Talk:Bombardier Turbostar

Suggested Turbo/Turbostar merge

I see no need to merge. A Turbo is a different train to a Turbostar.

• They were built by different companies
• Built in different eras
• The Turbo article is inacurate (i think) by having the Turbostars in that article
• Different top speeds
• Different internally

To me the proposed merge is like saying merge the Turbostar and Electrostar articles together, its not needed. The only debate is over the Class 168, which is very similar to the Class 170. Is the Class 168 a Turbo, a Turbostar or neither? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Year1989 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The Turbostar is descended from the Turbo, but it’s a quite different train, and it would be counterproductive to merge the two. As for the 168, Bombardier refer to it as a Turobstar on their web site, and I’m inclined to say that it’s their prerogative to make that decision. David Arthur 22:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the two articles should be merged, as they talk about two different types of train. However, it might be worth considering if there is any actual need for these articles at all, along with others such as Pacer (train), as most of their content is duplicated from the individual articles. --Jorvik 19:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

The difference between the 170 and 171 is minimal, and the 168 and 172 are only slightly more distinguished, so I think it’s definitely more useful to cover them all in one article about the Turbostar family (in the agreement under which they were created, the individual class articles were meant to cover only the specific details of each class, but other information has crept in). The Turbo article was just created yesterday, and it seems similarly useful, with the proviso that its coverage of the Turbostar should be removed and replaced with a note that the Turbostar is a post-privatisation descendant of the Turbo. David Arthur 23:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I tend to agree with David. Pickle 17:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Turbostar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080705034433/http://rssb.co.uk/rv_coupling_system_data/list_index.asp to http://www.rssb.co.uk/rv_coupling_system_data/list_index.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)