Toolbox |
---|
![]() | BR Standard Class 7 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The link to Mercury goes to a disambiguation page. I'd have fixed it myself, but I don't know which type of Mercury the train was named after.
Alan Pascoe 21:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Another well researched and nicely written article that deserves to be listed as a GA.
You knew that there was going to be a "but" though, so here it is:
Not too much to sort out there though I don't think, so I'm placing this article on hold. -- Malleus Fatuarum 01:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
--
Malleus Fatuarum 00:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Done--
Bulleid Pacific
13:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
That'll do do for me, nice job! --
Malleus Fatuarum
16:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
"This meant that all the valve gear was on the outside, eliminating the problems encountered when operating three or four-cylindered locomotives, with poor access to the inside cylinders located between the frames.[2]
The Standard 7s were a two cylinder design. How about changing it to
"This meant that all the valve gear was on the outside, eliminating the problems of poor access to the valve gear located between the frames.[2] Patrick lovell ( talk) 11:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this edit - I'm suspicious of this, because generally speaking, the pony truck pivot would be part of the sub-frame, and thus a problem solved during the designing of that sub-frame, whereas the presence of the ashpan is an obstacle found in the design of many loco classes, often causing a problem requiring a compromise solution. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
May I refer you to the reply I made in the BR Standard Class 6 section. The Class 6 and Class 7 chassis' were nearly identical and suffered similar cracking. Had a 4th batch of Class 7 engines been ordered before the modernisation plan had taken hold the relevant drawings would have been amended to include Class 7 engines. 7severn7 ( talk) 18:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I've got things right for all three classes of pacific now. Clearly 1953 and 1954 were pivotal years as refinement of these engines was stopped because of the modernisation plan. 7severn7 ( talk) 07:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
<ref></ref>
tags because really it belongs as a footnote, not part of the text. I still think it's borderline
WP:OR though, so shall open it up to the floor. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
14:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)To my mind, 100 or so tons of miscellaneous metals makes an 'it'. (However, if 70000 really was a 'she', then she was also the doyenne, not doyen). 86.184.154.98 ( talk) 00:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
In Britain, steam locomotives were often referred to as `she', perhaps by analogy with ships, or out of affection(?!), or was it due to the action of the fireman's shovel? Barney Bruchstein ( talk) 21:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Under "Performance" should we not have the top speed quoted?
-- 621PWC ( talk) 17:44, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
There is at least one instance of a Britannia achieving the magic 100mph figure, the locomotive in question being 70005 John Milton in the vicinity of Elstow, Beds. on the Midland Main Line; sadly I forget the exact date. Can anyone elaborate and provide a magazine/book reference to support this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.94.188 ( talk) 00:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on BR Standard Class 7. 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:
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.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:29, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
I'd love to know. And I'm sure I'm not alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.2.34.102 ( talk) 09:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ SouthernFootplate - as per WP:BRD I've created this discussion so we don't end up in an edit war.
Per MOS:CAPTION, "Captions should be succinct; more information can be included on its description page, or in the main text." For users visiting the page for the first time, who may not be rail enthusiasts such as ourselves, they would not understand text such as "70032 Tennyson" in the caption. If a user is interested in the photograph and wants further information, they can open the image where there is a more detailed caption submitted by the photographer. Danners430 ( talk) 15:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
![]() | BR Standard Class 7 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The link to Mercury goes to a disambiguation page. I'd have fixed it myself, but I don't know which type of Mercury the train was named after.
Alan Pascoe 21:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Another well researched and nicely written article that deserves to be listed as a GA.
You knew that there was going to be a "but" though, so here it is:
Not too much to sort out there though I don't think, so I'm placing this article on hold. -- Malleus Fatuarum 01:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
--
Malleus Fatuarum 00:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Done--
Bulleid Pacific
13:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
That'll do do for me, nice job! --
Malleus Fatuarum
16:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
"This meant that all the valve gear was on the outside, eliminating the problems encountered when operating three or four-cylindered locomotives, with poor access to the inside cylinders located between the frames.[2]
The Standard 7s were a two cylinder design. How about changing it to
"This meant that all the valve gear was on the outside, eliminating the problems of poor access to the valve gear located between the frames.[2] Patrick lovell ( talk) 11:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this edit - I'm suspicious of this, because generally speaking, the pony truck pivot would be part of the sub-frame, and thus a problem solved during the designing of that sub-frame, whereas the presence of the ashpan is an obstacle found in the design of many loco classes, often causing a problem requiring a compromise solution. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 19:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
May I refer you to the reply I made in the BR Standard Class 6 section. The Class 6 and Class 7 chassis' were nearly identical and suffered similar cracking. Had a 4th batch of Class 7 engines been ordered before the modernisation plan had taken hold the relevant drawings would have been amended to include Class 7 engines. 7severn7 ( talk) 18:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I think I've got things right for all three classes of pacific now. Clearly 1953 and 1954 were pivotal years as refinement of these engines was stopped because of the modernisation plan. 7severn7 ( talk) 07:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
<ref></ref>
tags because really it belongs as a footnote, not part of the text. I still think it's borderline
WP:OR though, so shall open it up to the floor. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
14:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)To my mind, 100 or so tons of miscellaneous metals makes an 'it'. (However, if 70000 really was a 'she', then she was also the doyenne, not doyen). 86.184.154.98 ( talk) 00:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
In Britain, steam locomotives were often referred to as `she', perhaps by analogy with ships, or out of affection(?!), or was it due to the action of the fireman's shovel? Barney Bruchstein ( talk) 21:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Under "Performance" should we not have the top speed quoted?
-- 621PWC ( talk) 17:44, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
There is at least one instance of a Britannia achieving the magic 100mph figure, the locomotive in question being 70005 John Milton in the vicinity of Elstow, Beds. on the Midland Main Line; sadly I forget the exact date. Can anyone elaborate and provide a magazine/book reference to support this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.94.188 ( talk) 00:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on BR Standard Class 7. 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:
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.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:29, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
I'd love to know. And I'm sure I'm not alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.2.34.102 ( talk) 09:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ SouthernFootplate - as per WP:BRD I've created this discussion so we don't end up in an edit war.
Per MOS:CAPTION, "Captions should be succinct; more information can be included on its description page, or in the main text." For users visiting the page for the first time, who may not be rail enthusiasts such as ourselves, they would not understand text such as "70032 Tennyson" in the caption. If a user is interested in the photograph and wants further information, they can open the image where there is a more detailed caption submitted by the photographer. Danners430 ( talk) 15:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)