Jump to content

Talk:British Rail Class 158

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Naming convention

[edit]

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 22:28, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Arriva Trains Wales

[edit]

Some clarification / sorting out needed - ATW did not acquire class 175s nor did ATW operate Alphaline services, sounds like someone is rewriting history. Class 175s were built to order for First North Western, and were inherited by ATW when FNW franchise area transferred to ATW. ATW / W&W and Wessex used 158s for ages before 175s were on the scene. 80.3.23.64 (talk) 01:31, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Image tidy

[edit]

I've attempted to tidy up the images so that they match the subsections they are next to - a few liverys are missing.

Apologies if I've made any mistakes.Carrolljon (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

what is "DPTAC 'easy to see, easy to press' yellow tactile LED Passenger Door Control buttons on a raised rubber surface surround" and why is it important/what is its purpose. Carrolljon (talk) 11:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

[edit]

The DPTAC 'easy to see, easy to press' yellow tactile LED Passenger Door Control buttons on a raised rubber surface surround are the latest modern Passenger Door Control buttons, which are operated by the passenger to either open or close the doors. Most refurbished or overhauled trains receive this feature during the refurbishment or overhaul at the place where they are being refurbished.

I will update the Class 158 details with other operators shortly during the next few weeks, along with some photographs.

The Passenger Door Controls that I describe is the EAO series 56 raised braille circular door button with yellow surround —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Skuce (talk • contribs) 11:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Skuce (talk)

Encyclopedia is not a newspaper..

[edit]

I think a minor change to the way some of the sections are presented here is needed. I context the class operated under british rail for about 5 years but is barely mentioned in the text - note that the "BR franchise" covered all of britain - it was not regional.

The main point is that having a section named "current operations" is like painting the forth bridge. As an alternative I suggest presenting the franchises historically - with no distinction between past and present operators. Any suggestions?Carrolljon (talk) 11:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Forth Bridge painting will be complete this year so that's a rather poor metaphor to use. CrossHouses (talk) 16:20, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

refurbishment references

[edit]

Found some more references (some may be duplicated). Will attempt to incorporate them later unless someone else does first.

87.102.126.244 (talk) 16:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if anyone else has spotted this, but the article contradicts itself. Do FGW's refurbished 158s still discharge toilet waste onto the track, or are they retention-type? --Peeky44 What's on your mind? 12:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

regional operations

[edit]

Rearranged operations by region - any comments?

(also please note this is an encyclopedia - therefor documentation that only covers the current status is a little out of place. Also please note the article is about the Class 158, not the franchises) —Preceding unsigned comment added by FengRail (talk • contribs) 22:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commons images

[edit]

Hi everyone. Just to inform you, the Commons category for 158s has now been completely sorted by livery and operator. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I've been tagging up some stuff that needs referencing, but an IP address (presumably the one that contributed) it keeps untagging. Presumably they must have a source for things like the BR allocations...

--Enotayokel (talk) 22:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible change to the title of this article

[edit]

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.

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:British Rail Class 158/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This page has got very unweildy and confusing as authors try to log seemingly every unit swap or repaint. Perhaps some sections (particularly those for former operators of 158s) could be reduced to a short summary? 149.254.192.195 14:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 14:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on British Rail Class 158. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is with the front connecting doors?

[edit]

Why do most (It seems) 158/9s have a metal looking panel (Like something wore away) on one side of the interconnecting doors at the front of the train? SageWater (talk) 12:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on British Rail Class 158. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in British Rail Class 158

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of British Rail Class 158's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "TRC1":

  • From British Rail Class 155: "Class 155". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 124: "Class 124, 180, 181". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  • From British Rail Class 150: "Class 150". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  • From Holyhead TMD: "Railways of North Wales - Holyhead 23rd December 1980". Dave Plimmer. Retrieved 25 November 2016.
  • From British Rail Class 151: "Class 151". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 8 November 2005. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  • From British Rail Class 129: "Class 129". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  • From British Rail Class 143: "Class 143". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 156: "Class 156". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 120: "Class 120, 179". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  • From British Rail Class 128: "Class 128". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 121: "Class 121, 149". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 141: "Class 141". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 142: "Class 142". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  • From British Rail Class 144: "Class 144". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.
  • From British Rail Class 153: "Class 153". The Railway Centre. Archived from the original on 9 March 2005.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not and will not include the Thai units

[edit]

These can have a separate page if need be. In fact I encourage that. That page can be linked from this page. But lumping them in here with units of a different company, different gauge, different country is completely and utterly asinine. It's one of the worst ideas I have ever come across on Wikipedia - and trust me I have seen a few. Tony May (talk) 14:09, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CREATE IT THEN!!! And stop undoing my reverts of your destructive edits and leave me alone!!! Anamyd (talk) 14:42, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your message on my talk page in case you weren't notified. Anamyd (talk) 14:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious now as to what you've done on the 360 article... Anamyd (talk) 14:49, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, you've f*cked up that one as well... Gives me a bit more to do tonight :) Anamyd (talk) 14:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That information is similarly WP:OFFTOPIC and therefore has no place in the article. Tony May (talk) 15:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. It's very much on topic. So very much has place in the articles. As I said will be fixing them tonight :) Anamyd (talk) 15:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you've seen my response to your message on my talk page. Anamyd (talk) 15:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If by "fixing them", you mean creating separate articles - that's OK. If by "fixing them" you mean trying to ram WP:OFFTOPIC information back into this article, WP:THATSNOTOK. Tony May (talk) 16:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You will have to work out what the WP:NAMINGCONVENTIONS are for Thai rolling stock - I have no idea, btw, maybe someone reading this will.Tony May (talk) 16:17, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scotrail image

[edit]

@Slenderman7676 : giving the following can you evidence captioning the image Abellio ScotRail as it seems to have been First ScotRail at the time the image was taken?

  • The image 25.08.13 Glasgow Central 158.869 (9597856463).jpg claims to have been taken 25.08.13 (A banner annouces Glasgow 2014 in the background)
  • The image was uploaded to commons 13 May 2014
  • According to Abellio ScotRail the contract was awarded in October 2014 and it began operating in 1 April 2015

Thankyou Djm-leighpark (talk) 01:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Use of images and fan art on this page

[edit]

There are enough images on this page, most of them are fairly good.

I suggest we don't need poor quality fan art to illustrate liveries. We have photographs for this, which are more accurate and far more useful. These should be moved to Wikimedia Commons where they are appropriate.

Tony May (talk) 23:21, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some more historical Liverie?

[edit]

Like the old TPE liverys under Arriva Trains Northern? And overs?83.100.194.116 (talk) 20:17, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox images

[edit]

Just seen the infobox images have been updated, and i'm quite disappointed. Surely we have better images of a GWR 158 that isn't blurred. And then surely we have better interior GWR 158 image that a) isn't blurred and b) doesn't have people in them. Seems rather poor to me! Vanmanyo (talk) 18:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Northern would be a good alternative, as I've found good quality, recent, exterior and interior images for them... The interior image isn't the best resolution, but not really blurry
exterior: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/20230929_Northern_158853_Brough.jpg
interior: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:158_752_After_Refurbishment.jpg
Alternatively, TfW - the interior is from 2016, which means a refurb has taken place since the image was taken... but it is better quality
exterior: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/TFW_158835_%2851170871886%29.jpg
interior: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Class_158_interior_atw_refurbished_2016.jpg
Looking through Commons, there aren't really that many other decent interior images, unless you're happy with people in the photo or older images... Personally I'd suggest going with Northern, and dispatching an eager wikipedian to the nearest 158 served station to get a better image! Danners430 (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, I've asked a colleague who works on 158s if he's happy to take a photo of the interior of a Scotrail 158 and upload it to Commons - won't be before Wednesday though… plenty of high quality exterior images of Scotrail 158s Danners430 (talk) 19:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My friend has come good and provided an interior shot of a 158 in Inverness - I’ve updated both images so the TOCs match and the interior image is of decent quality Danners430 (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the depots section of the infobox only have Salisbury?

[edit]

Why does the depots section of the infobox only have Salisbury? Anamyd (talk) 09:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No issue adding more if you have references for them. 10mmsocket (talk) 12:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added all the depots as of January 2024. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:55, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:British_Rail_Class_158&oldid=1262719742"