This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for British Rail Class 156:
|
can someone who knows how make all these images hug the right side of the page? Kingturtle 08:04, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Fixed the broken link leading to "Metro-Cammel Class 156" page. 130.209.74.218 ( talk) 11:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Changed sections to operations by regions.
Article still needs references - and still requires info on past operations - hence the various 'tags' on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FengRail ( talk • contribs) 04:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I can't find any hint of a source for the Class 152, or for the 90mph speed record. If someone knows where these can be found (old issues of railway magazines perrhaps?) could they please add them soon, or the text will be deleted. The wheel lathe stuff in the Scotland section is a bit dodgy too, but should be possible to confirm, while the note on Central Trains units moving to First North Western is clearly wrong, so will be removed. Alzarian16 ( talk) 19:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I found this photo on Commons, which appears to show a 156 at Barmouth in 2001. Can anyone tell me what company ran this service, what company the train was owned by, and whether 156s often visited Wales? - mattbuck ( Talk) 00:41, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
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.
An image used in this article,
File:Class 156 - DMU - (2).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
| |
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 18:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC) |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on British Rail Class 156. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
@ 94.196.101.173: re your edit, the RAIB report, para 24 definitely says two units were involved, neither of which was '499. Mjroots ( talk) 21:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
A citation is needed for the statement "A total of 114 sets were built between 1987 and 1989 for British Rail by Metro-Cammell's Washwood Heath works." This fact is given without reveal of the source behind it. They obviously don't own this statistic, so its source needs to be listed. I added a "citation needed" following this, this can be seen in the edit history of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbas6059 ( talk • contribs) 08:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Firstly, I've noticed the Twitter citation for the off lease 156s was recently removed. I'm just wondering why as Wikipedia as an exception for Twitter citations if published a "subject-matter expert", "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." As Richard Clinnick is the editor of Rail Express magazine I think he can be considered a "subject-matter expert" so the citation should be put back? The unit numbers for the "stored" section in the table are also strangely formatted and again, I'm just wondering why they aren't just written as normal text as they were previously? Pulsarnix ( talk) 16:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
{{citation needed span}}
. It basically emphasises that the grey ones only are unsourced. Hope that helps. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mattdaviesfsic (
talk •
contribs) 16:32, 4 January 2023 (UTC)