Talk:Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Company

Trains Mid‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	2007-07-27

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 and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article lacks references.

West Midlands Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject West Midlands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of West Midlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.West MidlandsWikipedia:WikiProject West MidlandsTemplate:WikiProject West MidlandsWest Midlands articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Preserved locomotives[edit]

Do we really need a big list of preserved locomotives? It means extra maintenance every time a loco moves, or enters/leaves operational status. A short summary, with wikilinks to the class articles, is what I suggest. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:53, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In one sense, yes. Because the alternatives for generating it would seem to rely on per-loco articles (to trigger categorization etc.) and even every loco needing to have its own article. Whilst I'm not averse to articles on individual preserved locos, I don't think we can justify doing it for each and every one. If we were forced to do this (i.e. to trigger categorization) then those articles would have to be templated to keep the workload under control and the likelihood is that they'd never expand beyond a stub with a serial number and a last-known location.

I write a surprising number of such articles. Most of my MediaWiki editing is commercial, rather than on Wikipedia, and an awful lot of that is based on such structures and the complex use of the DPL (Dynamic Page List) wiki extension to query across the cats. It's certainly possible (today I've been working on one with 550+ entries and 30+ sub-cats just to generate two overall report pages), but the work is appreciable and inappropriate for local conditions.

Do we actually need a sngle list of preserved BRC&W? If as you suggest, then there are already sub-lists by class, then I'd consider those as perfectly adequate. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know of the per-loco articles, and if plenty of verifiable information is available on that specific loco, then by-and-large I'm OK with these. My main concern is that besides these we have a list on British Rail Class 26 (which is handy as an index to the specific loco articles), and now here as well. I'd like consensus to replace the list of preserved locos on Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Company with a summary along the lines of:

A number of locomotives and multiple units built by BRCW have been preserved, and these include members of British Rail classes 26, 27, 33 and 81, also Córas Iompair Éireann 101 class.

--Redrose64 (talk) 16:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me - although I'd give some indication of the numbers and qualify with <ref>as of 2010</ref> I'd also link directly to the survivor list sections on the class article.

The best way to do this would be labelled section transclusion, but that's not enabled for Wikipedia, except from the Template: namespace. We could actually do it with template(s), but that's perhaps a little excessive. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:24, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Argentine President's Carriage[edit]

Andy, You refer to the carriage made for the Argentine President in 1910. I see where this is included in John Hypher's book. But I just wondered where you found the info that the carriage still exists and was once used by Eva Peron. Thanks if you can help with this. MarkBarrett2 (talk) 21:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not my edit, and I don't have the book. If still in service in the '50s, it's no stretch to suggest that it was used by Eva Peron and there's probably news coverage of her touring in it (she was no shrinking violet for such things). As to it existing today, then that's likely to be some major national museum collection (either railways or Peronist) and they're probably on line, albeit in Spanish. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:01, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Thanks for your reply and my apologies. The question should have been directed to Andy Mabbett who made the original post as Pigsonthewing. I have now put same question on his Talk page so hopefully he will respond there. I am just getting to grips with this side of Wikipedia so sorry again for any "faux pas"!! MarkBarrett2 (talk) 10:43, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tank production[edit]

This page could do with a lot more exploration of the company's involvement in tank production in ww2. They played a major part in the development of the Cromwell tank / Meteor engine, which was a pivotal point in the evolution if tank design. Arguably the company had more impact in this area than in locomotives, as their legacy lasted all the way through Centurion. Lkchild (talk) 23:14, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth Railways NSU class[edit]

Commonwealth Railways NSU class lists some preserved, BRCW-built, locos. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:33, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]