Steam Info Box Templates
Laura N Gerard
I am using Facepunch Steamworks (GitHub - Facepunch/Facepunch.Steamworks: Another fucking c# Steamworks implementation) inside a Unity Windows build, deployed via Steam. The device is authenticated first with the Nakama server, after which I try to get a steam auth token via SteamUser.GetAuthSessionTicketAsync() from the Steamworks API.
Will try this - on that note I was wondering if you were planning to upgrade your AWS images soon? I am using your CloudFormation templates there for my test servers, but 3.7.0 seems to be the last update on Heroic Labs in the AWS marketplace.
As soon as we began, it became clear that Casey and I should refocus the conversation. For the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had proposed the day before its climate change disclosure rule. The effect on all investor-owned companies including investor-owned utilities could be earth-shattering.
Now fortunately, utilities have been ahead of the curve. EEI and AGA developed detailed templates for their member utilities to disclose climate change info in formats that ESG investors like. The SEC rule would, however, push utilities to work quite a bit harder on climate disclosure.
The second requirement of the new rule is disclosure of historical carbon emissions. It requires disclosures of scope one emissions, which are direct emissions, such as smokestacks and tail pipes. Scope two is indirect emissions, associated with purchase of electricity, water, cooling, and steam. Scope three emissions are indirect, inherent in the upstream supply chain of a company, and downstream use of the products sold.
There's a third aspect in this rule, which is important, a requirement that if your financial statements are impacted by climate change events, transition activities and identified climate-related risks, to include in your footnotes to the financial statements, which are audited, the impact of that climate change to any relevant line items within your financial statements.
This line-level disclosure is not required if the impact on a line item is less than one percent of the total line item; I want to call your attention to the fact that this one percent threshold is quite low.
I've noticed that in some North American railway articles/templates we use the terms Class 1 railroad, Class 2 railroad, and Class 3 railroad, while in others we use Class I railroad, Class II railroad, and Class III railroad. I think we should pick either numbers or Roman numerals and use that in all articles, rather than having a mixture. My personal preference would be to use Class I/II/III since that's what the AAR uses, although I've seen Class 1/2/3 used enough that it's likely a valid alternative. I'd like to see what other people think. Comments? JYolkowski 02:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
You may have noticed User:Slambo/Train project templates showing up in a few categories today. Well, I got tired of searching for all of the template definitions that we have created for use in railroad related articles, so I made a list of them. Just building a list wouldn't show me what I wanted, so I added examples and parameters to the page and noted which categories each template will add an article to. I'm looking around to find out what other templates we're using and eventually plan to move this list out of my userspace into something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Templates. If you know of one or more that aren't in the list, please add them. slambo 17:30, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
I'm willing to help in any way I can, but have thus far limited my attempts to editing out and clarifying some entries in the Steam Locomotive Teminology page. I'm still a bit awed by Wiki: and am not sure that I'm up to major editing on a page; that said, I'm willing to serve as a resource to help others. What qualifications I have are this: I've been involved in model railroading for about 45 years, on and off, and am conversant and knowledgeable in much of the major and minor arcana thereof. I've also been a licensed steam locomotive engineer, and spent 5 years working at an American railroad museum, hence have some familiarity with aspects of rail preservation, as well. Feel free to contact me at philjern [at] gmail.com with any questions.
It's now May 8, and I see more support for the use of "and" in the article title than I do for "&". In the spirit of finding concensus, I'll wait one more day before I move the page back to use "and" in the title. If there is anyone else who thinks it should be "&" in the title, now's the time to speak up. slambo 15:48, May 8, 2005 (UTC)
I've created this article, partly to dispel the myth of the Granite Railroad being the first (and have corrected the mentions of that). I haven't yet gone through and added all the railroads listed in the references; if anyone wants to jump in that would be great, especially if someone can determine whether any before the Granite Railroad evolved into common carriers with continuous operation. --SPUI (talk) 08:21, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
The Trains Wikiportal is live. I've set up initial processes to update the Featured article (Archive, Candidates), Featured picture (Archive, Candidates) and Did you know (Archive, Candidates) sections similar to the overall processes for these articles on the Main page, and I've added a couple of items for each of the three candidate pages to start things off. The other sections on the portal are pretty straightforward. I took the links from the project hierarchy box (as shown on the project page) for the links in the Where to start section. The only other section that I think we might want to add would be a "Today in rail transport history" section similar to the Selected anniversaries section on the main page. I haven't started that yet, but I wonder if there are any other ideas for sections that we might want to add to the portal or existing sections that we might want to change? slambo 14:34, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
It's not usually obvious what years to use for the infobox. Yeah, if we had a separate page for each company, we could go from incorporation to death. But we don't (we often merge predecessors). Thus there really is no consistency between articles.
It seems that there are so many different possibilities that the dates are almost useless. See Talk:New York City Subway for one example. Can anyone convince me that there is a way to make it consistent, or just add to this discussion? --SPUI (talk) 18:06, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
Trunk line articles include a station listing of the original main line(s). Included is a list of branches, with general information, usually rounded to the nearest year. Full detail is provided for the main line.
System articles, when they evolved from an original line(s), include information on that line similar to a trunk line article. Otherwise, lines and systems that were taken over are described in general terms, without listing all branches.
An interesting problem arises when a modern-day line does not follow the same path as the original company. For instance, the Fairmount Line is most but not all of the old Midland Railroad, and the rest of the Midland is now the Franklin Line. Here, the history could be in the one article while the station listing is in the one about the modern line.
Each company should be at its last name before it was merged into a larger system. Disambiguation should have the state name in parentheses, not "of State" appended, unless the latter was the common or official name.
As the infobox says "years of operation", the opening year of the first section of original main line should be used. In cases like the Old Colony Railroad, the Boston and Providence Railroad opened before it, but was not leased until later - the B&P's date is not used. The end date is the last time trains ran over the main line. If there is ambiguity, a history section can be linked to, like on New York City Subway.
In general, this sounds like a good guideline. I would add a list of company officers to the information that should be in the article. As a minimum, I think the names of the presidents and/or CEOs and their years in office (like we have on Southern Pacific Railroad or on Pennsylvania Railroad) should be included. For short lists where we don't have articles on the individual people yet (like on Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad), we can include a little more biographical information.
Also, a system map should be included on railroad articles. A reader living in Frankfurt or Perth (any of them) might not know where Rochelle, Illinois, is and might not even know where Illinois is within the United States (assuming that the reader knows that Illinois is a US state in the first place). Ideally, the maps would show how the railroad relates to the surrounding political divisions (like on Canadian Pacific Railway or on Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad). Where the system isn't big enough to cross many borders, an inset style map (like on Cincinnati, Lebanon and Northern Railroad) should be used.
I've been meaning to put together a WikiProject Trains style guide for some time that would include guidelines on what information should be listed in railroad-related articles. Looks like we've got a start at such a guide here, providing there's enough consensus... slambo 10:57, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
We're all adding and editing trains articles on our own, but it seems to me that we might have a better chance at building up feature-quality articles if we do a collaboration of the week like other WikiProjects do. Several of us are helping out on Indian Railways right now which is the current India Collaboration of the Week. How much support is there among us on WikiProject Trains to do a Trains Collaboration of the Week? slambo 14:05, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
I'd like some comments on the maps I've made for New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad and Pennsylvania-Reading Seashore Lines. These are meant to be general locator maps rather than detailed system maps, which would ideally go in the history section. --SPUI (talk) 23:42, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
b37509886e