Talk:List of rolling stock preserved on the Severn Valley Railway

	This 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.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Trains: in UK / Locomotives Mid‑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

Mid

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

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

Not enough sources?

Just looking through and thinking to myself that for, in all honesty, almost anything, there's no source visible to back it up. From a quick glance, almost any table bar the goods wagons (why that matters to be on here, I don't know) has no source at all, and the few that are there support one loco. Not willing to PROD at the minute, but I'm acutely aware most of this is just original research and/or has been wiki-fiddled. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 07:33, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of the current steam locomotive fleet, there is a page for each on the SVR offical website. I have added one as an example. Before I spend a lot of time adding back the others, is that sufficient or are you looking for something else? --Robin84F (talk) 15:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your understanding of the process by re-adding just one. I'd say that the organisation's own web page is a primary source WP:PRIMARY, which may be OK as a last resort but other (secondary) sources are preferred. Some examples for that same 43106 loco

Preserved British Steam Locomotives is a personal blog, so as WP:UGC isn't acceptable
railadvent.co.uk is an enthusiast publication already used by a significant number of articles. It may be acceptable.
flickr image of the loco is again WP:UGC and not acceptable
ITV News - definitely acceptable
Railway Magazine definitely acceptable although all this article actually confirms is that the loco exists an is a resident loco at the organisation

Hope some of those make sense. It doesn't take time to find them and having one or more secondary sources in addition to the one primary is definitely preferred. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:24, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thanks. I'll try to make sure there are relevant secondary sources, either on line or published, for those I add back. Robin84F (talk) 14:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you join in the wikiproject and make some comments/contribution here - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Rolling stock lists 10mmsocket (talk) 14:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I wasn't aware the discussion was going on. Comment duly added. Robin84F (talk) 16:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boiler Tickets?

@Robin84F where are you getting the information about boiler ticket expiry dates? I cannot see it in the given references? 10mmsocket (talk) 08:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. As an example definition, this RAIB report defines a boiler ticket as a "Colloquial term for the period of time elapsing from one statutory hydraulic boiler test to the next, usually considered to be 10 years. However, all boilers are required to be thoroughly examined every 12 months, at which point the boiler's condition may necessitate removal from service." The report refers to a new '10-year ticket' therefore the concept appears to have official recognition, although the expiry date is of course an assumption. So for a recent entry into service like Hagley Hall, the completion of the overhaul can be verified to a source and the 'boiler ticket' expiry can be assumed to be 10 years from that time, although there is probably no published source which states the latter. I note that many of the other list pages include the same type of information, so presumably others are following the same approach. Maybe something you would like to raise as a wider question on the wikiproject page rather than specifically here - I'd obviously be happy to follow the agreed policy if there is one? Robin84F (talk) 16:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With no specific source to verify the boiler ticket date it is not encyclopaedic and should be removed. We have been discussing this recently in the Wikiproject - and this is exactly the sort of unreferenced additional information we wanted to prevent being added. Happy to point you to it if you haven't already seen it. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen it, but happy to comply. Robin84F (talk) 17:05, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit outcome

I've just given the article a reasonably-thorough copyedit and made the following changes:

Removed the infobox as duplicating the main article,
Removed the description of maintenance facilities as duplicating the main article,
Lower-cased the descriptions of livery details,
Fixed 50031's simultaneous appearance in two different parts of the list,
Removed a number of sentences and details that I consider to be trivial (for example, because they appear close to being a log of the locomotive's movements, rather than a simple description of its existence), and
Placed in-line tags where I believe that citations are still required, or – in one instance – where a citation is insufficiently detailed.

XAM2175 ^(T) 12:15, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, much appreciated. There are still a lot of locos to add back as I find sources, but I'll try to follow the same formatting as I go. Robin84F (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, cheers. XAM2175 ^(T) 13:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The information on 7802's boiler ticket being renewed was from a primary source (a newsletter to EMF shareholders). The fact that the overhaul is in progress is sufficient for this article so I've deleted it. Robin84F (talk) 18:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I was prepared to accept the bit about the boiler ticket as a passing mention in conjunction with the fact of the overhaul (others may, in fairness, have not been), just with a bit of a stronger pointer on the source because I couldn't find it on the EMF website and I wasn't sure of how widely it had circulated. I'm equally fine with taking it out though, so thanks. XAM2175 ^(T) 14:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

7714 source

Raised on another page, someone has remarked that (despite (y)our fine efforts, I didn't really help too much!), the source for 7714 has only been used to source its livery, given it's in that column. Can anyone confirm if the magazine can cite the 1930 build date? Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 15:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, done. Cheers. Robin84F (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 16:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the excellent UK Preserved book (Ellis) confirms all the build dates as well as independently confirming the existence of the item at the SVR. When I get a chance I'll add that as a specific citation for the date on the other locos, splitting it from the citation at the end of the text which covers other things such as entered service or last worked. I must also get a more up to date copy than 2019 at some point! Robin84F (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]