Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:DR Class 250

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Mjroots in topic No references; fails WP:V

Cannibal Trains

[edit]

I've commented out a sentence which neither made sense (to me, a non-trains expert) nor was lifted from the German Wiki. It's in the 'History' section. Anyone who knows something about cannabalised trains, please take a look! Cheers. Cricketgirl 10:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yep, it just means the poor trains get cut up for parts to keep the other ones going. I replaced it with wording to that effect, along with some other edits for clarity.SlackerMom 21:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

AC motors? Unlikely.

[edit]

Despite what the article says, this locomotive probably doesn't use AC motors per se, rather it must be the so-called "universal" motors, which are DC motor designs with modified connectors. These are fed with low-frequency AC current, that results in a significant but still tolerable amount of arcing and sparking. (Arcing becomes intolerable over 25Hz AC in large sized universal motors. The very meaning of the 50/3 = 16,66Hz traction system was to allow use of universally connected DC motors under the 15kV catenary.)

Nota bene: in railway traction the name of "AC electric motor" is usually reserved to honest AC motors of the Tesla / Dolivo / Kando heritage, built with squirrel-cage or slip-ring designs. 82.131.156.136 (talk) 22:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

No references; fails WP:V

[edit]

A W:BEFORE search in English turned up no authoritative sources. A search of German wikipedia at :de:DR Class 250 and :de:DR Class 155 turned up nothing. The article was likely sourced from the German version. What to do? Rhadow (talk) 21:57, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

The article already has an {{Unreferenced}} tag, clearly isn't a hoax (see photos), has equivalents in seven other Wikipedias and doesn't raise any urgent issues such as BLP. I would boldly do nothing in this case. The article is much better than nothing, and forms a solid basis for future improvement. Certes (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Rhadow: I did a WP:BEFORE check too, with different results:- Sources available - Modelleisenbahner Magazine issue 10 (1974) and issue 64 (2015); Eisenbahnmagazin October 2012 and June 2016; Fiebig, Gunther; Bäzold, Dieter (1987). Ellok-Arkiv (in German). Berlin: Transpress. ISBN 3-344-00173-6., Deiss, Richard (2010). Silberling und Bügeleisen (in German). Norderstedt: Books on Demand GmbH. ISBN 978-3-839-1626-99.; Bahnarchiv, Lokodex, Lok-datenbank, Bahnbilder. Mjroots (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2017 (UTC)Reply