More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator (find an active one) on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright.
|(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)|
James Street 
GNP&BR and BS&WR maps categories 
I happy for you to categorise them how you choose. I created the new category for the Great Northern Piccadilly & Brompton Railway because I hadn't spotted that thee non-ampersand version already existed. The commons category finder tool never seems to do what I expect it to. --DavidCane (talk) 00:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
"Midland" compounds 
Thanks for fixing the categories on those.
- Numbers is by far the easiest way; see the notes I put on the category pages. Beware some early photos of MR locos: the MR renumbered pretty much its entire fleet in 1907, and the 35 compounds built up to that point had originally been 2631-5 and 1000-29; these were renumbered 1000-34 in that order, so there were two different no. 1000 (the first one became 1005, and the preserved loco was originally 2631), so be careful if placing early photos of no. 1000 in Category:Midland Railway 1000 Class - No. 1000.
- As for design changes other than the driving wheel diameter: according to O.S. Nock (Great Locomotives of the LMS, p. 184), the MR engines had a rounded dome cover, whereas the LMS dome covers had a flattened top. There seem to have been a few other changes, which unfortunately did not apply to all the LMS locos:-
- The MR locos and the first 20 LMS locos (1045-64) had tall chimneys and Ramsbottom safety valves; LMS locos from no. 1065 on were built with shorter chimneys and Ross "pop" safety valves.
- All the MR locos were arranged for right-hand drive, as were the first 40 LMS locos (1045-84); subsequent LMS locos were arranged for left-hand drive. Whilst it's not easy to look inside the cab, the position of the reversing lever in there is given away by the position of the reach rod on the outside: left or right of the loco. First see this photo of an LMS engine: the reach rod emerges from the front of the firebox casing, passes over the leading driving-wheel splasher, then curves down to join the weighshaft. Now compare this MR loco: neither the reach rod nor weighshaft are visible, because they're on the other side.
- So, if the loco is left-hand drive, has Ross "pop" safety valves and a short chimney, it's definitely LMS. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Renaming an image at Nenuaton Railway Station.jpg 
I'd like you to know that I chose the name File:British Rail Class 390 at Nenuaton Railway Station.jpg to distinguish it from the other images at Nenuaton railway station. Simply naming that one file "Nenuaton railway station.jpg" seems a little too generic to me, although admittedly it's still better than Trains 004. ----DanTD (talk) 23:03, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- The point was that there is no such thing as Nenuaton railway station (click the link you provided and you'll see). It is Nuneaton railway station, and has been since the page was created on 6 June 2005. Further, I did not request a rename to either "Nenuaton railway station.jpg" or "Nuneaton railway station.jpg"; my rename request was to "British Rail Class 390 at Nuneaton Railway Station.jpg", see here. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
LNWR E & F 
I've no idea why I originally labelled it as an F, not an E. I'm not familiar with either class.
- Yes; Baxter, Bertram () Baxter, David , ed. British Locomotive Catalogue 1825-1923, volume 2B: London and North Western Railway and its constituent companies, Ashbourne: Moorland Publishing, p. p.258 ISBN: 0 903485 84 2. shows a date of rebuild from B to F as 5/06. This is in the range for both B to E rebuilds also B to F.
- Classes E & F were both 2-8-0 rebuilds of the Class B 0-8-0, all of these were 4-cyl compounds. The main difference between classes E and F was the boiler: class E retained the 4'5"x15'6" boiler from class B, whereas class F were given new 5'2"x14'6" boilers similar to those of the Class D 0-8-0 (2-cyl simple). A larger diameter boiler often means that a shorter chimney and dome are necessary, and this is the case here - see these Class E, Class E, Class F, Class F; this fourth photo actually shows the same loco as File:LNWR Class E 2-8-0 locomotive, 1273 (Howden, Boys' Book of Locomotives, 1907).jpg. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- See also Pearce-Carr, Tom () Compound Locomotives of the British Isles, Reading: Finial Publishing, pp. pp. 12-13 ISBN: 978 1 900467 37 7. where there are two photos, one of each class, which allow comparison: the difference in chimney and dome height is clear. It would also appear that class F has a straight footplate, whereas on classes B and E there is an upward kink to clear the cylinders. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)