![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:East Lancashire Railway. |
This article should be renamed to East Lancashire Railway(heritage) and an new East Lancashire Railway page created. To disambi between this and East Lancashire Railway 1844-1849.-- MinedOutOffHisPiste 18:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
The 9F I currently put as stored because for the forseeable future, and after what happened I do not think it will be moving anytime soon - Jrgnet Talk 17:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Wrong i'm afraid - technically on the wiki, stored is 'not being overhauled locos without a boiler ticket' - 92214 technically sits in the 'undergoing light work' area, as it NOT being stored. Talk 23:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I can't agree with the assesment for this article as there is a lot that needs to be added to it yet. It the moment it consists of a couple of paragraphs of text and a long list of locomotives of interest only to railway enthusiasts. What happened between 1859 and 1987? How did revival of the railway come about? Who owns it and runs it? How many of the locomotives actually run on the railway and are they on show when they're not running? Where are the references? Richerman ( talk) 00:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
What are people's thoughts on the proposals to include the ELR as part of Greater Manchester's train/tram network in the future? Are these proposals worthy enough to be included on this wikipedia page? Are they at all likely to come about?
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1079853_ccharge_steam_trains
I suppose the ELR would still exist, but commuter trains would also run along the route (during the week) and it would be possible for ELR trains to run further onto either the mainline or the Metrolink line..? (Probably not the latter.) David ( talk) 02:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
What on earth is wrong with this image? Why do anonymous users keep removing it? Its fine, a little over-exposed, but I do this for a living and I don't object to its presence - in my opinion it only adds to the article. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 19:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
[[image:]]
I'm afraid you also misunderstood my point as to what an ideal illustrative image should be. Also, I was discussing railway photography in general. If we give the photographer any credit for composition at all, this photograph is (I think) supposed to be of the locomotive. So the conventions which have stood the test of 80 years should apply.
Furthermore, the coach is almost certainly a Mk 1 coach. Mk1s (and indeed Mk2 and Mk3s, Mk3s being still in wide use across the mainline network) all allow you to lean out of the window - it's just not advisable at high speed on the mainline or you might lose your head. You're not supposed to do it on preserved railways either, but with a 25mph speed limit, as long as you judge any bridges you'll probably be OK. It's not really illustrating that.
I wasn't commenting on the rest of the article either, so let's not get distracted by that.
btw, The Phoenix is what you're in if you're any good at railway photography. I'm not, I was just being a little sarcastic, and I didn't expect you to know what it was because I didn't expect that you had any experience in the area. The Phoenix do encourage artistic or unconventional shots, but they are unconventional shots that are carefully composed, as opposed to shots which just happen to be unconventional because they're poorly composed snapshots.
If you want to take photos of trains, don't travel on them. It's rather like trying to take photos of your own wedding - it doesn't work.
How long does it need to be before a currently away is permanent or semi permanent or homeless ? (Some items listed havent been back for several years and others have not declared intention to return) My thoughts are.. if it's not been in 6 months the move should be considered at least semi permanent and therefore a "has been" not a temporary. If this article is to be honest.. if it's not there it's not there. Maybe create a section on engines that have operated at the ELR ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.241.213 ( talk) 20:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Was at the ELR last year, yes. But is that really a justification for including it in the "Locomotives" list, giving the impression that it's a "home" loco? 109.149.143.15 ( talk) 00:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
last Friday I changed the miles to km conversion from the formula to plain text 'to improve screen reader accessibility' as I said in my edit summary.
Today I noticed it got reverted back by @ Redrose64
I'm not going to change it back because that could start pointless edit warring, and none of us needs that.
Instead, as I'm a full time screen reader user (I use NVDA, but I have also tried it with JAWS) I'm going to explain my reasoning, so you can hopefully understand where I'm coming from.
Screen readers like JAWS and NVDA can read MathML, but only if a suitable plugin like MathPlayer is installed. I'm going to assume that most users who don't need to deal with formulas haven't got it installed. Personally I'm one of them. So, this is how NVDA on my system without MathPlayer currently renders that sentence with the conversion in it:
"East Lancashire Railway is a -mile (20 km) link heritage railway line in link North West England which runs between link Heywood, Greater Manchester and visited link Rawtenstall in Lancashire."
JAWS also gives a similar result.
As you can probably tell, it doesn't show the number of miles.
If I use a slightly more advanced navigation technique in NVDA, it reads it as "12+1⁄2".
Neither result is ideal.
However, writing it in plain text means that it can be read as intended by anyone regardless of if a maths plugin is installed.
I hope I have sufficiently demonstrated why I changed it. KaraLG84 ( talk) 15:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
{{
convert|12+1/2|mi|km|0|adj=on}}
and it doesn't use {{
frac}}
- the convert template is entirely Lua-based, the primary module being
Module:Convert. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
16:22, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
{{cvt|12 1/2|mi}}
, it comes up with an error message, so I assumed it just wasn't possible, I think.--
Ineffablebookkeeper (
talk) ({{
ping}} me!)
11:16, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
{{convert|20|km|adj=on}}
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:East Lancashire Railway. |
This article should be renamed to East Lancashire Railway(heritage) and an new East Lancashire Railway page created. To disambi between this and East Lancashire Railway 1844-1849.-- MinedOutOffHisPiste 18:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
The 9F I currently put as stored because for the forseeable future, and after what happened I do not think it will be moving anytime soon - Jrgnet Talk 17:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Wrong i'm afraid - technically on the wiki, stored is 'not being overhauled locos without a boiler ticket' - 92214 technically sits in the 'undergoing light work' area, as it NOT being stored. Talk 23:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I can't agree with the assesment for this article as there is a lot that needs to be added to it yet. It the moment it consists of a couple of paragraphs of text and a long list of locomotives of interest only to railway enthusiasts. What happened between 1859 and 1987? How did revival of the railway come about? Who owns it and runs it? How many of the locomotives actually run on the railway and are they on show when they're not running? Where are the references? Richerman ( talk) 00:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
What are people's thoughts on the proposals to include the ELR as part of Greater Manchester's train/tram network in the future? Are these proposals worthy enough to be included on this wikipedia page? Are they at all likely to come about?
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1079853_ccharge_steam_trains
I suppose the ELR would still exist, but commuter trains would also run along the route (during the week) and it would be possible for ELR trains to run further onto either the mainline or the Metrolink line..? (Probably not the latter.) David ( talk) 02:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
What on earth is wrong with this image? Why do anonymous users keep removing it? Its fine, a little over-exposed, but I do this for a living and I don't object to its presence - in my opinion it only adds to the article. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 19:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
[[image:]]
I'm afraid you also misunderstood my point as to what an ideal illustrative image should be. Also, I was discussing railway photography in general. If we give the photographer any credit for composition at all, this photograph is (I think) supposed to be of the locomotive. So the conventions which have stood the test of 80 years should apply.
Furthermore, the coach is almost certainly a Mk 1 coach. Mk1s (and indeed Mk2 and Mk3s, Mk3s being still in wide use across the mainline network) all allow you to lean out of the window - it's just not advisable at high speed on the mainline or you might lose your head. You're not supposed to do it on preserved railways either, but with a 25mph speed limit, as long as you judge any bridges you'll probably be OK. It's not really illustrating that.
I wasn't commenting on the rest of the article either, so let's not get distracted by that.
btw, The Phoenix is what you're in if you're any good at railway photography. I'm not, I was just being a little sarcastic, and I didn't expect you to know what it was because I didn't expect that you had any experience in the area. The Phoenix do encourage artistic or unconventional shots, but they are unconventional shots that are carefully composed, as opposed to shots which just happen to be unconventional because they're poorly composed snapshots.
If you want to take photos of trains, don't travel on them. It's rather like trying to take photos of your own wedding - it doesn't work.
How long does it need to be before a currently away is permanent or semi permanent or homeless ? (Some items listed havent been back for several years and others have not declared intention to return) My thoughts are.. if it's not been in 6 months the move should be considered at least semi permanent and therefore a "has been" not a temporary. If this article is to be honest.. if it's not there it's not there. Maybe create a section on engines that have operated at the ELR ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.241.213 ( talk) 20:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Was at the ELR last year, yes. But is that really a justification for including it in the "Locomotives" list, giving the impression that it's a "home" loco? 109.149.143.15 ( talk) 00:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
last Friday I changed the miles to km conversion from the formula to plain text 'to improve screen reader accessibility' as I said in my edit summary.
Today I noticed it got reverted back by @ Redrose64
I'm not going to change it back because that could start pointless edit warring, and none of us needs that.
Instead, as I'm a full time screen reader user (I use NVDA, but I have also tried it with JAWS) I'm going to explain my reasoning, so you can hopefully understand where I'm coming from.
Screen readers like JAWS and NVDA can read MathML, but only if a suitable plugin like MathPlayer is installed. I'm going to assume that most users who don't need to deal with formulas haven't got it installed. Personally I'm one of them. So, this is how NVDA on my system without MathPlayer currently renders that sentence with the conversion in it:
"East Lancashire Railway is a -mile (20 km) link heritage railway line in link North West England which runs between link Heywood, Greater Manchester and visited link Rawtenstall in Lancashire."
JAWS also gives a similar result.
As you can probably tell, it doesn't show the number of miles.
If I use a slightly more advanced navigation technique in NVDA, it reads it as "12+1⁄2".
Neither result is ideal.
However, writing it in plain text means that it can be read as intended by anyone regardless of if a maths plugin is installed.
I hope I have sufficiently demonstrated why I changed it. KaraLG84 ( talk) 15:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
{{
convert|12+1/2|mi|km|0|adj=on}}
and it doesn't use {{
frac}}
- the convert template is entirely Lua-based, the primary module being
Module:Convert. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
16:22, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
{{cvt|12 1/2|mi}}
, it comes up with an error message, so I assumed it just wasn't possible, I think.--
Ineffablebookkeeper (
talk) ({{
ping}} me!)
11:16, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
{{convert|20|km|adj=on}}