Talk:W class Melbourne tram
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
W class Melbourne tram is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Streetcars. |
[edit] SW class
There is SW5 and SW6 trams, they don't seem to be W class trams to me, Vicsig.net agrees and that's what most of this melbourne tram wiki is based on. Has anyone really even thought about this? wiesel (talk) 15:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- They have the 'S' appended to the front of the code, but I could still consider them part of the W class family as they have a lot in common. The average person can't tell them apart, I wouldn't be able to unless I poked about on Vicsig. (which is why the W class variants got merged in to this page) I would recommend the 'SW' stay part of the W class page, but just see what other people think first. Wongm (talk) 15:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Bit late, but I agree with Wongm. The differences between the W and SW class are minor, and I doubt there would be enough information to warrant a dedicated article on the variant. IMO sections should only be split into articles when they become too long to stay in their parent article but SW class Melbourne tram is currently a stub which contains less information than the section about it in this article. I'd suggest deleting the new article, for the same reason why I suggested merging the old mess where each variant of tram had its own article, none of them with a useful amount of information. invincible (talk) 04:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
