Обсуждение:Прямой поезд Цзюлун — Гуанчжоу

message: If the admins from FR, DE, IT and FI Wikipedia do not agree with your move and reverted them, I believe the naming convention in RU WP does not differ too much. Guangdong Through Train is the current common name of your so-called "Kowloon-Canton Railway (линия)". As far as I know, RU.WP does use English name in the article title if official English name exists like The New York Times. End of the story. -- Sameboat - 同舟 01:01, 21 мая 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm very sorry, but most discussion I intend to do in Russian (because of some details and difficulties). But, still... I'll try to do it in English.

text: If admins from FR, DE, IT and FI Wikipedia do not agree with my move in their sections and reverted them, let them do anything they want in their sections of Wikipedia. But you're mistaking quite a lot about RuWiki. Because according to article author's idea the article Железная дорога Коулун — Кантон devoted to the Kowloon - Canton(Guangzhou) Railway line (the source of "Kowloon - Canton Railway" (network) and "Kowloon - Canton Railway Corporation" names), which exists since 1906 by now. Your last changes  together with article renaming resulted with quite nonsense, as (quoting the article):

text: 1.

text: - It isn't so. "Guangdong Through Train" - is the name of special passenger trains, but not the railway section. The difference is obvious in Russian. If you mind simply "Guangdong", then —
"2.

text: - is false.
Moreover, further in the article:

text: 3.

text: - it is total mess.

text: So, I repeat and insist, that the article devoted namely to the Kowloon-Canton Railway line (past and present) and faster not the subject as is, but to the Russian homonym, which firstly minds railway section from the Kowloon to the Canton (Guangzhou) on which pass Guangdong Through Trains (nowadays) and passed something else (in the past). Scriber 02:32, 21 мая 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: :"Guangdong Through Train" is not merely about the "passenger train" but the "line" or "service" which succeeds from the historical Kowloon-Canton Railway line. Wikipedia is meant to present the information in its most updated form, unless the article is about the history which may be deemed too long in the other article. I suggest you reading :en:Guangdong Through Train (MTR) or :zh:廣九直通車 carefully before making the same mistake again. (Digression: do you honestly believe article "The New York Times" is about the concept of "время" in New York?) -- Sameboat - 同舟 03:13, 21 мая 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Оf course, I dont know Chinese, but (acording autotranslation) in Chinese article :zh:廣九直通車 definition posted "直通客運列車" (i.e. "城際直通車（英文：Intercity Through Train）", as it posted by the according link. And acording your interpretation: «"Guangdong Through Train" is ... merely about ... "service"». Could you disagreee with me, that "service" (ru:"услуга", "служба") and "railroad" (ru:"железная дорога") - "is the two big difference"? So, your variant "Guangdong Through Train" - it's about service, "passenger line" (ru:"пассажирская линия"), but not "railroad" itself (the subject which most article text devoted; "Guangdong Through Train" was not built not in 1906, ...., not in 1910 and so on and hadn't functioned before 1949). But my article variant (headline and text) devoted to the railroad section (with according equipment and infrastructure) between two geographical points. If you mean something else (for example, "Guangdong Through Train") - you should write anotner article in Russian with according text. Why you're ignoring the fact of physical existing such railroad section between Kowloon and Canton (Guangzhou)? Is it destroyed or not exist? Or, may be there are any ideological reasons? So, not only me declare that it really eists (see attached map :Файл:Guangzhou Shenzhen Hongkong Express Rail Link en.svg legend - black line). Scriber 03:49, 21 мая 2012 (UTC)

text: ::So, where are your contrarguments on quotations ## 2, 3 of ? Scriber 04:11, 21 мая 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: :::I'm afraid the map you refer to is not accurate to begin with because that black line is in fact the Guangzhou-Shengzheng Railway and East Rail Line shared (borrowed) by the Through Train service today. "Kowloon-Canton Railway" is merely an alternative name of "Guangdong Through Train" since 1979 because the name is (was) commonly known to Hong Kong people as a rapid transit network when the corporation ceased the Mainland China train service but retained its company and network name between 1949-1979. (And that's the reason the article about the KCR Hong Kong network does not require the disambiguation qualifier, naming convention of common name again.) If you insist to have a separate article, it can only represent the historical line, which the disambiguation qualifier "1906/1907-1949" is better to differentiate from the "Kowloon-Canton Railway (network/corporation)". But I see no reason to separate it from the history section of Guangdong Through Train as the Chinese version does right now (it begins its history since 1907). -- Sameboat - 同舟 04:33, 21 мая 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::But, could you explain subheadline of the article :en:Guangzhou–Shenzhen Railway: "This article is about the Chinese Section of the Canton-Kowloon Railway. For the British Section of the Canton-Kowloon Railway, see East Rail Line." What "Canton-Kowloon Railway" does it mind? Scriber 13:51, 22 мая 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  О наименовании и предмете статьи