like R160As running on the  when it is only assigned R160Bs. The transferring of the G to the Coney Island Yard is still underway, so while R68s are running on that line, they are not officially assigned to it, thus we cannot include this on the article. The JoeKorner datasheet is scheduled to be updated on June 25, hopefully to show the new assignments of R68s on the G, the N becoming exclusively R160s like the , and the  entirely R46s. When that happens, we can edit the articles based on the new assignments. Until then, have some patience and stops saying that R68s run on the G. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 23:52, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. First of all, there are R68s on the G, but its not regular. Second of all, that site you gave us is not a reliable source. The bottom of the page says that the page was last edited on December 15, 2010. 161.130.178.7 (talk) 02:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  R68s on the G 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on R68 (New York City Subway car). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101125215251/http://mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/100621_1330_CPOC.pdf to http://mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/100621_1330_CPOC.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160821151408/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160727/clinton-hill/new-digital-signs-on-some-g-trains-will-display-date-time to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160727/clinton-hill/new-digital-signs-on-some-g-trains-will-display-date-time
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can somebody check this or provide some sources?
"LED lights, door chimes (similar to those on the R142, R142A, and R179), and PA systems from SEPSA [it] (Italian: Società per l'Esercizio di Pubblici Servizi Anonima; an Italian railroad company) were tested on 2892–2895"
I find it very unlikely that SEPSA provided that equipment for the R68 for two main reasons:
- SEPSA never manufactured anything, nor never had any manufacturing capabilities either.
- SEPSA has been effectively defunct since 2012, when it was absorbed into EAV.
SEPSA was a small regional railway company (comparable to a "beefed-up" interurban) serving the western outskirts of Naples. It had been in a quite dire financial situation since practically the early '2000s, with decaying rolling stock and infrastructure (a situation comparable, and maybe even worse than Penn Central!). There's no way they could've manufactured, let alone provided, that equipment.
Socimi (talk) 22:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  SEPSA LED lights, door chimes and PA Systems for R68s???