This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Hoary has withdrawn his request for Vfd.
The vote was 14 to nothing in favor of keeping.
So is it now safe to remove the unsightly Vfd tag?
— DV 14:05, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Seeing this discussion now, I'm reminded of a saying I once heard: the best way to get an answer on the internet is not to post a question, but is to post a falsehood. I have no idea who first said it. Slambo (Speak) 17:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Just a historian's note here, but all GM locomotives built prior to 1941 were built by the Electro-Motive Corporation (EMC). The Electro-Motive Division (EMD) was formed on January 1, 1941 with the merger of the Winton Engine Company with EMC.
For the archived deletion debate for this article see Talk:EMD E2/delete -- Graham ☺ | Talk 21:58, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've moved that discussion to its own heading. It's interesting, but I'm still not sure if it belongs in this article, which is on a locomotive produced a good 3+ years before the GM acquisition. It might be better off in the article on the E series locomotives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.51.98 ( talk) 05:36, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Looking a little further into the matter, I'm beginning to question the premise, to wit, standardization forced upon EMC/EMD by GM. The E-series was standardized in mechanics and basic design from the beginning of the line and there was cosmetic tailoring done on EMD/GM models after the war, such as the porthole windows, stainless steel badge plates, and pilot bars on UP's E7 locomotives. The custom nose bodywork of the E2 seems to be the only form in the E series that is out of the ordinary and UP's next orders were off-the-shelf E3 and E6 locomotives with no more than the usual degree of detail variation that was done before and after the GM acquisition. The E5 wasn't strictly a custom model either because it was sold to more than one customer. Other than the body materials and the usual variation in side vents and windows it is identical to the E3. It seems evident that what changed was not the amount of variation allowed between customer orders but the conventions for new model designation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.51.98 ( talk) 08:00, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I've removed the extraneous, questionable section and moved it here pending discussion
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Hoary has withdrawn his request for Vfd.
The vote was 14 to nothing in favor of keeping.
So is it now safe to remove the unsightly Vfd tag?
— DV 14:05, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Seeing this discussion now, I'm reminded of a saying I once heard: the best way to get an answer on the internet is not to post a question, but is to post a falsehood. I have no idea who first said it. Slambo (Speak) 17:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Just a historian's note here, but all GM locomotives built prior to 1941 were built by the Electro-Motive Corporation (EMC). The Electro-Motive Division (EMD) was formed on January 1, 1941 with the merger of the Winton Engine Company with EMC.
For the archived deletion debate for this article see Talk:EMD E2/delete -- Graham ☺ | Talk 21:58, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've moved that discussion to its own heading. It's interesting, but I'm still not sure if it belongs in this article, which is on a locomotive produced a good 3+ years before the GM acquisition. It might be better off in the article on the E series locomotives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.51.98 ( talk) 05:36, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Looking a little further into the matter, I'm beginning to question the premise, to wit, standardization forced upon EMC/EMD by GM. The E-series was standardized in mechanics and basic design from the beginning of the line and there was cosmetic tailoring done on EMD/GM models after the war, such as the porthole windows, stainless steel badge plates, and pilot bars on UP's E7 locomotives. The custom nose bodywork of the E2 seems to be the only form in the E series that is out of the ordinary and UP's next orders were off-the-shelf E3 and E6 locomotives with no more than the usual degree of detail variation that was done before and after the GM acquisition. The E5 wasn't strictly a custom model either because it was sold to more than one customer. Other than the body materials and the usual variation in side vents and windows it is identical to the E3. It seems evident that what changed was not the amount of variation allowed between customer orders but the conventions for new model designation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.51.98 ( talk) 08:00, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I've removed the extraneous, questionable section and moved it here pending discussion