Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania

message: I mostly agree with not using the photo of the sister -- that's why I flagged it -- although given that the only difference is the number, I think that the sister photo is a good placeholder.  After all, we use a few perfectly terrible early Coast Guard photos of lighthouses as placeholders.
The article has a builder's drawing of the class -- no number -- how about that for here?
I don't understand, however, deleting the link to the article on the DD1 class.  Surely we don't need one article on the DD1 class and a separate article on #3696? Unlike some of the notable steam locomotives on smaller railroads, it's unlikely that we'll ever know much individual detail on #3696, so it is more like a class rep than an individual.  . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs)  11:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Among other things, we have a nomination form for the engine itself, so there's plenty of information on it.  With the old lighthouses, the photos are of the lighthouses themselves, not other ones of similar designs.  Finally, you linked simply to PRR (a redirect to Pennsylvania Railroad), not PRR DD1.  Was that an error?  Nyttend (talk) 15:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And you should be confused -- not my day, yesterday, sorry. I also transposed the engine's number, which Niagara has cleaned up. I meant to link to PRR DD1 which seems to me appropriate.  Until we get a PD photo of 3696, how about using this  here? . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs)  15:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  DDI Electric Locomotive No. 3696 

message: A separate problem which I raised at NRIS info issues.  1737 is on the NRHP as Passenger Locomotive No. 1737. It was the first locomotive in the K4 class, arguably the most famous of the PRR steam locomotives. We have an article on 1737, complete with a builder's photo of the original 1737.   However, it is well known that PRR 1737 was scrapped in the fifties and that the PRR, unwilling to admit that they had scrapped a famous loco, put its builder's plate on #3750 and preserved it.  The NRHP nomination calls out #1737.  The Pennsylvania Railroad Museum has the locomotive, with #3750's number plate back on it.
The conundrum is -- which locomotive's photograph do we use to illustrate this list -- the one that was actually nominated (3750) or the one that they thought they were nominating (1737) (we have both)? Which locomotive's story do we tell in the article -- or both? . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs)  12:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The nom form for 1737 also makes note of the fact that 3750 was "selected as a stand-in" for 1737. Meaning, IMO, the 1737 that was listed was the engine that is now 3750 (which, by the way, is also a state symbol). Merging the two articles is not out of the question, however. I should point out that a lot of the current articles on individual locomotives were all written by the same person (and pretty much none of them have sources). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 18:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[PRR 1737]]