Talk:SR Merchant Navy Class

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Toolbox
Featured article star SR Merchant Navy Class is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 18, 2008.
Trains Portal
DYK 2006-10-19
Sel week 35, 2007
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
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
Mid Importance: mid within UK Railways WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of the Locomotives task force.


To-do
list

Pending tasks for SR Merchant Navy Class:

 (purge cache –  edit this list)
See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo

Contents

[edit] Day Out with Thomas

Can a rebuilt merchant navy class disguise as Jordon for Day Out with Thomas? Felix 18:15, 17 July 2006

[edit] GA review

I made a few minor changes to comply with WP:MOS and now I'm promoting to WP:GA. The Rambling Man 17:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speed restrictions

What is meant by "speed restrictions for inside motion"?--John of Paris 13:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ummm, where is that written? I can only see "space restrictions..." EdJogg 14:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Must have misread it.

Let's try another... In what way was the valve gear "modified" in the rebuilt Pacifics? - looks pretty conventional to me.--John of Paris 15:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalism

Who is the extremely sad individual with nothing better to do than vandalise this article? If it were an article about a politician or war then perhaps I could understand it, but not an article about a railway engine of all things. Grow up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.13.13 (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Some person posted a picture of horse feces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.232.6 (talk) 21:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It's called envy. I've never seen so much vandalism in the space of one day. That must be the downside of being nominated a front page article. It should be WP policy to automatically fully protect them for a few days to keep these bird brained incapables at a distance--John of Paris (talk) 23:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Over 100 edits in one day! (including my two which were just to mark where I had reviewed up to!) I too was surprised by the level of vandalism -- I wonder how much it happens to other Main Page Featured Articles? Protecting might be a good idea, certainly semi-protecting, since that would allow through the number of 'good' edits that occurred as a result of the page being featured. Fortunately, wanton vandalism is easily reverted (have you requested Rollback yet, John?).
EdJogg (talk) 01:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
What's Rollback?--John of Paris (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably to remove the history of vandalism. Anyway, it doesn't really matter now. The article appears to have reached its highest degree of excellence in terms of content without going overboard on the technical details, and only sundry minor edits are required to improve grammar/spelling from now on. As my Dissertation tutor said recently: "Having looked that problem squarely in the face, let us now pass on". There are other railway articles that need work, so let's improve them, now that a benchmark for quality has been set... --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 14:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)