Talk:LNER Pacifics
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LNER Pacifics article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How to deal with Tornado
[edit]This article presents an interesting editorial problem of how to deal with "60163" Tornado. I have considered the following options, in light of the points made at user:Tony May/A1:
- Dealing with Tornado under the main section. This is perhaps what one might expect if we take at face value the A1LST regarding of Tornado as the fiftieth member of the class. This however is clearly absurd, as Tornado never was an LNER engine, and this would be anachronistic.
- Dealing with Tornado under the #Preservation section. On the one hand this puts Tornado amongst all pacifics to LNER presently in existence, and the A1LST is a member of the British railway preservation movement. But on the other hand Tornado is not strictly a preservation project, and is not viewed as so by the A1LST, and was never an LNER or BR engine.
- Dealing with Tornado separately under its own section. This has the advantage of splitting not lumping (for clarity), and also respecting that Tornado is not a preservation project. As for the location of this, it makes more sense for it to go after the #Preservation section, as this means it is chronological.
On reflection, I'd probably go for #3. Tony May (talk) 11:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)