Talk:British Rail Engineering Limited
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
removal - copyright edit
The text removed is the same as http://www.railwaybritain.co.uk/british%20rail%20workshops.html , without explicit licensing information it can't be used here. Sorry. It can be used as a source though.Sf5xeplus (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Doncaster Works sold to RFS? edit
Did RFS buy Doncaster from BR? Is there a good source, apart from this book title?
Graces edit
The footnote at the bottom of http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/BREL says "Sources of Information [1] Wikipedia"
So we can't cite it as a source.
(Also, it is a wiki)
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 23:33, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
@Andy Dingley: In your edit summary, you wrote: "Graces' isn't a WP mirror." To help, I have dug up these old versions of the article. This is the original 6 March 2007 version of the Graces Guide, which is a verbatim copy of the 24 Feb 2007 version at English Wikipedia. Both versions contain the sentence that I removed the footnote from: The historic site at Wolverton in Milton Keynes was progressively run down until the 1980s before finally being relegated to maintenance duties only.
With that confirmation in hand, I removed the footnote again.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:24, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- Why is being a wiki a problem? The point about WP's sourcing rules apply to open, public wikis (because of the editors) not "wikis" (because of the CMS platform). Graces Guide can be seen as SPS, but is usually robust and well in excess of WP's usual "Scrape anything off the web, it's OK" approach.
- As to Wolverton, then just what is the problem here? Go and find another source if you want - there's plenty out there. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:32, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- I don't want to delete anything about Wolverton. I only wanted to delete the footnote link to Grace's, which is circular. WP:CIRCULAR explains why we can't cite it:
- do not use ... publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources
- That's all.
- --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
- I don't want to delete anything about Wolverton. I only wanted to delete the footnote link to Grace's, which is circular. WP:CIRCULAR explains why we can't cite it: