Talk:British Rail Class 378

message: I've received the following reply from TfL regarding my Freedom of Information request about the designation of this class:
Thank you for your information access request dated 11 March, which was received by Transport for London (TfL) on the same day.  You asked TfL to clarify information about the East London Line.
Your request has been considered under the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and I can confirm that TfL does hold the information you require. 
I can confirm that the rolling stock for London Overground (built by Bombardier) is a customised Electrostar Class 378. 
The Rolling Stock Library has allocated the following Class numbers for the new Electrostar-based trains for London Overground:
*Class 378/0 for the 3-Car Dual Voltage Units for North London Railway (Initial order - 24 Units) 
*Class 378/1 for the 4-Car DC Units for East London Line (Initial order - 20 Units). 
Hammersfan 27/03/07, 10.00 BST
:Good work with that, FOIA really does work ;) Pickle 12:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2007 issue of the "British Railways Locomotives & Coaching Stock" book by Platform  Publishing confirms the above (see Page 279). Miner2049er 16:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FOI request from TfL

message: :Image:Ldn Ovrgrd Train Internal.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 06:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pickle 23:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Ldn Ovrgrd Train Internal.JPG

message: Would there be any need to put where these are currently being stored in the article?
Today i saw a three car one of these being pulled by a First Class 66 (or similar) on c2c towards London and could only assume it had come from Pigs Bay MOD in Shoeburyness. On further investigation by myself there are a few down at Pigs Bay. Would this be useful in the article? Thanks. Dr Jimi Ibett (talk) 16:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storage 

message: I saw 378225 at Haggerston this morning. This is a new-build four-car dual voltage unit I take it?  best, Sunil060902 (talk) 11:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  378/2 

message: At the header, there are two boxes telling you the article is in WikiProject Trains. However, one of them rates the article as low/stub and the other rates them Unknown/Unknown. Suggestion to pull the second box thingy? 94.8.82.204 (talk) 14:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate 'WikiProject Trains' 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/london-overground/
*:Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: @: I am very concerned in the manner in which  has interacted which may amount to a WP:WPA and may risk consequences.  However I am of opinion the he does have some valid good faith concerns about the quality of the images being replaced and in general I tend to broadly agree with at least 80%+ on his opinions on composition/quality etc (and I'm not particularly an expert ... very far from it).  In general here I can see you are trying to add images of the new livery on class 378.  Unfortunately the images available in the category can probably be described as currently as all or mostly having issues in some form or other.  Sometimes these can be alleviated by cropping or even photo-editing but the latter may be a little frowned on (I don't know) however even with that it might be hard to get an acceptable image from the current set.  It is possible if the centre image above didn't have exposure/light issues it could be cropped to the first coach and might show the livery well ... I would even consider cropping the image on the left.  In this article the train is the star and it probably needs to dominate any image as most people are viewing it as thumbnail (On a station or other article it is the subject that is the star and I get annoyed when a train dominates centre stage!).  Finally there is always a possible COI interest when adding your own image and it is best avoided when possible and its probably best not to push an image that doesn't unabiguously improve the article in every way.  The commons certainly seems to need a couple of really top notch images of 378's in the new livery ... actually I've just taken the liberty of grabbing a file from Flickr which is almost but not quite probably ok: .  Of course Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images is also important.  I'm sure I've digressed down a siding.  Tony's style of interaction remains concerning though.  I need to WP:DISENGAGE to let others sort this.  Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk)
::Djm-leighpark did you really mean to link WP:WPA Wikipedia:WikiProject Anti-war? I also have had concerns about  interactions related to image choice.SovalValtos (talk) 23:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies ... over confident in my memory of acronyms ... and a bad place to make the mistake ... I meant Wikipedia:No personal attacks/WP:NPA.  Thankyou for pointing that out and sincere apologies to all.Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  So you agree with me, but I'm not being nice enough about it.  Let's talk about the images.  We can include a relatively poorly illustrative photo of the new livery if and until we don't have any better ones. Tony May (talk) 01:00, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Concerns

message: Please select the preferred image for insertion to the page.  You may also validity select none or that none are good enough to warrant inclusion or that the new livery is not important enough to warrant inclusion.  The article is currently likely at above the maximum number of images that can be comfortably supported by the text and you may need to agree which image can be replaced.  If you really feel an image can be improved by cropping and you would be prepared to support a cropped version of that image to win then please create a cropped version (or ping me if you can't).  Try to avoid creating cropped versions that do not have a very good change of being used on Wikipedia (I would personally be unhappy if less than 33% of mine should be used on Wikipedia for a sustained period and I know 25% of the time after doing a crop the result turns out to be unfit for purpose and unusable ... I'm only giving my personal targets to avoid crop-mania on the commons).  Please assume I have some COI on image (2) having copied it from flickr thought I'm probably in favour of not using any.  For the record (3) might need cropping and might have issue with light reflections which afflicts so many pictures of shiny trains.  I really want to duck out at this point and let consensus decide (hopefully).Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Candidates