Talk:LNER Class A4/Archive 1

Archive 1

"Terrible Image Placement"

The previous version that user:Duncharris has reverted to has a huge gap between the 'overview' and the rest of the text, a direct cause of the image placement here. Also, since the b+w photos were uploaded, a number of better quality and more relevent images have been uploaded on separate locomotive pages. My revision includes the Portal Trains featured picture, which is far more illustrative than the grainy b+w images, and sorts out a number of formatting errors they created. The photographs with large captions serve a better purpose in the gallery format used on other pages. If it is the Thomas the Tank engine picture that is bothering you, you can always remove that...Rob 16:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes they are terrible. Where possible use historical photographs. Preserved engines often have things wrong with them. And in this case that is certainly true. Also, books should be referenced are Yeadon's Register and the like, good quality books not "guide to steam trains for dummies". — Dunc|☺ 13:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

"Where possible" - that"s wishful thinking! Any relevant historical photograph usually runs up against copyright problems (are these sometimes more imaginary than real?) and get removed by the "busybots" in no time at all.--John of Paris (talk) 10:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I am in agreement with the above user. The main photo at the moment would be good if it were 10 years earlier. Right now there is just a preserved engine, which decreases its usefulness. Eastern Region steam finished 1967 I think. There is also the possibility of obtaining official LNER photograph whose copyright is expired. Tony May (talk) 22:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Dominion of New Zealand

I have just seen the Dominion of New Zealand at Swanage. It is missing from the "Preservation" section... Mikemaisontaylor (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The locomotive presently masquerading as no. 4492 Dominion of New Zealand is actually no. 4464 Bittern in disguise, and so is mentioned on that row of the table. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

World Record

Is there any point in having this section on the A4 page when it`s all (in more detail) on Mallard`s page ? This was bought home to me as I was editing the section and ended up just copying and pasting a section of the article from Mallard`s page ! I have to say some of the "facts" quoted in the original version of this section were plain wrong, or at least misleading. Unlike land speed record attempts there are no requirements for it to be on the level, or hauling a certain load, or an average in both directions. To imply that Mallard`s record was some how invalid because it was downhill misses the point entirely. You might as well say that the speed achieved by the German 05 was invalid because it wasn`t hauling a "normal" service load.--JustinSmith (talk) 09:11, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

"Citation needed"

I've dug up an old book of Cecil J Allen's which might fix some of the holes here. Pinkbeast (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on LNER Class A4. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100201144701/http://hornby.com/locomotives-89/r2688/product.html to https://www.hornby.com/locomotives-89/r2688/product.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:21, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Reference 20

< Scott & Reed: ibid, p.166 >

What is this?

109.145.107.216 (talk) 23:32, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

ibid - a form of citation we shouldn't use here, because it's fragile (and unclear).

As a book source, I would have thought that it would be Scott, Ron; Reed, Brian (1971). No 19, Gresley A4s. Loco Profile. Profile Publications., but these Loco Profiles are only thin pamphlets, so it's unlikely to be that. Reed is a well known author though, they might have worked on another A4 book together?

If you investigate the early history of this article, you might find the original source. However a more practical approach might just be to find another source - descriptions of the big end troubles shouldn't be too hard to find. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:45, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Actually it probably is the pamphlet - I think these were later sold as a single bound volume, the page number might refer to that edition? Andy Dingley (talk) 23:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

In 2008 there were two citations of this book added: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LNER_Class_A4&oldid=202862681 Andy Dingley (talk) 23:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)