View source for Template talk:Track gauge/Archive 2

{{talkarchive}}

== Please add ==

Please add these specifications.
*{{railgauge|6.35mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=6.35|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.25|num=|den=}}.
*{{railgauge|7mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=7|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.276|num=|den=}}.
*{{railgauge|16.48mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=16.48|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.649|num=|den=}}.
*{{railgauge|21.97mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=21.97|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.865|num=|den=}}.
*{{railgauge|0.189in}} and {{railgauge|0.189"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.189|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=4.8}}.
*{{railgauge|0.315in}} and {{railgauge|0.315"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.315|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=8}}.
*{{railgauge|0.354in}} and {{railgauge|0.354"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.354|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=9}}.
*{{railgauge|0.709in}} and {{railgauge|0.709"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.709|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18}}.
*{{railgauge|0.741in}} and {{railgauge|0.741"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.741|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18.83}}.
*{{railgauge|0.748in}} and {{railgauge|0.748"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.748|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=19}}.
*{{railgauge|0.866in}} and {{railgauge|0.866"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.866|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=22}}.
*{{railgauge|69in}}, {{railgauge|69"}}, {{railgauge|5ft9in}} and {{railgauge|5'9"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=5|in=8|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.75}}.
[[Special:Contributions/121.102.122.122|121.102.122.122]] ([[User talk:121.102.122.122|talk]]) 11:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
:{{Done}}. Sorry for the delay, I have now added these. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 00:01, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
::See [[Template talk:RailGauge#Clean-up]] below for the explanation as to what happened here.  [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 16:01, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
:For [[London and Blackwall Railway#History]] please add {{RailGauge|5ft1/2in}} or {{RailGauge|60.5}} to replace {{convert|5|ft|0+1/2|in|mm|0|abbr=on}}.  [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 00:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
::This, at least, is verifiable - see
::*{{cite book |last=Allen |first=Cecil J. |authorlink=Cecil J. Allen |title=The Great Eastern Railway |edition=2nd |year=1956 |origyear=1955 |publisher=[[Ian Allan Publishing|Ian Allan]] |location=Hampton Court |page=9 }}
::where it states "The [London &] Blackwall line, laid first to a gauge of 5 ft. 0½ in." --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 10:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
:For [[FEVE#History]] {{RailGauge|1062mm}} instead of {{convert|1,062|mm|ftin|1|abbr=on}} and ''perhaps'' {{RailGauge|915mm}} instead of {{convert|915|mm|ftin|abbr=on}} or {{convert|915|mm|ft|0|abbr=on}}. The latter, however, is absurd when {{RailGauge|914mm}} would do. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 17:40, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
:: I suspect that FEVE's 915&nbsp;mm gauge is actually {{RailGauge|3}}.  I don't know where the 1,062&nbsp;mm comes from, as it is uncited, both at [[:FEVE]] and [[:es:Ferrocarriles de Vía Estrecha]]. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 21:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
:::For [[Rail gauge in Ireland]], [[Dublin tramways#Dublin and Lucan Steam Tramway]] & [[Dublin United Transport Company#Rail Gauge]] please add {{RailGauge|62+3/16in}} instead of {{convert|5|ft|2+3/16|in|mm|abbr=on}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 19:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
:::: That {{convert|5|ft|2+3/16|in|mm|abbr=on}} is a rather strange size, and was changed from {{RailGauge|63}} in {{diff|Dublin tramways|238462808|238338030|this uncited edit}} by {{user|Suckindiesel}}. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 19:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
:Interesting...[[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 21:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
::For [[List of rail gauges#Medium gauge]] (Bulgaria) please add {{RailGauge|1013mm}} instead of {{convert|1,013|mm|ftin|1|abbr=on}} {{frac|3|9|10}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 22:01, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
::: And if you do, could you correct the {{RailGauge|1009mm}} to give "3&nbsp;ft&nbsp;3{{frac|5|7}}&nbsp;in", please? [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 22:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
:See my request [[Template talk:RailGauge#Rail gauge correction required]] below. I'll put a post on [[User talk:Keith D]]
::Are any of these figures [[WP:V|verifiable]]? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 11:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

== Irish Gauge ==

The alternate name given for {{RailGauge|1600|al=off}} gauge is [[Victorian broad gauge]], which redirects onto [[Rail gauge in Australia]].  There is an [[Irish gauge]] article, which gives due prominence to its use in Victoria (Australia) and Brazil.  Curiously, the ''Rail Gauges in Australia'' article fairly consistently refers to it as ''Irish'' gauge, and redirects back to [[Irish broad gauge|Irish gauge]].  So, could the alternate name be change to ''Irish gauge'', please? [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 01:55, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
:Can be done if there is agreement. It may be worth dropping a note to the [[WP:Trains|Trains]] project to get a broader view on this. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 11:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
::For anyone puzzled:
*{{tlx|railgauge|1600|3=al=on|4=lk=on}} → {{railgauge|1600|al=on|lk=on}}
*{{tlx|railgauge|63|3=al=on|4=lk=on}} → {{railgauge|63|al=on|lk=on}}
*{{tlx|railgauge|5'3"|3=al=on|4=lk=on}} → {{railgauge|5'3"|al=on|lk=on}}
::--[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 15:59, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
:::Based on the comments here and at [[WT:TWP]], I agree with the change.[[User:Oknazevad|oknazevad]] ([[User talk:Oknazevad|talk]]) 17:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
::::OK. I will change it as no objections. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 14:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
:::::Thanks.  I think RedRose's entry might puzzle some people even more now. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 18:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

== &amp;nbsp; between imperial & metric values ==

Hiya

Is there a good reason for having the &amp;nbsp; between the two measurements (I understand its presence between the numbers and the units). Could we have an option to have a plain space instead? I'm having trouble formatting [[List of steam locomotives in Slovenia]] because of the extra space taken up by not wrapping the gauges.  [[User:Railwayfan2005|Railwayfan2005]] ([[User talk:Railwayfan2005|talk]]) 20:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
:I have added a '''<code>wrap</code>''' parameter to allow for wrapping before the parentheses if the space available is insufficient for it to display on a single line. Just add '''<code>wrap=y</code>''' to the template to allow it to output a normal space. You will have to try it out to see if it solves your problem. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 22:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
::Well it solves the problem I was having, but you need to make the '''<code>al=on</code>'''/'''<code>wrap=y</code>''' combination work as well. I'd suggest using {{tl|Nowrap}} if you've not already found it, then going back to normal spaces. What was the reasoning behind the templates current behaviour? I would normally expect wrapping to be on, not off. [[User:Railwayfan2005|Railwayfan2005]] ([[User talk:Railwayfan2005|talk]]) 23:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
:::The use of the {{tl|Nowrap}} is employed but the additional processing for the al switch is separate from that. I have no idea of the reasons behind the way the output is presented. I appear to have inherited the maintenance of it after making a change that someone requested. I have since had to rewrite it as the original used the {{tl|convert}} template and kept failing to load when there was high server load but I maintained the same functionality. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 01:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
::::Thanks for all the changes. <nowiki><code>}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{al|}}}}}|on|&amp;nbsp;{{#switch:{{{1}}}</code></nowiki> just needs to have the &amp;nbsp; swapped for a normal space to allow the '''<code>al=on</code>'''/'''<code>wrap=y</code>''' combination to work. [[User:Railwayfan2005|Railwayfan2005]] ([[User talk:Railwayfan2005|talk]]) 22:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
:::::It will need a fudge as it removes the space when I tried it out. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 23:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
::::::I have put in a fix for that - it will still incorrectly wrap if there are 2 words in the gauge name without specifying wrap. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 00:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
:::::::Does &amp;#20; help? Cheers![[User:Railwayfan2005|Railwayfan2005]] ([[User talk:Railwayfan2005|talk]]) 12:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

== Standard gauge ==

I'd like to suggest that someone with template expertise (at [[WP:WPT]] perhaps?) change {{t1|RailGauge}} so that [[Standard gauge]] (<code><nowiki>{{RailGauge|ussg}} and {{RailGauge|1435mm}}</nowiki></code>) is displayed as ''4 ft 8&#160;&frac12; in (1,435 mm)'' or ''1,435 mm (4 ft 8&#160;&frac12; in)'' instead of ''{{RailGauge|ussg}}'' or ''{{RailGauge|1435mm}}'' Using <code>&<!-- -->frac12</code> (or some similar other character) is more legible and doesn't interfere with the [[Leading|interline spacing]].  Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/67.101.7.14|67.101.7.14]] ([[User talk:67.101.7.14|talk]]) 16:38, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
:All of the fractions are output the same way you cannot just change one specific one to be different to the rest. It is better for reading with the enlarged characters rather than the smaller characters which are unreadable in some cases. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 21:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

== 1.8m gauge ==

Please add these specifications.
*{{railgauge|1.8}}, {{railgauge|1.8m}}, {{railgauge|1800}} and {{railgauge|1800mm}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=5|in=10|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.8}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|71}}, {{railgauge|71in}}, {{railgauge|71"}}, {{railgauge|5ft11in}} and {{railgauge|5'11"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=5|in=10|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.8}}</nowiki>.
[[Special:Contributions/58.138.55.55|58.138.55.55]] ([[User talk:58.138.55.55|talk]]) 12:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
:{{Done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 14:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
::See [[Template talk:RailGauge#Clean-up]] below for the explanation as to what happened here.  [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 15:49, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

== Breitspurbahn and modelling tracks ==

Please add these specifications.
*{{railgauge|0.512}}, {{railgauge|0.512in}} and {{railgauge|0.512"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=0.512|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=13}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|0.551}}, {{railgauge|0.551in}} and {{railgauge|0.551"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=0.551|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=14}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|0.945}}, {{railgauge|0.945in}} and {{railgauge|0.945"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=0.945|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=24}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|1.339}}, {{railgauge|1.339in}} and {{railgauge|1.339"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=1.339|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=34}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|1.89}}, {{railgauge|1.89in}} and {{railgauge|1.89"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=1.890|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=48}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|2.52}}, {{railgauge|2.52in}} and {{railgauge|2.52"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=2.52|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=64}}</nowiki>.
*{{railgauge|118}}, {{railgauge|118in}}, {{railgauge|118"}}, {{railgauge|9ft10in}} and {{railgauge|9'10"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=9|in=10|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=2997}}</nowiki>.
[[Special:Contributions/58.138.55.55|58.138.55.55]] ([[User talk:58.138.55.55|talk]]) 07:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
:{{Done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 21:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
::See [[Template talk:RailGauge#Clean-up]] below for the explanation as to what happened here.  [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 15:52, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

== [[Track gauge#Italian gauge|Italian gauge]] ==

Please add the broadest of the three [[Track gauge#Italian gauge|Italian gauges]], namely 1445 mm.  It is used on some urban networks in Italy (eg the [[Trams in Milan|Milan tram network]], about which I am presently creating a new article), and also in some other countries.  The other two Italian gauges, 700 mm and 950 mm, are already covered.  Thanks, [[User:Bahnfrend|Bahnfrend]] ([[User talk:Bahnfrend|talk]]) 14:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
:What do you want for the conversion? [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 01:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
::Sorry, forgot to check.  I understand that the usual conversion is 4' 8.9".  Regards, [[User:Bahnfrend|Bahnfrend]] ([[User talk:Bahnfrend|talk]]) 14:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
:::{{Done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 18:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

== Here we go again ==

For [[List of railway companies in Switzerland#Companies in operation today (standard gauge)]], (1200&nbsp;mm gauge) vs {{RailGauge|1200mm}}. I thought I had found them all. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 20:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
:What conversion do you require? [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 22:59, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
::The conversion of 1200 mm to ft and inches e.g. {{convert|1200|mm|ftin|1|abbr=on}} vs {{RailGauge|1200mm}}. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 17:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
:The reverse would be {{convert|3|ft|11+1/4|in|mm|abbr=on}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 17:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
::{{convert|1200|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}} is more like it. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 17:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC) [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 21:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
:::{{Done}}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 22:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
:Could you change 0.24 in to 1/4 in? [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 18:54, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
::{{Done}} - I have changed it. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 00:18, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

== Wikilink the Alternate Name only ==

Could we have an additional option to wikilink the alternate name, without wikilinking the unit labels (as per [[WP:OVERLINK]] and [[WP:REPEATLINK]], etc.)?  I would suggest this should be "lk=al" (with or without the "al=on"), or alternatively using "al=lk" if that's easier to implement.

Whilst on the subject of alternate names, I notice they all start with a capital letter, including ''{{RailGauge|sg|al=on|lk=al}}'', which is more commonly written all lower-case, as ''[[standard gauge]]'' (the others are all [based on] proper names, and rightly start with a capital letter in English).  Could that be changed, or might it be better to implement a new option, eg "al=lc"? [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 11:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

:The capital can be easily changed to lower case, if that is what is required.

:On the other point probably a separate option would be easiest to implement, may be lkal = on, and drop the lk=on linking the alternative name using it to only link the units. Though this would loose links in articles and may need a BOT to go round adding the new option to existing ones using the lk=on flag. Any idea how many articles use the option? [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 12:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

::I haven't looked at the source in any great detail, and I'm quite happy for you to implement it in the easiest way possible to give the required effect.  I think, however, that it might be useful to attempt to quantify the problem before proceeding.
::I haven't a clue how many articles use the option, but I guess there may be quite a lot, particularly in {{tlx|infobox locomotive}} and {{tlx|infobox rail line}}, where, for example, {{Tlx|RailGauge|<nowiki>sg|al=on|lk=on</nowiki>}} has been used to get a link to [[standard gauge]], but the links to the units are merely regarded as a side effect.
::*If those are the majority of the usage of the "al=on|lk=on" combination, the way to proceed may be different from if most usages really want the links to the units.
::*If, on the other hand, the combination is not often used (where there is an alternate name), then I suppose it should be possible to direct a BOT to edit them selectively.
::*If the usage is huge with no clear pattern, would it not be easier to implement it in a slightly more complicated way that didn't lose existing links, and forget the BOT?
::I also wonder if the "al=on|lk=on" combination is used with gauges such as [[metre gauge]] ({{RailGauge|m|al=on|lk=on}}) or [[Russian gauge]] (({{RailGauge|1520|al=on|lk=on}}) which (currently) have no alternate name (and does that matter?). [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 14:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
:::After a bit of playing around I have added a new parameter '''{{para|allk}}''' which can be used to wikilink just the gauge name when set to "on". If {{para|allk}} is not present and {{para|lk}} is set to "on" then both the gauge name and units will be linked. 
:::{{RailGauge|sg|lk=on|al=on}} and {{RailGauge|sg|al=on|allk=on}}
:::[[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 23:59, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

== 530 mm - 21 inch ==

Please add 530 mm -> 21 inch OR 1 ft 9 inch [[User:TrackConversion|TrackConversion]] ([[User talk:TrackConversion|talk]]) 22:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
:{{RailGauge|530}} has not yet been added (inserted). [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
::See below where indicates conversion should be to 20.9. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 19:51, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

== Gauges between 1 ft and 2 ft ==

There is a problem with the templates for the gauges between 1 ft & 2 ft. These templates currently produce the rather strange output of "1 ft X in" (the variable X changing according to the gauge) even though that is NOT how people speak when referring to these gauges. We all know that in common speech nobody talks about the "1 foot 3 inch gauge" - the term used is always (in my experience) "the 15 inch gauge". Railways of this gauge refer to themselves as "15 inch gauge" and not as "1 foot 3 inches gauge". It is confusing and misleading to have this output from the template that fails to match common parlance. This obviously applies particularly to the more common gauges where the name in inches only is commonly heard, especially 15" and 18" gauges. Interestingly, railgauge 12.25 already conforms, by producing an output of "12 & a quarter inch" rather than "one foot and a quarter inch"! It would be good if the others between 1 foot and 2 feet could do likewise please. '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 16:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
:I agree fully. If I see 1ft3in I have to stop and think, "hang on, that's 12+3 = 15in gauge!" -- [[User:EdJogg|EdJogg]] ([[User talk:EdJogg|talk]]) 12:47, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
::The thing to do is to look at the editing history of the relevant template. Any changes made without consensus by a sock of a banned editor may be reverted at any time by any editor without needing to seek consent to revert. I support the use of "whole number of inches" for gauges under 2'. Fractions to be written without use of the {{tl|frac}} where possible, and certainly for ¼, ½ and ¾. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 11:37, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
:::Ok, TC isn't guilty this time. {{user|Keith D}} seems to be most active here recently. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 11:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
::::Us mere mortals see a red padlock on this page, so we have to ''request'' changes here.  But I think you'll find {{diff|Template:RailGauge|366268110|prev|this edit}} on 5 June 2010 changed {{nowrap|(13 ≤ gauges ≤ 18)}} to use 1&nbsp;ft x&nbsp;in.  The requesting thread is [[:Template talk:RailGauge/Archive 1#ft in]] and then carries on at [[:Template talk:RailGauge/Archive 1#Fifteen inch gauge]].  It looks like [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] unilaterally asked for the changes, which [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] would not revert when asked by [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] and [[User:Globbet|Globbet]] since [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] would not give his consent. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 15:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::If you look above to my request at [[#Irish Gauge]], Keith's reply was ''Can be done if there is agreement. It may be worth dropping a note to the [[WP:Trains|Trains]] project to get a broader view on this.''  I did so, there was consensus, and the change was made.  Now, was that because I was relatively new, or as a result of the Fifteen inch gauge changes? [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 15:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::: Fifteen inch, and to a lesser extent eighteen inch, are known under just those names (more so than "15 inch"). I don't have any knowledge of those between eighteen and two foot, but linguistically it's a general construct that the small unit is used in isolation until there are ''multiple'' of the large unit in use, i.e. "23 inches" is used, but "twenty five inches" isn't, and this applies just as much to carpentry as it does to gauge. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 16:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
::::::: I agree too. [[User:Peter Horn]] may be able to find multiple instances of "1 foot 3 inch gauge" without difficulty. That still does not make it the normal usage. Unfortunately, from my limited past experience, Peter seems to regard consistency and uniformity as paramount. [[User:Globbet|Globbet]] ([[User talk:Globbet|talk]]) 22:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
{{od|7}} I did a websearch earlier on, and found loads of them, but the top ones were all derived from WP, even though many of them neither acknowledged WP, nor the CC licence.  Once I'd bypassed the WP derived occurrences by comparing "1ft 3in" with "15in", I got ''About 1,130 results'' against ''About 4,460,000 results'', although I didn't check them all. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 23:14, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
:I have '''''no''''' objection if someone with the necessary parsing skils starts the correcion(s) with {{RailGauge|356}} / {{RailGauge|14}} at the template level and, as his/her time resources permit, end as soon as possible with {{RailGauge|356}} / {{RailGauge|23.75}} showing inches only both in the output (from metric) and in the input. The new format will automatically appear wherever the template is used in any article. When the work is done at the template level the output etc. at the article level takes care of itself. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
::The ''Revision history'' of [[Template:RailGauge]] would appear to tell me that any one, or all, of the following users appear to have the skill(s) necessary to make the above mentioned change: [[User:Amalthea|Amalthea]], [[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]], [[User:Slambo|Slambo]], [[User:Tivedshambo|Tivedshambo]]. Do not count on [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] because he retired from '''''Wikipedia'''''. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 01:41, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
::: I already identified that it was {{diff|Template:RailGauge|366268110|prev|this edit}}.  Whilst I doubt that it could be undone due to later edits, I think it should be fairly easy to undo it manually.  I notice, however, that some gauges, such as {{RailGauge|17}}, {{RailGauge|450}}, {{RailGauge|19}} and {{RailGauge|19.5}} had feet and inches before, so perhaps it's best left to an expert.  [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 14:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

* Has anyone seen where [[Fifteen inch gauge railway]] has gone? [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 00:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
** Probably replaced by the template {{RailGauge|15}}... [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 01:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
*** It has '''''not''''' been replaced and '''''not''''' gone anywhere. Just look at [[Far Tottering and Oyster Creek Branch Railway]], found by "what links here" to [[Fifteen inch gauge railway]]. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:28, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
**** I have replaced that with "{{RailGauge|15}}" gauge in that article. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
*****Many thanks to everyone who has joined in this discussion. It seems to me that there is a clear consensus that we should return to the original "full number of inches" for the template output relating to gauges above 1 foot but below 2 feet. Thank you to {{user|Peter Horn}} who originally requested the change ''away'' from that format for his comments and cooperation. It seems that everyone is in agreement, but nobody has the skills to do the job! The person who can do this seems to be {{user|Keith D}}, but a look at his user page reveals that he is away on holiday until next week. I'll leave him a message drawing his attention to this discussion. Thanks again to everyone. '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 10:33, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
******You-all, please see comment above. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 01:41, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

===Updates===
I've updated the template to show gauges between 12" and 20" inclusive to be shown in inches only. I've chosen 20" as the maximum rather than the requested <24", for two reasons: Firstly 20" is the largest [[miniature railway]] (the [[Scarborough North Bay Railway]]), and secondly, some nominally 2 ft railways are actually 1' 11½" or 1' 11{{frac|3|4}}", and it seems odd (at least to me) to describe them as e.g. 23½". However, if there is consensus to change these distances as well, let me know, or update [[Template:RailGauge/sandbox]] and request the changes to be updated using {{tlx|editprotected}} (remember, there are probably very few, if any, administrators who watch this page).

I've also created a [[Template:RailGauge/testcases|test cases]] page, which displays all the different combinations currently in the sandbox.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Tivedshambo|<span style="color:#7F0000">'''&nbsp;Tivedshambo&nbsp;'''</span>]]&nbsp;([[User Talk:Tivedshambo|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Tivedshambo|c]]) 08:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

:Thank you for doing that. I think I would agree with your reasoning that 12" to 20" is appropriate, for the reasons you state. The idea was to make the output match common parlance, and people only talk about gauges which actually exist, so 20" is probably the sensible upper limit. Thanks again. '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 09:39, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

::That looks good, except that "<nowiki>{{RailGauge|530}}</nowiki>" ''gave something wrong''.  It looks like you started to add it, but then forgot the conversion, which would be {{convert|530|mm|in|1|abbr=on}}.  Having said that, I notice that it was requested by TC, who specified the wrong conversion, so perhaps it should just be removed. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 13:14, 7 May 2011 (UTC) <small>Amended to avoid error message. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 20:29, 7 May 2011 (UTC)</small>
:::I've removed it for the time being - if it's required it'll flag up in [[:category:Pages with incorrect use of RailGauge template]]. I'm wondering how many of these options are actually used, as this template is getting very big. I might see if I can ask a bot to extract all the uses of this template, and remove any obscure gauges that aren't used.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Tivedshambo|<span style="color:#7F0000">'''&nbsp;Tivedshambo&nbsp;'''</span>]]&nbsp;([[User Talk:Tivedshambo|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Tivedshambo|c]]) 19:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
::::In above section conversion was requested to 21in so need to decide which conversion is required before inserting. Would be good to see what conversions are actually used as I had to re-write it to avoid using the {{tl|convert}} template when the template caused the servers to hang when load was heavy. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 20:00, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::Requested at [[Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 41/Archives/ 24#Template usage]].&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Tivedshambo|<span style="color:#7F0000">'''&nbsp;Tivedshambo&nbsp;'''</span>]]&nbsp;([[User Talk:Tivedshambo|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Tivedshambo|c]]) 20:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

::::::[[User:Plastikspork]] has run through and summarised all the uses in [[User:Tivedshambo/railgauge-1]], [[User:Tivedshambo/railgauge-2]], [[User:Tivedshambo/railgauge-3]] and [[User:Tivedshambo/railgauge-4]]. I've summarised these uses in [[User:Tivedshambo/railgauge-5]], which ignores uses in test pages, etc, and also ignores the optional parameters. I'll look at seeing if there are any redundant options later.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Tivedshambo|<span style="color:#7F0000">'''&nbsp;Tivedshambo&nbsp;'''</span>]]&nbsp;([[User Talk:Tivedshambo|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Tivedshambo|c]]) 07:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
:Using {{tl|convert}}, {{convert|530|mm|in|2|abbr=on}} does give 20.87 inches. Eyeballing my flexible steel 33'/10m measuring tape gives me 20 {{frac|7|8}} inches. Ask TC, the one who requested it, where he intended to use it.  [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
::"The plot thickens", [[User:TrackConversion|TrackConversion]] has been blocked indefinitely. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 00:25, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
:::{{User|TrackConversion}} was a nasty, rude, bullying, sock-puppet of an individual who has dozens of blocked accounts, 90% of them using a two-word name with the initials "TC". He or she is a highly disruptive editor, with no respect for consensus, and a startling disregard for other people. So, whilst generalisation is dangerous, there must be a tendency in anything initiated by TC to wonder if it is necessary, or even to suspect it of being malicious. '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 09:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
::::TC was also on a crusade to metricate everything, even measurements which were only ever given in feet and inches. He wanted to group all track gauges into neat metric categories, no matter how artificial these were (the username was something of a giveaway). I think that 530 mm was just something he made up to sit conveniently between {{convert|18|in|mm|0}} and 600 mm. See his lengthy posts and even lengthier tables within the purple archive box at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Track gauge issues]]. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 12:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
::::: Whilst trying to rescue something of the mess of the [[List of track gauges by size]] article (which TC had split out from somewhere else), I had a good look around for 530mm gauge in the German Wikipedia equivalent articles, its only source ({{cite web| url=http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-en.php| title=Railroad Gauge Width| accessdate=4 May 2011}}), and via Mr Google, to no avail.<br>I therefore came to the conclusion that it was madeup, and removed it from that list.  I also suggested above that it be removed from this template, partly due to TC's wrong conversion, and partly due to it being TC's request.  I'm sure that if it exists, it will show up sooner or later, with citations and a correct conversion.<br>@Peter Horn: I amended my previous comment above to suppress the error message, and I suggest that you may wish to do likewise at [[User talk:TrackConversion]].  [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 16:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
::::I'm not quite sure what you mean Tim. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 15:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
:::::@Peter: The error message that now results from the use of <nowiki>{{RailGauge|530mm}}</nowiki> in {{diff|User talk:TrackConversion|428164158|prev|this edit}}. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 14:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

:The range {{Convert|12|to|20|in|0|abbr=on}} inclusive sounds reasonable. Let {{RailGauge|600mm}}, a [[Real versus nominal value|nominal]] 2 feet be the lower limit of feet and inches.  [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 15:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC) [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 15:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
::Having said I agree with this (12" - 20" range) I now realise that we have no template for the [[Pleasure Beach Express]] in Blackpool, which is 21" gauge. It is a considerable and significant installation, but is also very definitely a miniature railway, and not an overly narrow 2' narrow gauge line. I think we do need a template for 21" to be consistent, even though I can't )currently) think of another line of this gauge. '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 02:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== Lost article ==

If memory serves, we did have an article at [[Fifteen inch gauge railway]] a few weeks ago, because I linked the Far Tottering article to it. It was an article, although maybe a stub, and mentioned Heywood & Greenly. In the TC moves, this article has now been lost - no idea what it was last called, maybe [[381mm track gauge]] or somesuch. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 11:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
:Yes, I was reading it quite recently. It has been deleted, and there is a deletion log. I will raise the question with the admin who deleted it. '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 11:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
::No I won't - you've beaten me to it! However, I will lend support! '''[[User:Timothy Titus|<span style="color:green;">Timothy Titus</span>]] ''[[User talk:Timothy Titus|<sup style="color:orange;">Talk To TT</sup>]]''''' 11:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
:::I have added my "two bits" worth at that admin's talk page.. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:09, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

== Clean-up ==

In order to reduce the size of this template, I've removed a significant number of unused options. I realise this leaves a lot of one-way conversions (e.g. {{tlx|RailGauge|4.8mm}} works but {{tlx|RailGauge|0.189in}} doesn't), however as there are no articles which use the latter conversion, this shouldn't be a problem. Anything that's required in future can be re-instated, but please don't add entries unless they're going to be required, otherwise this template will just grow unnecessarily again.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Tivedshambo|<span style="color:#7F0000">'''&nbsp;Tivedshambo&nbsp;'''</span>]]&nbsp;([[User Talk:Tivedshambo|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Tivedshambo|c]]) 17:15, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

== Please add ==

Please add these specifications.
*{{tld|railgauge|59.06}}, {{tld|railgauge|59.06in}} and {{tld|railgauge|59.06"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=4|in=11|num=1|den=16|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1500}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|59.843}}, {{tld|railgauge|59.843in}} and {{tld|railgauge|59.843"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=4|in=11|num=5|den=6|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1520}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|76.575}}, {{tld|railgauge|76.575in}} and {{tld|railgauge|76.575"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=6|in=4|num=23|den=40|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1945}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|1980}}, {{tld|railgauge|1980mm}}, {{tld|railgauge|1.98}} and {{tld|railgauge|1.98m}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=1980|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|ft=6|in=5|num=19|den=20}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|77.95}}, {{tld|railgauge|77.95in}} and {{tld|railgauge|77.95"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=6|in=5|num=19|den=20|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1980}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|1981}} and {{tld|railgauge|1981mm}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=1981|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|ft=6|in=6|num=|den=}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|78}}, {{tld|railgauge|78in}}, {{tld|railgauge|78"}}, {{tld|railgauge|6ft6in}} and {{tld|railgauge|6'6"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=6|in=6|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1981}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|118.11}}, {{tld|railgauge|118.11in}}, {{tld|railgauge|118.11"}}, {{tld|railgauge|9ft10.11in}} and {{tld|railgauge|9'10.11"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=9|in=10|num=1|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=3}}
*{{tld|railgauge|59.06}}, {{tld|railgauge|59.06in}} and {{tld|railgauge|59.06"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=4|in=11|num=1|den=16|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1500}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|59.843}}, {{tld|railgauge|59.843in}} and {{tld|railgauge|59.843"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=4|in=11|num=5|den=6|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1520}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|76.575}}, {{tld|railgauge|76.575in}} and {{tld|railgauge|76.575"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=6|in=4|num=23|den=40|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1945}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|1980}}, {{tld|railgauge|1980mm}}, {{tld|railgauge|1.98}} and {{tld|railgauge|1.98m}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=1980|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|ft=6|in=5|num=19|den=20}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|77.95}}, {{tld|railgauge|77.95in}} and {{tld|railgauge|77.95"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=6|in=5|num=19|den=20|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1980}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|1981}} and {{tld|railgauge|1981mm}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=1981|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|ft=6|in=6|num=|den=}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|78}}, {{tld|railgauge|78in}}, {{tld|railgauge|78"}}, {{tld|railgauge|6ft6in}} and {{tld|railgauge|6'6"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=6|in=6|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=1981}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|6.35mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=6.35|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.25|num=|den=}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|7mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=7|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.276|num=|den=}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|16.48mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=16.48|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.649|num=|den=}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|21.97mm}} is really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=21.97|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|in=0.865|num=|den=}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.189in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.189"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.189|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=4.8}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.315in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.315"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.315|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=8}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.354in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.354"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.354|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=9}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.709in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.709"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.709|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.741in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.741"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.741|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=18.83}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.748in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.748"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.748|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=19}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.866in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.866"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=|in=0.866|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=22}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|69in}}, {{tld|railgauge|69"}}, {{tld|railgauge|5ft9in}} and {{tld|railgauge|5'9"}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/imperial</nowiki>|ft=5|in=8|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.75}}.
*{{tld|railgauge|1.8}}, {{tld|railgauge|1.8m}}, {{tld|railgauge|1800}} and {{tld|railgauge|1800mm}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=5|in=10|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.8}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|71}}, {{tld|railgauge|71in}}, {{tld|railgauge|71"}}, {{tld|railgauge|5ft11in}} and {{tld|railgauge|5'11"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=5|in=10|num=7|den=8|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|m=1.8}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.512}}, {{tld|railgauge|0.512in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.512"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=0.512|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=13}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.551}}, {{tld|railgauge|0.551in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.551"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=0.551|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=14}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|0.945}}, {{tld|railgauge|0.945in}} and {{tld|railgauge|0.945"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=0.945|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=24}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|1.339}}, {{tld|railgauge|1.339in}} and {{tld|railgauge|1.339"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=1.339|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=34}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|1.89}}, {{tld|railgauge|1.89in}} and {{tld|railgauge|1.89"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=1.890|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=48}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|2.52}}, {{tld|railgauge|2.52in}} and {{tld|railgauge|2.52"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=|in=2.52|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=64}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|118}}, {{tld|railgauge|118in}}, {{tld|railgauge|118"}}, {{tld|railgauge|9ft10in}} and {{tld|railgauge|9'10"}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=9|in=10|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=2997}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|84.25}}, {{tld|railgauge|84.25in}} and {{tld|railgauge|7ft0.25in}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=7|in=0|num=1|den=4|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=2140}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|84}}, {{tld|railgauge|84in}} and {{tld|railgauge|7ft}} are really <nowiki>{{Track gauge/imperial/sandbox|ft=7|in=|num=|den=|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|mm=2134}}</nowiki>.
*{{tld|railgauge|2134}} and {{tld|railgauge|2134mm}} are really {{<nowiki>RailGauge/metric</nowiki>|mm=2134|lk={{{lk}}}|disp={{{disp}}}|ft=7|in=|num=|den=}}.
[[Special:Contributions/58.138.55.55|58.138.55.55]] ([[User talk:58.138.55.55|talk]]) 14:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
:In view of the many problems we have had recently, please give a verifiable example of where each of these will be used. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 15:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

:: I note that {{user|58.138.55.55}} has been making several uncited edits recently, and may be the same editor who was making similar uncited original research earlier this year from that IP address.  Some of the recent edits appear to propagate errors introduced by TC (such as {{RailGauge|30}} being [[:Bosnian gauge]]).
:: Also note that I have edited the above request to use the {{tl|tld}} template prefix to suppress the multiple error messages. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 07:50, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

== Rail gauge correction required ==

For [[List of rail gauges#Medium gauge]] (Bulgaria): {{RailGauge|1009mm}} '''''however''''' {{convert|1009|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}} (3ft {{frac|3|18|25}} in), and {{convert|3|ft|3+11/32|in|abbr=on}},  please correct. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
:{{convert|3|ft|3+11/32|in|mm|abbr=on|disp=output only}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 00:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
::Are these figures [[WP:V|verifiable]]? That is, assuming that the Bulgarian engineers really did use a gauge of 1009 mm, are there any books that show the same gauge expressed to an exact thirty-second or twenty-fifth of an inch? This seems awfully precise considering permitted tolerances for tracklaying. After all, the figure is not so very far from {{convert|3|ft|3+3/4|in|mm|3|abbr=on}} and 0.65 mm is near as makes no odds. As for 3 ft {{frac|3|11|32}} in; that's surely an imperialisation of metre gauge? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 11:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:::An accuracy of ± ⅛" should be good enough for Wikipedia when converting from metric to imperial. 3&nbsp;mm is probably with gauge tolerance in most cases. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 11:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:The conversion in {{RailGauge|1009mm}} is '''''WRONG''''' because {{convert|3|ft|3+11/32|in|mm|abbr=on}}. If you-all would actually have read [[List of rail gauges#Medium gauge|the list]] you-all would have noticed that the track was ''originally'' laid to {{RailGauge|1}} and that ''lack of maintenance'' caused the [[Rail profile|rails]] to spread during use. As soon as proper maintenance was restored the gauge was restored back to {{RailGauge|1}}. Also [[Tolerance (engineering)|tolerance]] is irrelivant in the conversion of nominal [[track gauge]]s. We ''already'' have {{RailGauge|760}} and {{RailGauge|762}} as compared to {{convert|760|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}} and {{convert|762|mm|ftin|abbr=on}}, a difference of ''only'' 2 mm or a [[Real versus nominal value|nominal]] {{frac|1|8}} inch! [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 14:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

:::: Whilst I'd agree with ±&nbsp;⅛" (for non sub-miniature gauges), I'd be happy to go for ±&nbsp;0.1", and just use one decimal place, rather than vulgar fractions, for gauges not defined in imperial.  Gauges (over 4 inches) defined in imperial all appear to be in multiples of ⅛" (ie {{frac|1|8}}, {{frac|1|4}}, {{frac|3|8}}, {{frac|1|2}}, {{frac|5|8}}, {{frac|3|4}} and {{frac|7|8}}), and so are ok.<br>As for the Sofia Tramways, it rather looks like they slackened the tolerances for a while, but it essentially remained a nominal {{RailGauge|1m}} [[:metre gauge]] system, although without a source, it is difficult to tell. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 14:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

::::: We do have {{RailGauge|30}}, but {{convert|760|mm|ftin|1|abbr=on}} (apparently &frac12; [[German units of measurement|Austrian fathom]], which could ''actually'' be anything in the range {{convert|759.5|-|760.5|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}}), is a distinct ''nominal'' gauge, although the two are sufficiently close that they could probably inter-run without any problems at all. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 15:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
::It seems then, that 1009 mm is actually an accident caused by maintenance, or lack thereof, and is a compromise between the proper figure of 1000 mm and the widest figure found, 1013 mm. This shows that giving rail gauges to an accuracy better than 7 mm (half the difference, rounded up) may be considered unrealistic; it might be better to state "1007 mm ± 7 mm, 39.6 in ± 0.25 in". It is well known amongst engineers and mathematicians that the result of a calculation must never be expressed with greater precision than any of its operands: this is not a question of tolerance, but of mathematical accuracy - you cannot state as fact that which you cannot prove. I also note that the relevant entry bears a {{tlx|citation needed}}, and, as is well known, [[WP:CIRCULAR|Wikipedia is not a reliable source]]. Is there something ''outside'' Wikipedia that refers to these figures of 1009 mm; 3 ft {{frac|3|11|32}} in; 3 ft {{frac|3|18|25}} in, etc.? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 21:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:Again, again and again {{convert|1009|mm|in|2|abbr=on}} which is {{convert|9|mm|in|2|abbr=on}} '''''larger''''' than {{RailGauge|1000mm}} and thus '''''NOT''''' 3 ft {{frac|3|11|32}} in! Regardless of tolerance, it is the correct nominal conversion that counts. {{convert|3|ft|3+11/31|in|mm|abbr=on}}. In this case {{tl|RailGauge|1009mm}} needs to be corrected. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 00:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
:: Whilst it is true that {{tl|RailGauge}} is incorrect over its conversion of {{RailGauge|1009}} gauge, it does not necessarily need to be corrected to give "3&nbsp;ft&nbsp;3{{frac|5|7}}&nbsp;in" or similar (as I pointed out a few days ago); it could alternatively be deleted as a non-gauge.  Without any reliable source, I can see no justification for it either on this template or in the [[:List of rail gauges#Medium gauge]], where the table entry can be moved up to the "metre gauge" table, with a note about the spread of gauge using the {{tl|convert}} template, which I have now done. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 10:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

== Verifiability ==

I'd like to propose that all requests for additional gauges should be accompanied by evidence that such gauge really did exist, or that such conversion is quoted in reliable sources. This is primarily to prevent a repeat of the problems which we had earlier this year. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 11:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - too much hassle to clear up the mess afterwards. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 11:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - also to avoid template clutter (and slow loading). [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 14:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:The exiatence of a given [[track gauge]] may be verified from {{cite web| url=http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-e.html| title=Railroad Gauge Width| <!-- work=Паровоз ИС. Российский железнодорожный портал -->| <!-- accessdate=2007-11-29 -->}} as well as {{cite web| url=http://nl.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lijst_van_spoorwijdten&oldid=10277508| <!-- date=2007-11-25| --> |title=Lijst van spoorwijdten| work=nl.wikipedia| <!-- accessdate=2007-11-29 -->}}. In addition there is [[Jane's World Railways]][http://jwr.janes.com/public/jwr/index.shtml]. Unfortuantely the info is available by paid subscription only[http://jwr.janes.com/public/jwr/more_info.shtml#advantages] & [http://jwr.janes.com/public/jwr/more_info.shtml#search]. Perhaps ''Wikipedia'' could become a subscriber. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 14:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
::Unfortunately [http://nl.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lijst_van_spoorwijdten&oldid=10277508 Lijst van spoorwijdten] is merely a past version (dating from 25 November 2007) of [[:nl:Lijst van spoorwijdten]], which being a Wikipedia, is forbidden as a reference source. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 14:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
::: I'm not too convinced about ''{{cite web| url=http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-en.php| title=Railroad Gauge Width| first=D.| last=Zinoviev }}'' either. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 15:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
:Then the [http://nl.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lijst_van_spoorwijdten&oldid=10277508 Lijst van spoorwijdten] should be deleted where ever it is used in "references" and ''{{cite web| url=http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-en.php| title=Railroad Gauge Width| first=D.| last=Zinoviev }}'' should have a "caveat" attached. What ever the case may be, it is the only link  that lists {{RailGauge|1945}} for the [[Hollandsche IJzeren Spoorweg-Maatschappij]]. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 17:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
::No, no, [http://nl.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lijst_van_spoorwijdten&oldid=10277508 Lijst van spoorwijdten] was last revised on 28 mei (May) 2011! Ditto [[:nl:Lijst van spoorwijdten]] ("geschiedenis"). The Dutch article uses ''{{cite web| url=http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-en.php| title=Railroad Gauge Width| first=D.| last=Zinoviev }}'' as an external link [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 18:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
:::The ''current'' version was last revised 28 May 2011, yes, but [http://nl.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lijst_van_spoorwijdten&oldid=10277508 Lijst van spoorwijdten] is a link to an ''old'' version. Very close to the top is the text "Dit is een oude versie van deze pagina, voor het laatst bewerkt door [[:nl:Gebruiker:Robbot|Robbot]] ([[:nl:Overleg gebruiker:Robbot|Overleg]] | [[:nl:Speciaal:Bijdragen/Robbot|bijdragen]]) op 25 nov 2007 om 01:30.", which is Dutch, but it means "This is an old revision of this page, as edited by [[:nl:User:Robbot|Robbot]] ([[:nl:User talk:Robbot|Talk]] | [[nl:Special:Contributions/Robbot|contributions]]) on 25 November 2007 at 01:30. You will see a similar message at the top of any old version on English wikipedia as well, but it's easier to spot because of the pink box, see {{oldid|List of rail gauges|435481459|here, for example}}.
:::But it doesn't matter at all how old the page is, see [[WP:CIRCULAR]]. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 18:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
:Sorry, I missed the "fine print". So we can start to eliminate this link. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 00:18, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
:I hope some one can find a better (more autheritive) list on the web than ''{{cite web| url=http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-en.php| title=Railroad Gauge Width| first=D.| last=Zinoviev }}'', but that will take some doing. In the mean time, as I mentioned, I found that my 1969-70 edition of ''[[Jane's World Railways]]'' does not yet mention [[Iberian gauge]] for either for Spain or for Portugal. So much for absolute reliability. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:16, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
:: But is Mr Zinoviev a [[:WP:RS|reliable source]]? I'd like to establish where he gets his information, first, which so far seems to be fairly accurate.  I cannot see any real trace of sources, but neither does it appear to be [[WP:CIRCULAR]].  As it is, I'm cautious about citing it, but do not feel the urge to remove it as a reference at the moment. [[User:Tim PF|Tim PF]] ([[User talk:Tim PF|talk]]) 13:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
== New request ==

I have been ask to add "For [[Georgian Railways#History]] please add  ({{RailGauge|912mm|disp=s}}) to replace ({{convert|912|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on|disp=s}})" by [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] but the source in the article
is a dead link. Can anyone verify this entry? [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 09:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
:The railways of much of the former Russian empire were built to feet-and-inches measurements, not metric, so this is likely to be an approximation for an exact {{convert|3|ft|mm|3}}. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 20:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

More missings:
* 2000 mm mentioned in [[Cairngorm Mountain Railway]]
* 2438 mm
* 5500 mm
[[User:HTML2011|HTML2011]] ([[User talk:HTML2011|talk]]) 22:22, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
:2000 mm is verifiable, but why are the other two required? Can you provide sources that give these specific gauges? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 23:36, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
::See [[List of track gauges by size]]. [[User:HTML2011|HTML2011]] ([[User talk:HTML2011|talk]]) 01:39, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
:::No references are provided for those gauges in that article. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#d30000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 14:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
:For [[Minimum gauge railway]], {{RailGauge|15.3}} instead of {{convert|1|ft|3.3|in|mm|abbr=on}}. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 17:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
::Make that {{RailGauge|15.75}} for the [[Yunnan Burma Railway]] instead of {{RailGauge|400mm}}. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 18:13, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
:::Once again, for [[Cairngorm Mountain Railway]] and [[Cairngorm Mountain Railway#History]] {{RailGauge|2000}} instead of {{convert|2,000|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}} or 2,000&nbsp;mm (6&nbsp;ft 6¾&nbsp;in)
::::{{Done}} I have added 2,000mm conversion. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 14:05, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

== Disposition=or ==

For [[Pakistan Railways#Gauge]]: ({{RailGauge|1676|disp=or}}) ({{tl:RailGauge|1676|disp=or}}) instead of (1,676&nbsp;mm or 5&nbsp;ft 6 in) etc & for [[ALCO MRS-1#Development]] {{tl:RailGauge|ussg|disp=or}} instead of {{RailGauge|ussg|disp=s}} etc. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 16:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
: {{RailGauge|1676|disp=or}} and {{RailGauge|ussg|disp=or}}, the '''''"or"''''' still does not show! [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 16:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
::I have modified the sandbox version for the change in the metric to imperial conversion mode. If you want to check it out and see if there are any problems. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 21:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
::: "disp=or" still does not work here. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 15:45, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
::::Are you sure you are calling the '''sandbox version''' and for a '''metric to imperial conversion''' otherwise it will not display? I only changed one so that you could check it out and give some feedback to ensure that it does not cause problems with the various flags/options available to the template/ [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 15:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
:Pardon me, but where do I find the sandbox version? [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 22:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
::On the template page, at the bottom of the documentation is a box containing three lines; the second reads
:::''Editors can experiment in this template's [[Template:RailGauge/sandbox|sandbox]] <small style="font-style: normal">([{{fullurl: Template:RailGauge/sandbox| action=edit }} edit] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [{{fullurl:Special:ComparePages | page1={{urlencode:Template:RailGauge}}&page2={{urlencode:Template:RailGauge/sandbox}}}} diff])</small> and [[Template:RailGauge/testcases|testcases]] <small style="font-style: normal">([{{fullurl: Template:RailGauge/testcases| action=edit }} edit])</small> pages.''
::That is one of the standard positions for a sandbox link. More information may be found at [[Wikipedia:Template sandbox and test cases]]. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 23:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

== Alternate name and link for meter gauge ==

Seems a bit perverse that we don't have an alternate name and link for [[metre gauge]], which must be one of the most common gauges world-wide, and certainly more common than some (like Cape) gauges that do already have them. Or at least my attempt to request them doesn't work. 

Thus:

:<nowiki>{{RailGauge|sg|al=on|allk=on}}</nowiki> yields {{RailGauge|sg|al=on|allk=on}}
:<nowiki>{{RailGauge|cape|al=on|allk=on}}</nowiki> yields {{RailGauge|cape|al=on|allk=on}}

But:

:<nowiki>{{RailGauge|metre|al=on|allk=on}}</nowiki> yields {{RailGauge|metre|al=on|allk=on}}

Any chance of adding this, or telling me what I'm doing wrong?. -- [[User:Chris j wood|chris_j_wood]] ([[User talk:Chris j wood|talk]]) 11:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
:There was no code for it, but it's a reasonable request, so I've {{diff|Template:RailGauge|prev|510915827|added it}}. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 13:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
::Thanks -- [[User:Chris j wood|chris_j_wood]] ([[User talk:Chris j wood|talk]]) 14:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

== Error with RailGauge|900 ==

The "Railgauge|900" template ('' {{RailGauge|900}}'' ) produces an incorrect result, since '''2 ft 11 1/2 in''' would convert back to 902 millimetres.<br>The correct result would be '''2 ft 11 7⁄16 in''' ( ''{{convert|2|ft|11+7/16|in|mm|0|abbr=on}}'' ).<br>Could this please be fixed.<br>André Kritzinger 18:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

== Yet another rail gauge ==

For [[Dublin tramways#Dublin and Lucan Steam Tramway]] and [[Dublin and Lucan tramway#Closure]] {{RailGauge|62+3/16in}} or {{RailGauge|62.1875}} instead of {{convert|5|ft|2+3/16|in|mm|0|abbr=on}} gauge. Yet this gauge may be not authentic and may really be {{RailGauge|63}} gauge [http://gofree.indigo.ie/~nigelo/dbstframes.htm]. There is also [[Track gauge in Ireland]]. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 16:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
:{{Done}} added 62.1875. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 16:17, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

== Another new one ==

For [[DB Class V 51 and V 52#Development and design]]  {{RailGauge|860}} instead of {{convert|860|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}}. 23:48, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]]
:{{Done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 16:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
:: 0.86 in = ~ 55/64 in [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

== Yet another track gauge ==

For [[Washington Metro]] {{RailGauge|56.25}} and/or {{RailGauge|4ft8+1/4in}} instead of 4 ft 8¼ in (1429 mm). [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
:{{convert|56.25|in|mm|abbr=on}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:10, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
::Also for [[Washington Metro rolling stock]]. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 22:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
:::{{Done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 13:53, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

== Another esoteric addition ==

For articles dealing with lines in the [[Toronto]] area, background information, including that noted at http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/TSR/junction.htm, mention that there was a horse car track gauge of 4 feet 10 3/4 inches in use on some lines in that area prior to 1917. I believe that works out to 1492 mm. Please add this to the selection, as it would be useful in articles such as that for the [[Toronto Suburban Railway]].[[User:Raellerby|Raellerby]] ([[User talk:Raellerby|talk]]) 14:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
:{{Done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 00:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
::Interesting. This is close to: 
* {{RailGauge|58.875}} ([[Toronto subway and RT#Gauge]], [[Toronto Transit Commission#Streetcars]] & [[Toronto streetcar system#Track gauge]]) 
* {{RailGauge|1495}} (The infobox of [[Toronto streetcar system]]. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 21:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
== These Welsh again ==

{{resolved|Typo from source}}
Can someone take care? They had {{RailGauge|23.25}}. It's called [[Ffestiniog Railway]], but in Welsh: [[Rheilffordd Ffestiniog]] <s>(not redlinked?)</s> [redirect]. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 23:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
:I meant to say: should gauge {{code|1=23.25}} be included or be edited elsewhere? -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 20:27, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
::Not yet taken care of. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 22:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
:::What conversion do you want? [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 17:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
::::Looked at the source. The railline website itself, history page, says: ''The 23.5 inch gauge (just short of 2 feet)'' [http://www.festrail.co.uk/fr_history_1.htm?mn=14&sm=14-0]. Then the ''original'' gauge would be {{RailGauge|23.5}} (covered here). I could not find any ''23.55'' on the site (in little time). The newly laid track can have a different gauge, to be found. I changed the page to say "23.5". (By now, the red error is gone so we can close this one). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 18:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

== To the nearest 1/16 ==

Compare {{RailGauge|760}} with {{convert|760|mm|ftin|abbr=on}} or {{convert|760|mm|in|2|abbr=on}}. Me thinks the output should be 2 ft 5 {{frac|15|16}} in. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 22:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
:Makes sense. btw, {{convert|1/16|in|mm|3}}. Is there a torerance defined in gauges? -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 13:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
::There must be something of the sort, because you can't expect 100% accuracy in the laying of track. I've never seen a tolerance actually written down, but taking standard gauge as an example: as is well known, this is {{convert|4|ft|8+1/2|in|mm}}. However, it isn't always that figure. In the early days, Stephenson's lines were laid to {{convert|4|ft|8|in|mm|abbr=on}} until it was found that there was too much friction between flange and rail - so the flange-to-flange dimension was kept at 4'8" with the rail gauge being widened by half an inch. More recently, British main lines have been laid to a nominal gauge of {{convert|1432|mm|ftin}} for over 30 years, so a variation of 3 mm is easily accommodated without altering the wheels of rolling stock - this narrowing helps to prevent [[Hunting (engineering)|hunting]] at high speed.
::We might imagine that a nominal {{convert|4|ft|8+1/2|in|mm|abbr=on}} allowed a tolerance of {{convert|1/4|in|mm|abbr=on}}, so the minimum gauge would be {{convert|4|ft|8+1/4|in|mm|abbr=on}}. If the modern 1432 mm gauge has a tolerance equal to the difference between it and the established  standard gauge - 3 mm - its minimum would also be {{convert|1429|mm|ftin|abbr=on}}.
::Rail gauge tolerances are probably of the order of one-eighth of an inch. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 15:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
:::It's the definition that counts, not the tolerance(s). We have {{RailGauge|1432}} for Hong Kong. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
::::Is it defined in mm or in inches? -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 00:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
::[[Rail transport in Hong Kong#Rail gauges and power supply]] defines it in mm. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::This example is trivial, because the ms end up nicely in {{frac|1|8}} inches. The example in the opening line is more to the point. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 12:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
:::The British 1,432-millimetre weirdness is now phased out (being undone and restored back to 1,435 millimetres).  New track, replacements and upgrades should all be TSI compliant now as nominal 1,435-millimetre except for odd bits of replacement.  The GB [[Rail Safety and Standards Board]] [http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_Group_Standards/Infrastructure/Railway%20Group%20Standards/GCRT5021%20Iss%205.pdf GCRT5021 Track System Requirements] in paragraph 2.9.1.1 defines GB track gauge as 1,435 mm plus in paragraph 2.11.3 design-speed related tolerances 1,430–1,450 millimetre for plain main line track, and up to 1,426–1,465 millimetre for off-piste slow-speed.  The specified critical upper threshold is 1,480 millimetres whereby rail traffic is stopped until it's fixed.  Earlier revisions of GCRT5021 ''did'' still allow laying lengths of 1,432 millimetre during replacement works, but that explicit paragraph has been removed, with only the allowed tolerances given in its place. —[[User:Sladen|Sladen]] ([[User talk:Sladen|talk]]) 10:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

:The input can be either mm or inches. The ouput should be as closely as possible reflect the input without taking tolerance into consideration. Example {{RailGauge|762}} or {{RailGauge|30}}. In that case the conversion is exact. The actual layout of the track is immaterial. 03:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]]
::We already have {{RailGauge|56.25}} gauge for the [[Washington Metro]], but not the reverse {{tlx|RailGauge|1429mm}}.
[[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::We cannot leave out the margin of precision. If the railway company writes in mm, the number ''implies'' a precision. If we convert that to inches, the [[significant figure]]s are there. Another solution would be: follow the Railway Company definition: if they define in inches, we mention them first (and the conversion is bracketed). We should not revert that. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 09:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::Back to the opening issue: going from 760 mm to inches requires a rounding (or precision). 760 mm converts to {{convert|760|mm|inch|sigfig=10|disp=output only}}. To get 760 mm: 29 {{frac|7|8}} inch is wrong by 1.175 mm, 29 {{frac|15|16}} inch is wrong by 0.4125 mm. I see no reason to use the higher error. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 12:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
:Ok I have made the change to this one. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 13:13, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
::Checking: {{convert|2|ft|5+15/16|in|mm|abbr=on}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 01:52, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
== Another odball ==

For [[Wuppertal-Vohwinkel–Essen-Überruhr railway]], {{RailGauge|820}} [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{convert|820|mm|in|2|abbr=on}}, {{convert|820|mm|in|3|abbr=on}}[[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
::Not yet done. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 03:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
:::From 820 mm: 32 {{frac|2|8}} is wrong by 0.85 mm. 32 {{frac|5|16}} is wrong by 0.7375 mm. So we should use 32 {{frac|5|16}}. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 12:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
::::I really don't think that we should worry about "errors" where the difference is less than about 3 mm or {{frac|1|8}} inch. Can you demonstrate that the railway engineers used finer tolerances? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 13:56, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::I do not have to prove anything. What you (or I) ''think'' or ''worry about'' does not matter. We only need to make the figures match as good as possible. A very good and simple check is called the round trip: what if you do reverse conversion? 32 {{frac|5|16}} &rarr; 821 mm, which is wrong (so maybe we even should go to {{frac|1|32}}). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 14:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::Why is 821 mm necessarily wrong? If the railway concerned lays its track to a tolerance of 3 mm, it's well within limits. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 15:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::: This is like the problem with [[ordnance]] calibres, although rather simpler. "820mm" is not merely a measurement, it's an ordinal name as well. Decauville, Orenstein & Koppel, or whoever it was who builds this stuff describes them as "820mm" and not "821mm". We should not mess with this naming!   Unit conversion is a convenience for those sorting by gauge and for those who are metrically innumerate (or imperially innumerate, in the other direction). We'd no more rename this to 821mm gauge than we'd rename it to 32 {{frac|5|16}}" gauge. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 16:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::::It is a name too, indeed. And also: when it is defined 820 mm, who are we to change that to 821 mm? Rounding issues and precision are a numerical thing in themselves, before we take a look at the practical situation. Basically, in physics measurement, the number is within half of the last (smallest) unit. So here: within 0.5 mm (so between 819.5 and 820.5 mm). If we do want to use tolerance, 3 mm is not the answer. TGV (high speed lines) are much more precise: 1 mm ({{frac|3|64}} inch) [http://www.theculturedtraveler.com/archives/Nov2003/TGV.htm]. Another point: if you use the tolerance to ''change the basic length'', you are already consuming that tolerance. While 821 mm is within the 3 mm tolerance, after that the remaining tolerance is 2 mm (because you cannot go over the initial 820+3 limit). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 16:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::I didn't say that it should be changed to 821 mm. I wanted to stress that giving overprecise conversions is misleading. To put it another way: is 820 mm accurate to one millimetre, or to two significant figures? It might allow plus or minus 5 mm, and I wouldn't consider that unreasonable. The UK railway network is laid to a nominal gauge of 1435 mm (see [http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_Group_Standards/Infrastructure/Railway%20Group%20Standards/GCRT5021%20Iss%205.pdf this doc], section 2.9.1.1), but this is only required to be maintained between 1430 mm and 1450 mm; on lines subject to a maximum speed of less than 95 mph, this tolerance is even greater (section 2.11.3 of the same doc). --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 17:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::All right you did not say to change it to 821 mm, but you'd accept it. Great link btw. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 23:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::We aren't laying PW though, we're defining the names of articles. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 23:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
:{{RailGauge|820}} is what is given in the article [[Wuppertal-Vohwinkel–Essen-Überruhr railway]] and the imperial output should be as closely as possible in fractions as is the case for example with the [[Iberian gauge]] {{RailGauge|1668}} ({{convert|1668|mm|in|2|abbr=on|disp=s}}). Tolerances are irrelevant here, both input and output are "[[Real versus nominal value#Engineering|nominal]]". [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 05:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
::Try {{convert|2|ft|8+1/4|in|mm|abbr=on}}, {{convert|2|ft|8+5/16|in|mm|abbr=on}} or {{convert|2|ft|8+9/32|in|mm|abbr=on}} [[User:Peter' Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 02:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
:::Converted: 2 ft 8 {{frac|9|32}} in makes 819.94 mm. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 10:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
::::Peter Horn, how is the imperial size "nominal" in the 820 mm case? A reader ending up here by converting from inches should arrive at "820", so 2 ft 8 {{frac|9|32}} is best. No toleance involved indeed, but maths, precision and rounding yes. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 10:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
::::That said, I think adding some 820 mm to the template can be done right away. If this thread ends up on a different value, we can change~that later on. The article does not have to wait. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 10:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
== Russian gauge ==

Could we add "[[Russian gauge]]" {{RailGauge|1520mm|al=on}} both as recognised input as outgoing allk link to the page (outgoing link possibly also in {{RailGauge|1524mm|lk=on}}, as it can be a range of gauges?). If the habit here is such, the short "Russian" could be added too. Since the name is obiquous, it could have been discussed before but I could not find it. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 10:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
:I have added Russian to {{RailGauge|1520mm|al=on}}. You can use <nowiki>{{RailGauge|russian|al=on}}</nowiki> as input and link it on output with <nowiki>{{RailGauge|russian|al=on|allk=on}}</nowiki> that gives {{RailGauge|russian|al=on|allk=on}}. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 00:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
{{od}}Since {{RailGauge|1524|al=on}} is Russian ''too'', '''I propose adding''': {{RailGauge|1524|al=on|lk=on}} ''also'' returns the named link [[Russian gauge]] (as does {{RailGauge|1520|al=on|lk=on}}). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 03:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

== Yet another oddball ==

For [[Dresdner Verkehrsbetriebe#Tram network]] {{RailGauge|1450}} instead of {{convert|1,450|mm|ftin|2|abbr=on}}. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
:Should be added because it is a used gauge, right. It would be 4 ft 9 {{frac|3|32}} in I suggest. Reverse calculation leads to 1450.18 mm, which rounds nicely to 1450. Since this gauge is close to the standard 1435 mm one, it makes sense to be this precise in inches (to maintain a distinction). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 08:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
::{{done}} [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 14:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
:Merci, [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 14:26, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
== Space after template ==

I noticed that, when the template is used, it displays with unnecessary "internal" spaces as well as with a space following it.  The result is that, when one (naturally) types a space between the template and the following word, it causes a double space.<br><br>Examples are {{RailGauge|2ft|al=on}} and {{RailGauge|600|al=on}} followed by double spaces.<br>Examples are 2 ft (610 mm) and 600 mm (1 ft 11... (Typed out to compare).<br>(It looks like "ft" is followed by a double space, but not "mm".)<br><br>It even happens when the template is followed by a comma or fullstop as in {{RailGauge|2ft6in|al=on}}, and {{RailGauge|2ft6in|al=on}}.<br>It even happens when the template is followed by a comma or fullstop as in 2 ft 6 in (762 mm), and 2 ft 6 in (762 mm). (Typed out).<br>At least here "internal" double spaces don't happen - compare the punctiation marks after (these), (brackets).<br><br>Examples with the "al=on" option omitted display as {{RailGauge|2ft}} with double "internal" and single end spaces.<br>Examples with the "al=on" option omitted display as 2 ft (610 mm) with double "internal" and single end spaces (Typed out to compare)<br>(Again it's the "ft"...)<br><br>The problem does not occur when an alternative name exists, for example:<br>with {{RailGauge|3ft6in|al=on}} and others.<br>with 3 ft 6 in (1,067 mm) Cape gauge and others. (Typed out to compare)<br>(Unfortunately I cannot offhand think of a named imperial-to-metric conversion from a round foot value with no inches to see if the "ft" would screw up again....)<br><br>While I'm at it, should 11 ½ have a space in in, or should it be 11½ with no space?<br><br>André Kritzinger 01:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:I don't see any double [[Period (punctuation mark)|periods]]. Do you have any unusual fonts installed? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 11:45, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
::No, nothing, I use it as is. Not even on email. I use Internet Explorer, if that would make a difference.<br>André Kritzinger 12:01, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Well, I see two instances of a triple period ("{{tq|1 ft 11... (Typed}}" and "{{tq|the "ft"...)}}"), and one of a quadruple period ("{{tq|screw up again....)}}"), but these are all from your plain text, none are generated by {{tlx|railgauge}}. Does anybody else see any ''double'' periods?
::::Grrr... (The second language barrier tripped me up again! I'm too used to the term "[[full stop]])".<br>I meant space. What the spacebar does. The issue is therefore about double spaces. My apologies! (I edited the above.)<br>André Kritzinger 14:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::It is to do with the non-breaking spaces, it needs to detect if there is any inches or fraction to follow before outputting it. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 16:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
::::There must be a better way. Why not just make {{tl|nowrap}} part of the RailGauge template, as in "{{nowrap|{{RailGauge|3ft6in|al=on}}}}"? (Obviously the gauge name will somehow have to be allowed to wrap, though.)<br>Like this with the wrong commas: ((nowrap|((RailGauge|3ft6in|al=on)))).<br>André Kritzinger 18:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=al=on}}. → {{RailGauge|2ft|al=on}}.
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=al=on}} text → {{RailGauge|2ft|al=on}} text
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=al=on|4=wrap=y}}. → {{RailGauge|2ft|al=on|wrap=y}}.
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=al=on|4=wrap=y}} text → {{RailGauge|2ft|al=on|wrap=y}} text
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft}}. → {{RailGauge|2ft}}.
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft}} text → {{RailGauge|2ft}} text
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=wrap=y}}. → {{RailGauge|2ft|wrap=y}}.
:::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=wrap=y}} text → {{RailGauge|2ft|wrap=y}} text
:::::Why not omit the {{para|al|on}} since there is no alternate name to show? --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 18:56, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:::One could. But that doesn't fix the bug, it just sidesteps it. And an instruction to that effect would have to be included in the template handling notes, making it more complex, not simpler. Besides, the "internal" double spaces are still there.<br>André Kritzinger 20:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=al=on}} expands to {{tag|span|params=class="nowrap"|content=2&amp;nbsp;ft&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;(610&amp;nbsp;mm)}}&amp;nbsp; which displays as "<span class="nowrap">2&nbsp;ft&nbsp;&nbsp;(610&nbsp;mm)</span>&nbsp;"
::::*{{tlx|RailGauge|600mm|3=al=on}} expands to {{tag|span|params=class="nowrap"|content=600&amp;nbsp;mm&amp;nbsp;(1&amp;nbsp;ft&amp;nbsp;{{tag|span|params=class="frac nowrap"|content=11{{tag|sup|content=&amp;#32;5}}&frasl;{{tag|sub|content=8}}}}&amp;nbsp;in)}}&amp;nbsp; which displays as "<span class="nowrap">600&nbsp;mm&nbsp;(1&nbsp;ft&nbsp;<span class="frac nowrap">11<sup>&#32;5</sup>&frasl;<sub>8</sub></span>&nbsp;in)</span>&nbsp;"
::::All apparent spaces except the sole instance of <code>&amp;#32;</code> are in fact [[non-breaking space]]s, <code>&amp;nbsp;</code>; one characteristic of these is that when several occur, the same number are displayed - by contrast, more than one successive normal spaces always shrink to a single one. The case of <code>&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;</code> seems to be because the gauge is whole feet - there are no inches. If you put {{tlx|RailGauge|2ft6in|3=al=on}} this gives {{RailGauge|2ft6in|al=on}} and there is no double space. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 21:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:::There is still a space between the {{tlx|RailGauge|2ft6in|3=al=on}} template and, for example, a full stop. For example, {{RailGauge|2ft6in|al=on}}. Instead of<br>2 ft 6 in (762 mm).<br>André Kritzinger 22:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
::::Which is what you would expect as al=on should only ever be used on those gauges that actually have an alternative name. The example you quote does not have an alternative name so should not have al=on on the template call. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 22:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:::That's not what the handling notes say. At present it just reads "The al, lk and disp parameters are optional."<br>It does not specify that "The al parameter should never be used with any un-named gauge." And if it did, a list of those named gauges where its use would be permissible should be included.<br>André Kritzinger 23:36, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
:I have tweaked the imperial conversion in the sandbox to see if it solves the double spacing problem. If you can try this out and let me know if it solves the problem, without creating new problems, I can put live. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 12:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I made some comparisons:<br>
*{{RailGauge|2ft|al=on}}. Real from {{tlx|RailGauge|2ft|3=al=on}}<br>
*{{RailGauge/sandbox|2ft|al=on}}. Sandbox from {{tlx|RailGauge/sandbox|2ft|3=al=on}}<br>
*{{RailGauge|2ft}}. Real from {{tlx|RailGauge|2ft}}<br>
*{{RailGauge/sandbox|2ft}}. Sandbox from {{tlx|RailGauge/sandbox|2ft}}<br>
*{{RailGauge|3ft|al=on}}. Real from {{tlx|RailGauge|3ft|3=al=on}}<br>
*{{RailGauge/sandbox|3ft|al=on}}. Sandbox from {{tlx|RailGauge/sandbox|3ft|3=al=on}}<br>
*{{RailGauge|3ft}}. Real from {{tlx|RailGauge|3ft}}<br>
*{{RailGauge/sandbox|3ft}}. Sandbox from {{tlx|RailGauge/sandbox|3ft}}<br>
The double space after "ft" is fixed, thank you, and it doesn't look like there's any new problem. The double space from the unnecessary use of "|al=on" still happens, though.<br>
(While you're tweaking, remember to also check the "Railgauge|900" and "Railgauge|900mm" template result: "2 ft 11 1/2 in" instead of "2 ft 11 7⁄16 in")<br>André Kritzinger 23:18, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
:OK. I have put the modified imperial template live and changed the conversion for 900mm. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 08:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
:::{{done}}} as for the double spaces within. Examples show it looks OK. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 09:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
::Reopened below, [[Template_talk:RailGauge#Edit_proposal_.28capitalised_input_for_gauge_name.29|here]]. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 18:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
:::{{done}} as for the original problem (trailing space). See [[Template_talk:RailGauge#Edit_proposal_.28capitalised_input_for_gauge_name.29|edit request]] below. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 09:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

== Edit proposal (capitalised input for gauge name) ==

{{edit protect|ans=yes}}
*About the code that adds the alternative name, right after the {{code|1=#default}} line. It now says:
: {{code|1=<nowiki>{{#switch:{{{1}}}|...</nowiki>}}
For correctness, it should be:
: {{code|1=<nowiki>{{#switch:{{lc:{{{1}}}}}|...</nowiki>}}
As it is now, capitalised input like "Standard" is not recognised here. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 14:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
* A nearby issue: when the {{code|1=al=on}} does not fire (there is no alternate name found), the template produces a final space (that would preceed the alt name). This is not preferred. I have proposed, in the {{tl|RailGauge/sandbox}} ([http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Template:RailGauge/sandbox&diff=538059962&oldid=538059534 this edit]), to only produce the space when an alt name is found. The sandbox also has the lc-issue solved. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 15:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
::The issue was raised earlier above in [[#Space after template]]. I did not that one before I posted here.
::So: >{{RailGauge|3ft|al=on}}<. The sandbox shows a fix: >{{RailGauge/sandbox|3ft|al=on}}<. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 18:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
'''I propose''' to put the full {{tl|RailGauge/sandbox}} code into the live template. It should solve both issues. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 18:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:EP --> --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 18:29, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

== Iberian gauge ==

Could we add "Iberian" gauge as a gauge by name, and linkable to [[Iberian gauge]]? Currently only numeric input is available: {{railGauge|1668|al=on|allk=on}}. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 15:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:: The traditional Spanish and traditional Portuguese gauges are different by 9 mm, although there is interoperability of rolling stock at moderate speeds. [[User:Afterbrunel|Afterbrunel]] ([[User talk:Afterbrunel|talk]]) 08:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:::So it would be wrong to state: Iberian gauge=1668mm? Then I'll drop the proposal. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 10:24, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

== Oddballs ==

[[Tatra K2]] & [[Tatra T2]] mention(ed) a gauge of {{convert|1535|mm|ftin|abbr=on}}. Does such a gauge actually exist? And if so, where? I have changed it to {{RailGauge|1524}}. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC) [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 23:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
:Above, at [[#Russian gauge]], I have just repeated my proposal: input 1524mm can return a link to [[Russian gauge]] ''too'' (as does input 1520mm). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 03:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
::But that does not answer my question: From where does the gauge {{convert|1535|mm|ftin|abbr=on}} come? Which, if any, tram systems in the former USSR, now Russia etc., used it? [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 14:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
:::I did not claim I was. I was just noting that you changed it to ''Russian gauge'', which makes a bit more sense here than just the number 1524 mm. I did do some research on 1535 mm too, but did not find anything noteworthy. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 13:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
:That is probably because 1535 mm gauge did not ever exist. [[User:Peter Horn|Peter Horn]] [[User talk:Peter Horn|User talk]] 18:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

== Edit proposal (prefixed space in imperial inch-with-fraction situation) ==

{{edit protect|answered=yes}}
'''Issue''': Currently, they have a leading space in some situations (actually an nbsp). This space shows in tables (like {{tl|RailGauge}} documentation) and infoboxes. Examples:
* >{{RailGauge|2.5in}}<
* >{{RailGauge|2.125in}}<
* >{{RailGauge|2.5in|wrap=y}}< wrap=y
* >{{RailGauge|2.125in|wrap=y}}< wrap=y

'''Cause''': It happens when 1. imperial units are put first, and 2. no ft is defined or shown, and 3. the inch measure has a fraction (not decimals).<br/>
'''Solution''': I have adjusted the subtemplate {{tl|RailGauge/imperial/sandbox}} (in its sandbox; [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Template%3ARailGauge%2Fimperial%2Fsandbox&diff=538894859&oldid=538857401 this] version). Note: the main {{tl|RailGauge}} is ''not'' altered.<br/>
'''Testcases''': Sandbox checks:
* >{{RailGauge/sandbox|2.5in}}<
* >{{RailGauge/sandbox|2.125in}}<
* >{{RailGauge/sandbox|2.5in|wrap=y}}< wrap=y
* >{{RailGauge/sandbox|2.125in|wrap=y}}< wrap=y
See alse {{tl|RailGauge/testcases}}: the issue is gone, and no new issues arise. Being a technicality, I think this is not controversial.<br/>
'''Edit request''' replace {{tl|RailGauge/imperial}} with all code from {{tl|RailGauge/imperial/sandbox}} ([http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Template%3ARailGauge%2Fimperial%2Fsandbox&diff=538894859&oldid=538857401 this] version). Do not touch main template RailGauge.
-[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 10:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:<s>Paused the request.</s> -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 15:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:Reactivated the request. Situation for {{para|wrap|''y''}} now covered too. See testcases. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 16:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
::[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:EP --> OK I have put live - revert out of problems are found. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 23:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks. Did not see aberrations so far. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 00:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC)