Talk:New Zealand DC class locomotive

Maxx

I'm sure I saw DC 4732 in MAXX Blue at Newmarket today (14/12/06). Has anyone else seen this loco? I'll keep a watch and if I see it again I guess I'll add it to the page. That would make, by my count, 12 DCs in MAXX blue (counting the others listed on the page). C.R.Auckland 07:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Further note: I've changed the number of DCs leased to Veolia from 10 to 14. The Veolia page says 14, and there are 12 currently listed on this page as being in MAXX Blue (that includes 4922 which I've added). Plus 4732 (which I'm waiting to see again to make absolutely sure before I add it) would make 13, so there's probably another one around somewhere. C.R.Auckland 09:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

And the fourteenth MAXX DC is... 4093.C.R.Auckland 08:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

DC vs. DCP - technical difference

Hi, the article mentions that DCP subclass is especially designed for passenger trains. But what exactly is the technical difference? Do they have interfaces to supply passenger cars with energy? Probably not as all trains in NZ I've seen so far had separate generator vans. Or are the DCP's just faster but cannot pull heavy trains? Thanks for adding some information to the article. --Dabbelju (talk) 21:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I recall reading somewhere that at one time TranzScenic wanted to have a dedicated fleet of locos specifically for their operations -- which were not to be used for freight operations and vice-versa. Hence the DCP subclass was introduced so staff could quickly figure out which locos were part of the passenger fleet and which were not. These days the subclass might as well not exist since there is a mixture of DCP and DC locos operating both freight and passenger trains! If I come across a source for this I'll make sure to add a reference to it. James Pole (talk) 06:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Presvation attempts for withdraws

Hi, I think they should preserve Dc 4507 that is now withdrawn, and send her to a presvation trust,203.173.253.45 (talk) 04:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Plans for Presvation for the Dc Class

Hi, I think what they should do is preserve the Dc's that are still in the Interantional Orange Livery, also the numbers should be, Dc 4029 Dc 4064 Dc 4070 Dc 4093 Dc 4104 Dc 4110 for me203.173.252.199 (talk) 05:42, 13 April 2013 (UTC) Dc 4133 Dc 4219 Dc 4225 Dc 4277 Dc 4444203.173.252.199 (talk) 05:42, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Preservation Attempt for Locomotive 4444

Hi,

I think they should preserve Dc 4444 to a preservation trust when she gets withdrawn from service, I don't know where but somewhere, also from what I heard the National Railway Museum is going to be soon or possibly Dc 4029 from what I heard, but it has not happened yet.203.173.252.199 (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)§

First, Wikipedia is not a forum. Second, I have just seen photos of DC 4444 at Hutt Workshops under repair, so withdrawal is a long way away yet. pcuser42 (talk) 05:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

Sir I think I saw in a picture that Dc 4127 hasn't been scrapped, since 2007, and could still possibly be their, see for you selfs in the Flickr site on Hutt Workshops, it was with DBR'S 1239 and 1241, and two other Dc's, I am not so shore, but could you see it,"203.109.168.212 (talk) 01:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please see PCuser42's response to your above addition to this page. Wikipedia is not a forum. Unless you've got some verifiable information to add, want to discuss the article, please don't use this page. --LJ Holden 02:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Liverys

Sorry for the edit, but I had to write the last Dc's still painted in International Orange, hope it wasn't much trouble. 203.97.114.146 (talk) 23:38, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Why apologise? :) pcuser42 (talk) 02:57, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I've re-written the livery section as it was a bit unwieldy and had some inaccurate information. Gosteamnz (talk) 01:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit Gosteamnz :) I've copyedited the section, as well as removed "no locos in MAXX have been withdrawn" as DC 4732 is ambiguous at the moment. pcuser42 (talk) 02:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Additional information getting too ambiguous/excessive/unnecessary?

I am a little worried about the value of the latest information being added to this article lately. If we are unable to verify those sources, or if they don't really have enough value of facts in the article, should we like tag them to highlight the issue to resolve them soon or just remove them in one go? Overtime, I am seeing the article being packed with more ambiguous notes; where to the point that the article might have to undergo a major cleanup. RTWDestroy (talk) 08:18, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:BEBOLD would suggest removing them outright if they're added. So I'd do that - source everything, and remove information that is not of value. pcuser42 (talk) 10:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

No DC's in inside storage

Hi, I have changed the "Withdrawal" section of all the DCs stored inside to outside storage since the plant they were stored in has been condemned. Please leave the changes as they are ThanksNZ Rail 150 (talk) 09:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)NZ Rail 150

Are Dc 4732 and DCP 4830 withdrawn? 118.92.241.244 (talk) 07:17, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. Kaiwhara (talk) 07:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Well 4732 is up for sale and I've been told 4830 is to be towed to Hutt for storage and sale. TrainboyMBH (talk) 07:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC) TrainboyMBH

Original Research is not permitted on Wikipedia and may be challenged. Wikipedia is not a forum. Kaiwhara (talk) 07:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Auckland Transport service

I propose removing the AT transport service colour (blue) as per Template talk:NZR locomotive list: This colouring for rolling stock lists is no longer relevant, it was meant to signify diesel classes in exclusive AT service; that requirement no longer exists. --LJ Holden 02:31, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Given that leases have expired or are to expire shortly, I would agree. pcuser42 (talk) 06:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Sources

Jesus that source list is a mess. Lots of sources are being used multiple times, copied and pasted instead of being named.

I don't have time to tidy it up now but if someone could clean it up I'll send you a virtual cookie. pcuser42 (talk) 06:45, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for having too much sources. I will remove them if you want me to. NZ Rail 150 (talk) 06:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Having them is fine, just consolidate them (per the link above) so that they're not duplicated in the source list. :) pcuser42 (talk) 08:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Preserved DCs

Given that the tender for DCs closed after publication of the December 2018 issue of NZ Railfan, I have serious doubts about the accuracy of the preservation claims persistently made by Maurice812, even though they are cited. I haven't actually got a copy of this yet, so can anyone else verify this? pcuser42 (talk) 18:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

I've since obtained a copy of the December 2018 edition of NZ Railfan as given in the citation, and I've confirmed that it does not mention that any DCs are preserved (which make sense given the above) - it only says that the DCs are up for tender. Accordingly, as the information was not verified, I've removed the information. @Maurice812:, please cite a reliable verifiable source before restoring this information. pcuser42 (talk) 04:13, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Well you wouldnt let me use the email from Tim Kirwin as a reference and Colby James told me the information would be in the December Railfan. Everyone has known that Gvr owned Dc 4818 since Tim sent the email over a month ago and everyone knows about the 2 MLS Dcs as well. Whats the point of wikipedia if you cant read the most up to date information on it, its not like anything I put on the page wasnt true Maurice812 (talk) 03:49, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Truthfulness isn't the point here, it's using reliable sources that any editor can verify - please read the policies. An email, especially a leaked one, does not comply with Wikipedia policies, nor does hearing information from a friend. Colby also isn't the most reliable source either, especially given his own citations are flawed. Also, considering I run the GVR email system and I had no idea about it, it's a stretch to claim that "everyone knew". pcuser42 (talk) 08:25, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

But almost all of the NZR wikipedia pages have lots of information on them that doesnt have sources so whats the different, are you gonna go delete all of that information too. Also I didnt say the email was leaked, it was sent to some people and it also says MLS got 2 Dcs but you deleted that info on the page too. I dont believe that you didnt know about 4818 cos lots of other people at glenbrook did who I know, so I think your making it up. Colby was wrong about the December railfan but he knows more than you? Maurice812 (talk) 02:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

My only response now is WP:CIVIL. pcuser42 (talk) 06:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Maurice812:, on your question re uncited statements on Wikipedia, a lot of these have slowly been removed yet more are added as we go. I've had some bizarre exchanges with many people in the rail fan community over the years - Wikipedia policy is not to simply delete additions but to act in good faith and try to verify them. However as @Pcuser42: states, it is optimal that additions are cited with reliable sources. LJ Holden 22:07, 23 January 2019 (UTC)