Talk:Rail transport in China

message: I'm trying to edit the history section using information from Chinese websites and books. Please write down any suggestions.
Sinolonghai 18:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I merged the "current" section and "data" section.Sinolonghai 17:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: I'm afraid there was a cut-and-paste move ( ).  — Instantnood 17:16, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
: Fixed. Noel (talk) 20:00, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. — Instantnood 20:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cut-and-paste move

message: A railway link to Tibet was recently completed. Please add an updated map plus relevant info. --24.255.155.100 23:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please update 

message: The bit about the first trains and being built quasi-legally by Jardine needs sourced statements, please. SchmuckyTheCat 23:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: - You were told that they were translated. It's better to put on the [citation needed] tag than removing the materials (tho it happened at the beginning you were simply reverting for the sake of warring, without noticing them). — Instantnood 13:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unsourced material can be removed by anyone at anytime. Being "a translation" doesn't change that. SchmuckyTheCat 20:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the materials on Wikipedia aren't sourced, yet they can be easily verified, as in the case of what you've removed. Such removings are more like vandalism than anything. The key issue, however, is not with unsourced material, but with your revert warring without paying attention to what other people's edits are about. — Instantnood 20:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Liar. Show us where in Wikipedia:Vandalism does it mention the removal of unsourced materials constitutes vandalism.--Huaiwei 21:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Was user:SchmuckyTheCat actually intending to remove unsourced materials? — Instantnood 21:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read wp:v again. If you start sourcing edits you won't have much trouble. SchmuckyTheCat 22:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre-ww2 history

message: Is there a good reason History of rail transport in China should have a distinct page from this one? Cmprince 17:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  The People's Republic of China and the Republic of China, Taiwan, both claim to be the legitimate China.  Until this is resolved, better to keep all three distinct.Qhist 18:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I didn't read the full title. Makes more sense now, but I'd just point out that much of the content is similar between the two articles, so beware of letting one becoming a fork of the other. Cmprince 19:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Keep them separate; a majority of this article deals with rail transport before the 1940s. MisfitToys 18:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: * Support — I agree with you. Python eggs (talk) 06:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: The caption to the first picture is in Chinese. Can we fix this please? Mazeau (talk) 02:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not Chinese. It's Japanese. The image was copied from Japanese Wikipedia. 60.27.140.118 (talk) 04:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caption 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Oppose. Support move to Rail transport in mainland China instead. Montemonte (talk) 00:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Under "conventional railways":
X 2000 links to the Swedish X2000 trains, but I assume that this is a different train service.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefan2 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link problem 

message: The article says it's second after USA. However the wiki article 'List of countries by rail transport network size' puts also Russia ahead of China. Couldn't read the chinese characters of the citations link, so don't know about its accuracy. 85.217.45.181 (talk) 05:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found that The World Bank also puts Russia ahead and gives China only 67092 km for 2016 against 124000 km:World Bank's "Rail lines (total route-km)"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Efojs (talk • contribs) 17:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rail network size 

message: In November 2017 the railway bureaus were renamed and restructured, the article should reflect these changes.
http://news.sina.com.cn/c/nd/2017-11-20/doc-ifynwxum6319234.shtml
Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  2017 restructuring 

message: For some reason the map of the rail network is only avalible in the low res format when before it was high res, i think the high res should be made avalible because i can barely read the city names/zoom in 184.185.222.8 (talk) 16:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: my bad im tripping i found it 184.185.222.8 (talk) 16:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low Quality Map 

message: Can please making of Photomontage of China rail transport? 37.109.162.56 (talk) 17:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add photomontage of Chinese rail transport?