Talk:British Rail Class 444

Naming convention

There is a discussion about the naming convention to use for articles about British locomotive and multiple unit classes at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (British railway locomotive and multiple unit classes). Your comments are more than welcome. Thryduulf 22:29, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In common with the Class 450 these are often used in multiple and call at intermediate stations with short platforms. As a result staff AND passengers need to be able to safely move from one train set to another while the train is in motion. So I've changed the article text to say that these gangways are for "people" rather than either "guards" as it was when I changed it, or "passengers" as it had been previous to the last edit. 82.69.171.90 (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible change to the title of this article

This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avicennasis (talk • contribs) 18:29, 10 March 2011‎

A name change is desparately needed for this article. This is meant to be an encyclopedia, and here we have an article entitled "British Rail Class 444". British Rail never owned or operated Class 444 trains. This article gives the false impression that they did. Contrary to the claim in the previous post, there is no discussion on Naming convention at the location indicated. 86.150.67.86 (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

The post above yours was placed more than two years ago, and the discussion (which is now closed) is now archived at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways/Archive 20#Naming convention. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Class 444 in swr livery- update.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Class 444 width

This Wikipedia article says that the 444's width is 2.796m, but that is incorrect. The 444 carriage end data plates show 2.688m. I edited it just earlier but someone reverted my edit. SWRTrainFan (talk) 14:12, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

That would count as original research. Wikipedia relies on references to reliable sources. Perhaps manufacturer information would be available to source this information? Cheerio, Mattdaviesfsic. Talk to me. 14:15, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

It was me who reverted it and as @Mattdaviesfsic says, it was for good reason. Being correct is good though, so if you can find a source it would be great. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:17, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Interestingly the owner of the trains backs up the 2.796 (rounded to 2.80) width on the fleet page - https://angeltrains.co.uk/fleet/class-444/ 10mmsocket (talk) 15:20, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Very strange. The 444 carriage plates genuinely do say 2.688m, I took a photo and if it were possible to send photos here I absolutely would. I have a feeling the manufacturer (Siemens) is more likely to be correct over the leasing company (Angel Trains), but I get that people here want sources for things. I guess the only conclusion is that one of them is incorrect lol. SWRTrainFan (talk) 19:05, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Widths of rolling stock are notoriously inconsistent. Some sources give the extreme width over all projections such as steps, handles, hinges and the like; some give the maximum width over the actual bodywork (the sheet metal); some give the width at a specified height above rail level, which is not necessarily the maximum width. 2.796 m - 2.688 m = 108 mm, which isn't much - slightly over four inches, or two inches on each side of the carriage, and this might well be accounted for by projections beyond the actual bodywork. It's important to qualify the width by stating on what basis it's being measured.

However, it's not as bad as it is with lengths, where the buffers, couplers and gangway connection might be included or excluded by different sources, giving rise to a difference that might be as great as three feet.

@SWRTrainFan: Photos may be uploaded to commons, see your user talk page there. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)