Talk:GE B36-7

"infamous wreck" ?

Does the phrase infamous wreck indicate a neutral point of view. I know that the Conrail engineer was smoking pot, but I'm not sure the word infamous is right for this situation. Bob305 (talk) 01:17, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree that "infamous" is over the top, but the Ricky Gates locomotive needs to be noted somehow. --SSW9389 (talk) 04:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Invalid Source

Removed as it did not link to a page mentioning Wilmington, NC

References

CSX RCPHG4

The Diesel Shop shows 16 B36-7s being used as RCPHG4s. These appear to be radio control switching units. SSW9389 08:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Horsepower Rating

As noted in the article both a 3600 horsepower rating for the very earliest versions and a 3750 horsepower rating for later production B36-7s are correct. The four Cotton Belt units and the 16 Santa Fe units were rated at 3600 horsepower when built in 1980. SSW9389 (talk) 11:25, 10 December 2017 (UTC) The first GE unit rated at 3750 horsepower for traction was demonstrator #606 in January 1983. This was the first computer assist for traction unit built by GE. The 752 traction motors were also upgraded from previous Dash 7 units. See Extra 2200 South Issue #77 dated 1/1983 page 9. SSW9389 (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC) By default the six Southern units built before the #606 demonstrator would be rated at 3600 horsepower. The Conrail Historical Society lists a 3600 horsepower rating for the 60 Conrail units. Ratings for the Seaboard System's 120 units and the Cerrejon Coal Railroads eight units are unknown at this time. The Southern Pacific's 16 units are rated at 3750 horsepower. SSW9389 (talk) 14:07, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Extra 2200 South

@SSW9389: The citations to Extra 2200 South are incomplete; can you provide the missing information (article titles, full page numbers of the articles)? Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 23:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

The happenings of individual train cars that have not received media coverage

What's the convention of including their disposition, such as "wrecked and rebuilt" just based on rail fan images? Things like wrecked cars or wrecked planes that have not received any coverage for that specific incident aren't included into the vehicle or aircraft model's page and say "tail number nnnn" or "VIN nnn" was wrecked so and so and cite citizen journalist photos.. I think chronicling the life of each locomotive/trains/watercraft etc is just information clutter and not encyclopedic. Graywalls (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

You are completely wrong on this and this and your anti-history bias is showing. The cabless Cotton Belt unit and the Ricky Gates lead unit are the most famous B36-7s. --SSW9389 (talk) 04:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Train cars? --SSW9389 (talk) 04:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

"most famous" according to who? Wikipedia is not a place to cobble together information based on user generated contents, which includes personal photos. https://pressroom.toyota.com/scion-xb-release-series-10-techie-style/ there were 1,500 of this limited edition cars build. Someone might have a picture of wrecked one on Flickr, but it is inappropriate to write something like "#1,257 was totaled in Maine, then it was sold at an insurance auction and retitled as rebuilt in New Hampshire". Why do you think train cars are any different? The fact isn't controversial, but things like this is unencyclopedic. Graywalls (talk) 02:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Calling a locomotive a train car is unencyclopedic. Your street cred on anything historical or American is zero. Sometimes photos are all that is known. To delete facts because of not understanding American prototypical practices shows both historical and anti-American bias. --SSW9389 (talk) 09:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@SSW9389: See WP:NOTEVERYTHING and this is even if the contents in question had reliable source. If there's no reliable source, that's out of question. In a car forum, or enthusiast magazine, the hypothetical example above might actually be included. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it's not a place to exhaustively show case anything and everything about everything which would lead to a significant information pollution. Graywalls (talk) 00:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Folks, let's tone down the rhetoric a little bit, yeah? Wikipedia can't say that these two locomotives were the most famous, in its own voice, unless a reliable source makes that claim. Regarding the three units in the Chase crash, the locomotive design wasn't really relevant, it was all on Gates. For the B-unit, it may not be noteworthy unless a source discusses. See EMD F40PH#Variants for an example of discussing locomotive variants. In general, we can't just source to a photograph. Mackensen (talk) 10:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)