 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avicennasis ( talk • contribs) 18:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Why? 59.148.180.109 ( talk) 05:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Because the numbers were not in the TOPS scheme (which wasn't introduced until the early 1970s) but in the 1948 scheme, under which all diesels were numbered between 10000 snd 17999. The block 12000-12999 was allotted to ex-LMS diesel shunters, plus those of LMS design built after nationalisation. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 23:27, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
There are some inaccuracies in this article, but it's very difficult to find sources to enable them to be changed. 12082 at the Watercress Line now carries its correct original number - all the "12049" saga seems to be in the past. However, even recent magazine stories still maintain this story, and the Watercress Line website's relevant page is still headed as 12049. I've got a photo it as 12082, taken last weekend, but I know that doesn't count! To make things worse, one of the tables shows 12082 as being scrapped, but I know that if I change it, I'll get reverted as unsourced. Does anyone know of any recent sources which would enable all the convoluted 12049 part of the story to be deleted? 12082 could then just take its rightful place in the list of preserved locos. Mwsmith20 ( talk) 11:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- None that I can find with a quick search - but then again, there's no harm in waiting for a source. Danners430 ( talk) 12:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avicennasis ( talk • contribs) 18:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Why? 59.148.180.109 ( talk) 05:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Because the numbers were not in the TOPS scheme (which wasn't introduced until the early 1970s) but in the 1948 scheme, under which all diesels were numbered between 10000 snd 17999. The block 12000-12999 was allotted to ex-LMS diesel shunters, plus those of LMS design built after nationalisation. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 23:27, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
There are some inaccuracies in this article, but it's very difficult to find sources to enable them to be changed. 12082 at the Watercress Line now carries its correct original number - all the "12049" saga seems to be in the past. However, even recent magazine stories still maintain this story, and the Watercress Line website's relevant page is still headed as 12049. I've got a photo it as 12082, taken last weekend, but I know that doesn't count! To make things worse, one of the tables shows 12082 as being scrapped, but I know that if I change it, I'll get reverted as unsourced. Does anyone know of any recent sources which would enable all the convoluted 12049 part of the story to be deleted? 12082 could then just take its rightful place in the list of preserved locos. Mwsmith20 ( talk) 11:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- None that I can find with a quick search - but then again, there's no harm in waiting for a source. Danners430 ( talk) 12:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)