Talk:List of GM-EMD locomotives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Lists (Rated List-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Trains / Locomotives (Rated List-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis 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
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GP15D, GP20D: Switchers?[edit]

I'm a little confused as to where the GP15D and GP20D should go. On the one hand, they're lettered GP and they're capable of road speeds, but they're marketed as switchers. I guess I'm leaning toward moving them into the switcher column, but I'm not sure enough to do it without a second opinion. Ckape 05:35, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

i would call them switchers, as that is the dominant use. Ken (talk) 16:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

-do we need to separate "Yard" (MP15, et al) vs "Road" (GP15D) switchers or is this just over-complicating things? Ken (talk) 21:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

pages for models or series?[edit]

I also wonder about whether it would be better to group similar locomotives, For example, the SD70, SD70M, SD70I, SD70MAC, SD75M, SD75I, SD70ACe and SD70M-2 are all rather similar and I'm not sure there's enough differences to justify having separate pages for them all and the repeated information that would come with having separate pages. Similarly the SD80MAC, SD89MAC, and SD90MAC could probably be combined into an SD90-series page Ckape 06:12, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'd say we should start with one article (with redirects for the more specific names) and split if we end up with enough material for seperation. —Morven 11:09, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

There are others that should be merged. The SW and SC were the same damn locomotive with welded and cast frames, respectively; same for the NW and NC. It might even be sensible to merge all the Winton-engined switchers together. Many of the later switchers can be covered in related groups too. Of course, each individual name should be a redirect. This all depends whether enough can be said about individual models, of course. —Morven 04:16, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

Rebuilds?[edit]

What about rebuilds that are given new, "fictitious" model numbers? Eg. Pacific Harbor Line 45 is called a 'SD20-2' (http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=93377) - should we list such? I'm inclined to agree, if simply because people will come here expecting to find them. —Morven 09:12, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

In regards to rebuilds, there are a lot of ways to classify them, such as by model, railroad, rebuilder and so on. They should be listed eventually, but they would be difficult to do, because the large number of variants. In my opinion we should try and finsh all factory build locomotives first or atleast get the major ones to an acceptable level, before starting to work on rebuilds, but if someone wants to start making a list of rebuilts they can go ahead. --Spot87 18:47, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Santa Fe's CF7 comes to mind as a notable rebuild model that is now gaining wider acceptance on shortlines. I've been wondering how to include them myself. I don't think they should necessarily be listed in this article, but they should be mentioned in the article describing their source parts, something like "many of these locomotives were rebuilt by the Santa Fe Railroad shops into CF7s" or somesuch. I hesitate to recommend a List of rebuild model diesel locomotives article, but we might want to consider it so we can start collecting the information in one place. I would agree on finishing off the standard models before tackling rebuilds en masse. slambo 19:44, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Please have a look at the new article CF7; an article regarding the Santa Fe's conversion of EMD SD24s into SD26s might look similar, for example.--Lordkinbote 09:31, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Just took a quick skim through it. Well done! If I can get to it this weekend, I'll take a more thorough read and see what I can add to it. Slambo (Speak) 12:12, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

EMD GP60 Series?[edit]

What does everyone think of moving EMD GP60, which contains infomation on the GP60, GP60B and GP60M, to EMD GP60 Series? This would be alot the EMD SD70 Series, because the locomotives are so similar and there are only 300 or so locomotives in the EMD GP60 series. --Spot87 22:55, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

There are also several other series that could be combined into one article, atleast for the time being; such as the SD60 series, possibly the GP15 series, and maybe some others. What does everyone think? --Spot87 18:42, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not so sure on the article renaming. On one hand, the article title should reflect the model's most common name (like we have with GP60 right now), but an article name should reflect the article's content (if it's really about a series of models, then adding "series" to the title could be appropriate). However, redirects are cheap; each individual model name should be redirected into the one article about the entire series (like the SC, T, etc., are now). I guess I'm indifferent at this point. slambo 19:48, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
I agree completely, so we will leave things as is for the time being. --Spot87 21:59, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:EMD 511.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:EMD 511.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed Fair use tags fully explained now.. --DP67 (talk/contribs) 04:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

This page is massive![edit]

This page is beginning to fill up rapidly. WP starts barking out that warning at around 37kB and this page is now over 50kB. Are there any objections to splitting the page into sub pages for SD Series, GP series, Etc.. That should cut down the size some. I tried stripping all unnecessary whitespace and that only saved 1kB. I've never had a problem loading the page but the disclaimer claims that some browsers may have trouble and don't want to cause any grief.. --DP67 (talk/contribs) 05:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:BM SC 1104.jpg[edit]

The image Image:BM SC 1104.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --13:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You missed the RS1325 . . .[edit]

Two of these were built for the Chicago and Illinois Midland Railway, and are still in use on the Illinois and Midland today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.215.223 (talk) 02:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

RS1325 is there, filed under Switchers...perhaps it would be better placed under Road Switchers? Wuhwuzdat (talk) 14:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

JT42CWRM for Egypt[edit]

What about JT42CWRM for Egypt in 2009? Tabletop (talk) 06:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

EMD DDP45??[edit]

Ever heard EMD DDP45? You may get a good (or weird) inspiration after read this website

A r d W a r (BKLS) 17:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

While Mr Berliners website is quite interesting, most of the contents, including some submissions by myself, are hardly encyclopedic. WuhWuzDat 18:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

considering that the photo is obviously of a model, I think that we've seen enough.Ken (talk) 14:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

DH1[edit]

Added a pic of a DH1 - run on 1067mm.

there is another page about the DH - leave it to the page owner to link

The DH's here were built mainly for sugar service. Sulzer55 (talk) 02:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Non-EMD Exports[edit]

Since this page is supposed to be listing only US and Canadian built locomotives, in separate sections albeit, the export section needs some revisiong to remove several types that were only built overseas by licensees. Namely the Euro 4000, GT22CUM-1 (built only in Brazil), GT22HW (built only in Yugoslavia). Also, B12 belongs under a GMD-built section, which also would include a substantial number of additional G8/12/16's. NF110, NF210 also are GMD only. Would everyone agree with this??

76.223.76.83 (talk) 00:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

File:EMD SD70M-2 NS 2714.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:EMD SD70M-2 NS 2714.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

File:The waterworks, near Port Reading Junction Bridgewater, NJ IMG 4872.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:The waterworks, near Port Reading Junction Bridgewater, NJ IMG 4872.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of GM-EMD locomotives. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:36, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Image Errors[edit]

I have found an issue regarding the SD90MAC and the SD95ACP-2. The image for these 2 locomotives is the same picture (File:EMD SD90MAC UP 8512.jpg). If someone could change the picture, that would be appreciated.

Thank you, QuickWittedHare (talk) 21:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)QuickWittedHare