Talk:Port Talbot Railway 0-8-2T (Sharp Stewart)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rename article?
[edit]As the Barry Railway Class H was also a Sharp Stewart 0-8-2T, I suggest this article be re-named. I suggest Port Talbot Railway 0-8-2T (Sharp Stewart). At the same time, I suggest that Cooke 0-8-2T be re-named Port Talbot Railway 0-8-2T (Cooke). Biscuittin (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - I was looking at this very issue the other day and was almost WP:BOLD. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I think we might also re-name Stephenson 0-6-2T as Port Talbot Railway 0-6-2T (Stephenson). Biscuittin (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Most loco article names begin with the railway company, except for generic designs such as the products of EMD, so that's fine by me. After all, we have LMS Royal Scot Class where nobody else had a Royal Scot class... --Redrose64 (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Redrose64. There have not been any objections. Is it OK with you if I make the changes, as above? Biscuittin (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Most loco article names begin with the railway company, except for generic designs such as the products of EMD, so that's fine by me. After all, we have LMS Royal Scot Class where nobody else had a Royal Scot class... --Redrose64 (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I think we might also re-name Stephenson 0-6-2T as Port Talbot Railway 0-6-2T (Stephenson). Biscuittin (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Go for it --Redrose64 (talk) 20:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- All done. Should we now add these locos to Template:GWR Locomotives? Biscuittin (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- That template is too darn crowded as it is. I'd like it confined to true GWR locos; we can have a separate template for the locomotive-owning companies amalgamated with (AD, Barry, Cambrian, Cardiff, Rhymney, TV) or absorbed by (BM, BPGV, CMDP, GV, LMM, MSWJ, N&B, PT, P&M, RSB, SHT, SWM) the GWR in 1922-24. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, sounds like a good idea. Biscuittin (talk) 17:54, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- That template is too darn crowded as it is. I'd like it confined to true GWR locos; we can have a separate template for the locomotive-owning companies amalgamated with (AD, Barry, Cambrian, Cardiff, Rhymney, TV) or absorbed by (BM, BPGV, CMDP, GV, LMM, MSWJ, N&B, PT, P&M, RSB, SHT, SWM) the GWR in 1922-24. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I've started a navbox, {{GWR absorbed locos 1922 on}}
, so far it's only on this article. The Barry, Rhymney and Taff Vale rows are pinched straight from {{GWR Locomotives}}
; the other rows are from what I could find under Category:Great Western Railway locomotives. All the group names are there; several don't show because the related |listn=
is blank. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. That's a good start. Biscuittin (talk) 13:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have started adding your navbox to the articles. Biscuittin (talk) 20:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Completed. Biscuittin (talk) 20:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have created a page GWR absorbed locos 1922 on for locos which do not yet have individual pages. Biscuittin (talk) 21:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Completed. Biscuittin (talk) 20:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have started adding your navbox to the articles. Biscuittin (talk) 20:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Start-Class rail transport articles
- Low-importance rail transport articles
- Start-Class UK Railways articles
- Low-importance UK Railways articles
- Wikipedia requested images of rail transport in the United Kingdom
- Locomotives task force articles
- Wikipedia requested images of locomotives
- All WikiProject Trains pages