Talk:Wien Hauptbahnhof

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Trains: Stations Mid‑importance Trains Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This article is supported by WikiProject Stations. Austria Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AustriaWikipedia:WikiProject AustriaTemplate:WikiProject AustriaAustria articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I've moved the page back to the normal name to follow the English references, and added "railway station" to match the other stations in Vienna. If anyone objects to using the media, travel books etc as a source for English usage of the local name, see also

• I would suggest that "railway station" be deleted from the name of both this article and the Wien Westbahnhof railway station article – to a bilingual reader like me, the present names are tautologous and look weird. Bahnfrend (talk) 13:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd raise no objection to that (as long as we keep Hauptbahnhof - anyone who thinks this station is "central" is any English sense of the word should trying walking to the city centre...). Wheeltapper (talk) 22:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be acceptable to move this and the Westbahnhof article to "Vienna Hauptbahnhof" and "Vienna Westbahnhof" respectively? I understand the move to "Hauptbanhof", however, "railway station" is redundant and you would be hard-pressed to find anyone who referred to Vienna as "Wien" in English. RGloucester — ☎ 17:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The question is not really what people call the city, it is more about what they call the station (to the extent that the issue ever arises!). They don't always match; eg people call the English town Whittlesey, but its station Whittlesea railway station. While there is no perfect answer for Vienna, at least the official name is completely unambiguous and follows some good sources. It also offers consistency with Wikipedia articles on stations in Prague, Cologne, etc.Wheeltapper (talk) 19:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think English speakers generally call the station "Wien Hauptbahnhof". I don't think they call it "Vienna Central Station" either. In my experience, it would be called "Vienna Hauptbahnhof", because many English speakers cannot even pronounce "Wien", however "Hauptbahnhof" has become an accepted term in English that is pronounceable. This is illustrated by this link, which shows that "Hauptbahnhof" is used in English. However, "Wien" is not. English speakers will not call the station or the city "Wien".

As far as "Cologne, that article was only recently moved back to the German name. However, I don't approve of that either. It doesn't make any sense to use a German name that many English speakers don't even know how to pronounce, when there is an acceptable English name for the city. The Prague article is even worse, as English speakers will have no idea how to pronounce the sea of diacritics, not to mention that Slavic names are inevitably harder for English speakers to read than German ones. We need to make these articles accessible to the English reader, and hiding them behind foreign names is a very poor idea. RGloucester — ☎ 15:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We don't actually have to know how to pronounce something to read about it, and IMHO hiding articles behind "pronounceable" but otherwise largely unknown names would be far worse. In reality I doubt many English speakers generally call it anything, what with it being a new-ish, foreign, station in a place where they probably aren't going to be arriving by train(!). We do at least have reliable sources for Wien Hauptbahnhof: OeBB, Today's Railways, Railway Gazette. While this is hardly a decent source, in the past I have heard Anglophones say something like "Collnn Hauptbahnhof"; it was clear they were attempting "Kerln Hauptbahnhof" rather than "Cologne Main station", even if the outcome wasn't perfect.

If articles could only use names that people without specific knowledge could pronounce, how would we deal with places like Ruswarp railway station and Loogabarooga railway station? Wheeltapper (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify: What are we actually talking about, the railway station or Wien resp. Vienna?

• The article is already at
  Talk:Wien Hauptbahnhof railway station. This is a strange combination of redirects, it seems to me that we need some admin action to move this talk page to where it belongs, i.e. Talk:Wien Hauptbahnhof
  (at least as of now).
• As far as Wien Hauptbahnhof resp. Vienna Hauptbahnhof is discussed I would strongly prefer not to have another singular discussion, but - if at all - to do a "mass discussion" for Wien Hauptbahnhof, Zürich Hauptbahnhof, Hannover Hauptbahnhof, München Hauptbahnhof, Köln Hauptbahnhof etc. We should have the same pattern for Vienna, Zurich, Hanover, Munich, Cologne etc. And for some good reasons I would personally strongly always prefer the station's original name in local language, just the same as Praha hlavní nádraží. So IMO we should leave things as they are ...

Regards, Kleeblatt187 (talk) 20:15, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The redirects have been solved now, this talk page was moved according to the article. Kleeblatt187 (talk) 21:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The station, I hope. Previous discussions all seem to have come out in favour of using the real name for the station, irrespective of the town (I think only Nürnberg Hauptbahnhof is left to be tackled, if anyone can be bothered to do it; life is too short to take on the Belgian language politics regarding Brussels Midi!). Wheeltapper (talk) 20:40, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with "Hauptbahnhof", as this has been accepted into the English language, and is difficult to translate. However, if there is an available and commonly used and easily pronounceable English name of the city/town at hand, that should be used. The real name doesn't matter if English speakers don't understand it. RGloucester — ☎ 21:08, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't we then risk hitting

WP:SYN in the context of the station? The fact that Vienna (Cologne, Munich, Florence...) have local names is not really an obscure bit of information. Wheeltapper (talk) 22:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

I could go to extreme ends and say that this article should be at "Vienna Central Station". Both the Vienna city website and OBB term it thus in English. I'm trying to compromise. I don't see why we contradict OBB on this matter. RGloucester — ☎ 23:52, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OeBB calls it Wien Hauptbahnhof (your link above is not actually to OeBB) or uses the direct translation "Vienna Main station", as do reliable English language sources like magazines. "Vienna Central station" would be massively misleading for an English speaker; if anything, Mitte is the "Central station" in the English-language sense. Even "Union" might be more appropriate than Central. How would we decide what is pronounceable; is Wien any less pronounceable than Loogabarooga Junction? Wheeltapper (talk) 10:01, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I gave a duplicate link. OBB does in fact call it Vienna Central Station in English. Look here. The issue is, dear fellow, that there is an easily pronounceable and unquestionably used English language name for the place. Therefore, we have no reason to confuse people. If no alternative English name exists, that's another story. But, in this case, there is. RGloucester — ☎ 16:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't know why you refer to Loughborough as Loogabarooga…Loughborough follows standard English pronunciation rules, and is easy to pronounce for an English speaker. "Wien" on the other hand, follows German pronunciation rules which most English speakers may not know. It could be read "Ween" in English rather than "Veen", for example. RGloucester — ☎ 16:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See the September move discussion which took place at

Talk:Kaiserslautern Central Station#Requested move, of which the notice below is the testimonial. In September, 121 train station articles in German speaking countries were nominated and moved together (though a few were excluded since they had previously had local move discussions). Vienna's station was in the list of 121. You can appreciate that consistency has value, and there is some awkwardness in translating 'Hauptbahnhof' as 'central station'. It is impressive that we have Praha hlavní nádraží in the English Wikipedia, not to mention Zagreb Glavni kolodvor. The name Wien Hauptbahnhof is a piece of cake by comparison. Anyone who is is trying to read directional signs in the actual city will appreciate having the real name of the station easily available. EdJohnston (talk) 18:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

How is it impressive to have foreign names that I cannot read, and most English speakers cannot read, as the title of the article on a train station I might be interested in from an architectural standpoint on the English language Wikipedia? This is not Google maps, this is an encyclopaedia. And I should add that Google maps calls the station "Prague Main Railway Station". Regardless, I'm not talking about the Slavic ones right now. As I've said, I have accepted "Hauptbahnhof" as a compromise, as it has been used in some English language discourse. What I don't accept is "Wien". Consistency has no value if it is a confusing consistency. In cities with English names that are used almost exclusively, the English names should be used. This isn't the whole Gdansk/Danzig thing either. Vienna is Vienna, always in English. RGloucester — ☎ 18:29, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on

I have just modified one external link on Wien Hauptbahnhof. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070522015414/http://www.hlechner.at/projekte/271/ausstellung/ to http://www.hlechner.at/projekte/271/ausstellung/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Wien Hauptbahnhof. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120627024407/http://www.wien.gv.at/english/transportation-urbanplanning/central-station-milestones.html to http://www.wien.gv.at/english/transportation-urbanplanning/central-station-milestones.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150901000641/http://hauptbahnhofcity.wien/en/ to http://hauptbahnhofcity.wien/en

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:00, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I think the number of 45,000 in the following sentence is wrong: "In excess of 45,000 cubic meters of concrete was used in the construction of the structure's baseplate as well as the entrance to the underground garage." -- Image a cube of 45 km length each, entirely filled with concrete. That's impossible. More likely is that 45 cubic meters of concrete were used for construction.

Cheers. 134.171.175.69 (talk) 18:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your cube had roughly ${\displaystyle 10^{13}m^{3},}$ a 3-d cube with sides ~36m has the desired volume. Purgy (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]