Talk:GE E60

message: This entire article is effectively unsourced; I don't think the way to solve this is to add more unsourced information. I'm tempted to take  up on his suggestion to stub the article and start over. I can't get them immediately but I have some books with discussion of the E60, suitable for starting over. Any takers? Mackensen (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, the reason I removed the information added by  just to force him to add the reference to his "GE Manual". It was bizarre that information be added, for which a reference source was known. I felt it was a lazy edit, and just wanted the reference to be added.  I'm comfortable with the rest of the article being unreferenced, but I have a new year resolution to try and ensure that where information is added, that it is correctly sourced.  Call it a "drawing a line in the sand" ... accept the past, but do not accept past behaviors as being acceptable in the future.KirksKeyKard (talk) 15:27, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Instead of deleting things try the talk page.  I couldn't find an obvious reference template for manuals, but now I don't care. BTW I was of half a mind to tear this whole article down to a stub just to give you a taste of your own medicine.  Pro tip, being obstructionist is not a very positive new year's resolution.Sturmovik (talk) 18:01, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  You've complied with my request, which was un-necessary in the first place.  A seasoned editor should not need to be reminded of one of the five pillars. i.e.  "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources." KirksKeyKard (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub this? 

message: Much of the section on the E60C-2 appears to be plagiarized from the following source:  Here's the duplicator detector report. It's been in the article from the beginning. Mackensen (talk) 22:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I did the original work 10 years ago. After reviewing the page, I did cite Geissenheimer's article in 2002 as a source for NdeM's E60C-2 order. If it is deemed as plagiarization, I apologize for that and you can remove this portion if you want. Chaohwa (talk) 19:42, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

text: This is resolved; I rewrote it, then removed it altogether. Mackensen (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on GE E60. 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/20160202093917/http://gg1bob.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=4392013 to http://gg1bob.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=4392013
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060222145707/http://www.trolleycar.org:80/observations/geissenheimer/geissenheimer020226.htm to http://www.trolleycar.org/observations/geissenheimer/geissenheimer020226.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060701013811/http://www.hebners.net:80/amtrak/ to http://hebners.net/amtrak/
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) 20:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm having a hard time finding anything on the New Jersey Transit ownership of these locomotives beyond the newspaper articles on their purchase from Amtrak in 1983. NJT isn't my usual beat;  I'm open to suggestions. Mackensen (talk) 23:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Jersey Transit