Talk:LMS-Patriot Project

Trains: in UK / Locomotives Low‑importance

Trains Portal

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

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

Untitled

Article based mainly on text from LMS Patriot Class. Biscuittin (talk) 09:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was reverse merge. WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 09:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

A recent edit by WT79 The Engineer (talk · contribs) has drawn my attention to the fact that we have two articles:

LMS-Patriot Project, created at 09:07, 25 February 2012 by Biscuittin (talk · contribs)
LMS Patriot Class 5551 The Unknown Warrior, created at 19:14, 11 June 2017 by Moylesy98 (talk · contribs)

These cover the same project to build a single replica locomotive. There is surely no need to have both; hence, I propose we merge the newer into the older one, LMS-Patriot Project. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64:~~Oppose~~ – LMS Patriot Class 5551 The Unknown Warrior is about the original locomotive as well as the replica. Also, wouldn't the merged article end up rather big, considering that they are both of reasonable size already, and the LMS-Patriot Project article effectively only covers a subsection of the loco's article? WT79 The Engineer (talk) 14:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~That said, if a merged article could be produced without creating any size issues, then I would support a reverse merge. WT79 The Engineer (talk) 14:39, 17 May 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]
Reverse Merge – It wouldn't create any size issues – most of the text is duplicated (Project launch -- Project milestones (partial), and Construction duplicates Design/Completion sections). WT79 The Engineer (talk) 14:47, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Clarifying: reverse merge instead of merge because the LMS Patriot Class 5551 The Unknown Warrior article is about both the original locomotive and the replica, and information about the original locomotive is not useful in this article. WT79 ^{(Speak to me | account info)} 08:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about size. LMS-Patriot Project is presently 8,446 bytes and LMS Patriot Class 5551 The Unknown Warrior is 22,031 bytes. These figures include duplicated content and matter that may be removed (such as the {{merge from}}/{{merge to}}). By comparison, today's featured article is currently 53,195 bytes - and that's not large for a TFA: Sega Saturn was TFA on 11 May, being 145,277 bytes at the time. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~Merge the other way for preference but merge anyway.SovalValtos (talk) 16:50, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge: Two articles is a content fork. The first article currently has the better name as, while very unlikely, a simple vote could change the number/name in this case. Quite possible for the article to have a section on the original 5551 providing not to WP:UNDUE. It could well be different name is more appropriate as the operation test phase is reached and wider publicity is extant; but not at this point; and that will be a (potentially controversial) move at the time. But for now avoid WP:CFORK.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the other way Locomotive is more notable than the project, locomotive article is far better, precedent per LNER Peppercorn Class A1 60163 Tornado. Black Kite (talk) 12:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Y done by WT79 at 09:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC); hope I didn't miss too much when merging. WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 09:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]