Talk:Caledonian Railway 439 Class

Trains: in UK / in Scotland / Locomotives Low‑importance

Trains Portal

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

Low

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Transport in Scotland (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

Untitled

I have added details of the Caledonian Railway 19, 92 and 431 classes to the 439 class article. I think this is reasonable because they are all very similar locomotives and it makes comparisons easy. However, somebody might prefer to split this into separate articles. 82.21.65.109 16:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-arrangement

I think some re-arrangement of this article is desirable. The "Dimensions" paras duplicate much of the data in the infobox but there are detail differences between the classes so these need to displayed somehow. Please discuss. Biscuittin (talk) 17:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved dimensions to infobox. I'm thinking of renaming the article "Caledonian Railway 0-4-4T" so that it covers all the classes. Please discuss. Biscuittin (talk) 17:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

All the other Caledonian Railway 2P 0-4-4T locos seem to be at Caledonian Railway 0-4-4T so I suggest the 439 Class joins them. Biscuittin (talk) 10:57, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Summary table at Talk:Locomotives of the Caledonian Railway#0-4-4T. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to remove the merge proposal tag. It has been in place for three and a half years without attracting any support. As the 439 may be considered the pinnacle of CR 0-4-4T production, and certainly the most numerous class, I suspect there are stronger arguments for keeping the article than merging. In any case, the response from editors has been silence. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 10:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]