Danners430

This user's mind-reading skills are not so good. Please leave an edit summary.

What did you do?This user includes edit summaries in their contributions and thinks that everybody should use them as well.

---

This user has publicly declared that he has a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Strathspey Railway (preserved).

This user has publicly declared that he has a conflict of interest regarding these Wikipedia articles:

• North Yorkshire Moors Railway
• List of rolling stock preserved on the North Yorkshire Moors Railway

Standard 4 2-6-0

Hi,

I have again amended the Standard 4 2-6-0 page. 76017 is now based at the K&ESR and will likely remain so in 2025, a reference is provided and images on social media show that it is not based at Carnforth. 76084 is now also withdrawn from overhaul 86.23.78.52 (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

And once again it has been partially reverted because you did not provide a citation in the article to confirm the move to the K&ESR. Sources do not go in edit summaries, they go in inline citations.

Additionally, you changed the URL on the source for the withdrawal of 76084 - but you did not change that title, author or publisher attributes of the citation, leading to it being misleading. If you are going to make changes, please do them properly. Danners430 (talk) 08:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

"Unsourced" withdrawn 221s put back on British railway rolling stock, but apparently it's OK for them to be in "past fleet" on Avanti West Coast?

Such nonsense... Anamyd (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Are you here to have a discussion, or make random statements? Danners430 (talk) 17:56, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Because you seem to ignore all attempts by other users to communicate with you (see comments about the use of edit summaries and reliable sources)... Danners430 (talk) 18:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)