Difference between revisions of "Talk:Steam Locomotives"

From SVR Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Reordered list: new section)
(How would people prefer GWR classes to be standardised? 45xx or 4500?)
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 
I've also redirected a number of loco number/name pages, e.g. [[1450]] and [[The Flying Pig]], so that searching for those terms automatically redirects to the loco's page. I've not done this for most of the out-of-use locos, however. --[[User:Danny252|Danny252]] ([[User talk:Danny252|talk]]) 09:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 
I've also redirected a number of loco number/name pages, e.g. [[1450]] and [[The Flying Pig]], so that searching for those terms automatically redirects to the loco's page. I've not done this for most of the out-of-use locos, however. --[[User:Danny252|Danny252]] ([[User talk:Danny252|talk]]) 09:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
----
 +
 +
== GWR Class Numbers ==
 +
 +
In the interests of standardisation, is there any preference for giving GWR class numbers as "45xx" or "4500"? I'm leaning towards the latter, as it maintains consistency with classes that didn't start on a round number (e.g. 4575, 2884). --[[User:Danny252|Danny252]] ([[User talk:Danny252|talk]]) 11:21, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:21, 1 July 2016

Should 6634 (Waterman Trust) be included as loco under restoration? (with suitable note on status etc).

Reordered list

I've reordered the out-of-use list to be in numerical order, as I couldn't really see much of a pattern in the old list. I've also pulled out some locos to put in a private/industrial list, mainly as it felt odd putting Warwickshire in the middle of the GWRGreat Western Railway locos - possibly part of the reason for the odd ordering.

I've also redirected a number of loco number/name pages, e.g. 1450 and The Flying Pig, so that searching for those terms automatically redirects to the loco's page. I've not done this for most of the out-of-use locos, however. --Danny252 (talk) 09:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


GWRGreat Western Railway Class Numbers

In the interests of standardisation, is there any preference for giving GWRGreat Western Railway class numbers as "45xx" or "4500"? I'm leaning towards the latter, as it maintains consistency with classes that didn't start on a round number (e.g. 4575, 2884). --Danny252 (talk) 11:21, 1 July 2016 (UTC)