Talk:Iore

message: The article says:
:With 14.600 HP, they are reported to be the strongest cargo locomotives in the world.
This only applies if we consider the two parts to be one locomotive. The rest of the article talks about two locomotives operated in pairs, and in that case the above is certainly not true (see SBB-CFF-FFS Re 620). Moreover, there is a difference between power and tractive effort. I would consider "strength" to be about tractive effort, however the above sentence talks about a power figure... I'll fix that. --Kabelleger 22:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Strongest cargo locomotives

message: 700 kilonewtons = 157366.26 pounds force par google. Somethings up with the wikipedia conversion...
--Chesapeake (talk) 07:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  kilonewton to pound conversion wrong.  

message: Why was this moved from IORE to Iore? The official designation is IORE with capital letters! See Bombardier Transporation website --Kabelleger (talk) 19:20, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed! The manufacturer's designation is in all capitals, this move should be undone. It's the equivalent of moving the EMD SD40-2 article to Emd Sd40-2. WuhWuzDat 19:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Actually it looks like the article's title hasn't changed, but IORE was replaced by Iore in the text... --Kabelleger (talk) 19:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not true, sorry, I got confused by the fact that the old revisions are shown with the new title... --Kabelleger (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

text: @Wuhwuzdat: Note that "EMD SD40-2" consists entirely of an acronym (EMD) and a letter and number code for the model. That is by far the same as in this situation, where "Iore" is a name, not a code or acronym. Arsenikk (talk) 22:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Even if "Iore" is short for "iron ore" (which is the only explanation I have come across, although never from a WP:RS), that would still make it a portmanteau, which again should not be capitalized. This is a prime example of why the MOS has this clause, if all-caps is more common in other printed media, it is simply because they follow a different style guideline than WP. No matter how you turn it around, it is incorrect English to write anything except acronyms in all-caps. Arsenikk (talk) 15:43, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't found any more arguments to write it all-caps, so I guess we'll leave it the way it is. Thanks for the explanation. --Kabelleger (talk) 17:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding an alternate stylization in all-caps was a good idea, though. Arsenikk (talk) 10:09, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Could it be an idea to use the template  to decapitalize the ‘i’? Eisfbnore (talk) 20:56, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  IORE vs. Iore 

message: I commented out the recent unsourced edit that said 600 kN is the continuous tractive effort and 700 kN is a short-term TE, and request a clarification and a source. According to the Bombardier data sheet on the locomotive (cited in the article), 600 kN is the starting TE, so a continuous TE equal to that and a short-time one that's even higher seems unlikely. (a possible explanation is a change in the axleload.)
Also, I wonder if the two sources in the recent edit adding single section operation are good enough for Wikipedia. The first one links to a personal homepage, generally frowned upon in WP:SPS, however, I think it is covered under "...produced by an established expert on the topic of the article..." The other link goes to a photo album -- I'm not sure about that, I have been told before that images aren't acceptable as source, but I haven't found a specific MoS policy against them. --Rontombontom (talk) 13:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the 700 kN, ref 30 (Stiberg) mentions this, stating [translated from Norwegian, and referring to a twin unit]: "In addition, the loco has a boost function, if one should get stuck you can take off with 1400 kN". Arsenikk (talk) 14:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Added! --Rontombontom (talk) 14:15, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Regarding the photo album link, I asked at WP:RS. Although I'm not entirely happy with the depth of the replies I got before the question got archived, it does seem that if nothing else, the use of that particular image from that particular site as evidence for single operation would be widely considered WP:OR, so I removed it. --Rontombontom (talk) 08:17, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tractive effort, sources 

message: I added a sentence about the type of the converters (Camilla family of water-cooled GTO converters). IMHO this is a significant detail, because Adtranz's locomotives for Germany and the later TRAXX 1 locomotives made in Kassel used a different, ester-cooled GTO converter, originally developed by the German branch of ABB. I gave the FS Class E464 as example for earlier use because the source has some details on the Camilla and the Octeon platform; other vehicles with Camilla I'm aware of were the FS Class E412, SBB-CFF-FFS RABDe 500, and the AVE Class 102 (I think). --Rontombontom (talk) 14:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Camilla 

message: There's some information about the underframe in this article http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/powerful-freight-locos-take-shape-at-dalian.html - quote The IORE locos have a number of special features for winter operations such as a heavy steel frame protecting the underfloor transformer and steel bars ahead of the leading bogies to prevent blocks of ice or other obstacles from damaging equipment; these are not needed on the Chinese locos. Air filters with roof-level intakes that prevent snow and iron ore dust from reaching the traction compartments are retained to ensure that coal dust cannot penetrate the interior. moved from China HX3B Oranjblud (talk) 13:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Snow collision protection

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726105217/http://www.eurailpress.de/article/view/27/china_erste_bombardier_lokomotive_ausgeliefert.html to http://www.eurailpress.de/article/view/27/china_erste_bombardier_lokomotive_ausgeliefert.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:12, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified