Talk:British Rail Class 411

Capitals!

I have Motive Power Recognition:3 EMUs by Colin J. Marsden (mid 1980s) in which all the Southern units' codes are given as capitals. best, Sunil060902 (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Conversely, SEG's stock directory lists the codes in proper case format. This is how they were originally used on the southern. The upper case format only came in with computerisation, prior to this the format was proper case. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 21:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Intro

"These units were based on the earlier Southern Railway 4Cor design, built in 1937."

Really? They clearly look based on the BR Mark 1 coach with cabs addedPatrick lovell (talk) 15:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Your right from what I know and from the sources I could find they where based on the BR mark 1 and mark 2 coaches Kalkal2168 (talk) 04:17, 26 August 2024 (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.

South Eastern Trains

An editor has recently modified the list of operators to include South Eastern Trains (SET). All of this class were withdrawn before this operator existed.

Yes, it is correct that SET is a successor company to Connex, but these units were NOT operated by the successor company.

Can editors please use their commonsense before making such changes to the list of operators. If you do not understand the subject on which you are editing, then please refrain from making edits that are factually untrue. Bhtpbank (talk) 21:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Vehicle 70576 location

Out of an abundance of caution, I'm asking a question here. Vehicle 70576 location is listed as being located at Snibston Discovery Park, which according to Reliable Sources closed in 2015. The Reliable Sources at the Snibston Wikipedia page don't mention the fate of the vehicle, but there is a RS on the Snibston Wikipedia page stating the track has gone to the Great Central Railway. Flickr has photos of the vehicle at the Great Central Railway, and the Railway Heritage Register Carriage Survey Project database has the vehicle at the GCR. The Carriage Survey Project is used as a reference for two other vehicles on the Class 411 page. Could Flickr and/or Carriage Survey Project be used as reliable sources? I note that the current info for this vehicle is not referenced. Either way, the info regarding this vehicle appears to be incorrect. In the absence of these being RS, should the info be deleted as incorrect, be added to the article 'Citation needed' or alter to' it used to be at Snibston' (or similar)?

thanks

--~~~~ Rattey (talk) 15:55, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Modifications to formations category

I have modified the information within the formations category as previously it was indicated as follows (Power car + 2 trailers or standard coaches + power car). This is incorrect as what is stated as power cars are actually driving trailers (standard cars with shoe gear and a driving cab). The full configuration follows (Driving trailer + Non driving trailer + Motor coach + driving trailer). The motor coach is where the equipment such as the break compartment (guards compartment), traction motors, motor alternator, compressor, etc. I have found this information from many different sources but I will only state one here for my ease (you can find many sources proving my point on websites sutch as Wikipedia, YouTube and other sources. One of my sources: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rsnzAe4MJnY&pp=ygU2UGFkZGxpbmcgdXAgYW5kIGNoYW5naW5nIHNob2UgZnVzZXMgbmV0d29yayBzb3V0aCBlYXN0 Kalkal2168 (talk) 04:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Beware - YouTube is not a reliable source, and Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference. Danners430 (talk) 05:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I have found many other sources than just YouTube proving my point (aggain power cars is the incorrect description for the driving trailers on the br class 411). Again there are many other sources proving my point such as training manuals and videos and even other encyclopedias. Kalkal2168 (talk) 16:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I apologize if you believe otherwise but there is plenty of evidence proving my point Kalkal2168 (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe anything - and what I believe is irrelevant anyway. What matters is if you have a source, if that source is reliable, and if you actually list that source against the edit(s) being made. Certainly when your edits were reverted, you had provided no source in the article, and the only source on the talk page was that YouTube link. Danners430 (talk) 16:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Did you even look at that YouTube link as it sends you to THE training manual that they used to train staff members on this unit. (and I sure do hope that is correct!) Kalkal2168 (talk) 16:35, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

And did you even look at the link provided in the revert edit summary? Take a look at WP:UGC. We don't know who is behind "The Railway Channel", so how can it be verified to be a reliable source? I'll await others' opinion on this matter though.

What doesn't change though is the fact that the source was buried in a random talk page post when it should have been an online citation on the edit you made. Danners430 (talk) 16:46, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Well I’m sorry il put the link in next time (and honestly YouTube is a much more reliable source than Wikipedia, from what I know I was taught never to trust Wikipedia (honestly I can see why now)). Kalkal2168 (talk) 16:52, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

No. I'm sorry, but I'll categorically refute any thought that YouTube is a more reliable source than Wikipedia. For one reason - YouTube doesn't tell you where information is coming from, whereas Wikipedia is requires all information be sourced from reputable sources. No, I would never cite Wikipedia in any academic work - but Wikipedia is perfect for finding summaries of information, and directing you to the actual source for that info… and that source is what would be going in my academic work. There are only a very small number of YouTube channels that take this same care. Danners430 (talk) 16:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The Wikipedia policies in question are WP:VERIFIABLE and WP:RS. Danners430 (talk) 16:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand what you are trying to say but that video is not a normal YouTube video, this video in question is a tape recording of the training information program for the drivers of these units. I’d like to add that many channels have this exact same video up ( therefore proving my point that the tape is not tampered in any way shape or form). Kalkal2168 (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kalkal2168: Motor coaches have traction motors; trailer coaches do not. That is the only difference. The presence or absence of driving cabs, shoegear or brake vans is irrelevant. See for example

• Williams, Alan; Percival, David (1974). British Railways Locomotives and Other Motive Power: Combined Volume. London: Ian Allan. p. 180. ISBN 0-7110-0534-6.

which gives the formation of Class 411 as

Motor Saloon Brake Second

Equipment: Two 250 h.p. English Electric traction motors

Trailer Composite (K)

Trailer Second (K)

Motor Saloon Brake Second

(As above)

Compare the entry for Class 421 on page 181 which gives the formation as

Driving Trailer Composite (H)

Trailer Saloon Second

Non-Driving Motor Saloon Brake Second

Equipment: Four 250 h.p. English Electric traction motors

Driving Trailer Composite (H)

On page 127 it is explained that ... (K) indicates a side-corridor vehicle with toilet and (H) indicates a vehicle with open or saloon second class accommodation, side corridor first class accommodation and a toilet. All motor coaches have driving facilities unless the heading specifically states otherwise.

HTH. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the situation and I apologize for any inconveniences to anybody involved Kalkal2168 (talk) 18:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)