Talk:Elsässische Maschinenbau-Gesellschaft Grafenstaden

This article contains a translation of Els%C3%A4ssische_Maschinenbau-Gesellschaft_Grafenstaden from de.wikipedia.

(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article lacks references.

An editor has requested that an image be added to this article. Please work with the Images task force to add a suitable image to this article.

Associated projects or task forces:

	This article is supported by the Rail transport in Germany task force (marked as Low-importance).

DoubtsEdit

It should be clarified, if Koechlin works in Belfort merged as well with Grafenstaden in 1872. The article suggests, that Elsässischen Maschinenbau-Gesellschaft Grafenstaden was a separate factory from Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques until 1919. On the other hand, German book on locomotives calls Belfort works a branch of Grafenstaden already in 1880s - and it is known, that both manufacturers were at least closely tied and built de Glehn's locomotives. Possibly all works (Mulhouse, Belfort and Grafenstaden) merged in 1872 and Elsässische Maschinenbau-Gesellschaft Grafenstaden was in fact the same, as Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques? (the later name seems to mean the same in French). Article on Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques says, that in 1872 the company of Koechlin merged with the Graffenstaden to form SACM. Pibwl ←« 17:00, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Dates don't add up.Edit

"based on the 1921 patent of a Benedictine monk, was bought in 1837" Kortoso (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

It's 1821 not 1921. I've amended it. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:27, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Vielmohls mersi. ;) Kortoso (talk) 16:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)