Talk:British Rail Class 385

ScotRail delays - BBC News

ScotRail confirms high-speed plan delays - BBC News . . now where have I seen that photo before? . . dave souza, talk 09:37, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Better photographs are needed, but unfortunately I can't find any! Please help.

The existing photos don't show (1) and entire unit and (2) there are platforms in the way.

Something like this would be ideal.

If anyone can take some photos, that would be helpful.

• 
  Platform in the way, slightly overexposed sky
• 
  Platform in the way, slightly overexposed sky
• 
  Even Hitachi's digital rendering has a platform in the way

Please go and take a photo, not knock up some rubbish in paint. Tony May (talk) 12:12, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Wots wrong wit paint? Here's some I done earlier...

• 
  is more about the station
• 
  seaside scene, but heading out of the page
• 
  buffer stop light in the way, why can't they plan stations to suit photographers?

Will take the liberty of making the third one the pic at the article infobox, feel free to revert or take another photo. . . . dave souza, talk 09:43, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Dave. Of those, the middle one is the best, IMHO. I don't like the buffer stop signal jutting in front of the subject. If you are in Scotland, some good photos of some Scotrail Turbostars would be helpful. We're missing good photo of these, though they're the most common type of Turbostar. Tony May (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Tony, you're welcome to swap the article photo - I didn't like the buffer stop light, but didn't have the option to get Scotrail to remove it. Haven't seen any Turbostars as far as I know, if I do chance across one in good weather will try to remember to take a photo. . . dave souza, talk 16:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

• 
  320 today...

Thought you might be in luck today, but it's an EMU – don't expect we get DMUs here. . . dave souza, talk 15:27, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Class 385s

65 Units Are Now In Service Rflashg (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Unit Formation

More info is required on the formation of the units, especially as they come in 3 and 4 car variants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.33.185.122 (talk) 20:48, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

IMO, this is excessive detail laid out at WP:CRUFT, linking to WP:What Wikipedia is not. The information consistently added (mostly from IPs) is not even sourced. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 20:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Mattdaviesfsic: at the time that comment was posted, the article looked like this. There's a 90% chance that they were complaining about the absense of the formation information now included in the infobox, rather than the more recent vehicle numbering detail to which you're referring.

By the way, I strenuously object to information like that being described as fancruft. With a source and a bit of format cleanup I would consider it perfectly acceptable, and indeed have added it myself to a number of articles here. If your objection is that it is unsourced, please just say that and skip the apparently-denigratory observations. XAM2175 ^(T) 12:03, 23 April 2023 (UTC)