Talk:Level crossings in the United Kingdom
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Siemens barrier[edit]
Moved from User talk:The joy of all things § SuggestiveHello, I noticed that you have written some discouraging information with regards to Siemens s60 barrier machine. some of which are false.
I wanted to talk about your reasons behind this.
Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to bring this up.
- 10AlfredStreet! yes, here would be more appropriate. I have not written any discouraging information at all. You have been removing sections without giving a reason for removal. When you remove whole sections, then you also remove the citations and they state explicitly what the text refers to. So in the case of the Redcar gates, I have no vested interest whatsoever in that information; however, if you remove an entire section, you should use the edit summary to justify your reasons for doing so, otherwise it just looks like WP:VANDALISM. This is why I reverted your removal. If the information is wrong, correct it by adding reliable sources WP:RS, don't just remove again without an edit summary, as I will again, feel like you are just vandalising the page. Oh, and when you are using talk pages, please use the four tildes (~~~~) to add your signature and timestamp. Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 11:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- Given that you have not responded when you have prompted me to; given that you have made three edits in the mainspace (two reverts on this article and one on my talk page), I think you have a vested interest in this. I advise you to read WP:COI before reverting again. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 15:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, many thanks for getting back to me, apologies that it has taken me a few days to respond. I appreciate your feedback as to why my amendments had been over turned. The 'Gates and barriers' section seems to be written with the intention to talk negatively about the Siemens s60 barrier with comments such as "relatively new barrier design which was given a 'Certificate of Acceptance' by Network Rail in June 2012" the use of inverted commas is implying it should not have been give. "After trials at numerous crossings, no more of these barriers have been fitted since they have become unreliable (requiring maintenance) and occasionally unsafe (in strong winds). This may however now be a claim just for the English government, as one new crossing in North Wales (Tyn Y Morfa) has recently been fitted with this type of barrier (in March 2018).[21]" is a FALSE comment and should be deleted. Why mention it if you also state that it is now a claim? The S60 does get installed on the UK network still but will not be installed on any crossings with a boom requirement of 9.1m. 10AlfredStreet! (talk) 10:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- 10AlfredStreet! The text you have inserted reads as thus:
The Siemens S60 barrier machine has been used at a vast range of MCB-OD crossings with recent instalments at Whitland and Ferryside for the Carmarthenshire Project in the UK and has over 11,000 installations worldwide. The small footprint barrier design originated from North America but is assembled and tested at the manufacturing site in Chippenham, UK for UK installations. The barrier controls are at eye level which makes installation and maintenance procedures quicker and more ergonomic for the on-site teams. When a S60 is installed it only needs electrical power (no hydraulics are required) which provides a more environmentally friendly solution and reduces routine maintenance needs. Power consumption is 15 amps at 12V or 8amps at 24V, which are relatively low currents that can offer saving on cable core size and the number of batteries required for the back-up supply. Further saving may be realised in the design of the interface circuitry by using fewer components than traditional systems.
- A claim that it has been installed at 11,000 locations needs a cite. Manufacturing in Chippenham, needs a cite. The rest is way, way too detailed about amps and volts; the article is not in an advanced electronics magazine! You will need to source these claims, because of the level of detail, it seems like WP:OR. The joy of all things (talk) 11:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
- 10AlfredStreet! The text you have inserted reads as thus:
- Hello, many thanks for getting back to me, apologies that it has taken me a few days to respond. I appreciate your feedback as to why my amendments had been over turned. The 'Gates and barriers' section seems to be written with the intention to talk negatively about the Siemens s60 barrier with comments such as "relatively new barrier design which was given a 'Certificate of Acceptance' by Network Rail in June 2012" the use of inverted commas is implying it should not have been give. "After trials at numerous crossings, no more of these barriers have been fitted since they have become unreliable (requiring maintenance) and occasionally unsafe (in strong winds). This may however now be a claim just for the English government, as one new crossing in North Wales (Tyn Y Morfa) has recently been fitted with this type of barrier (in March 2018).[21]" is a FALSE comment and should be deleted. Why mention it if you also state that it is now a claim? The S60 does get installed on the UK network still but will not be installed on any crossings with a boom requirement of 9.1m. 10AlfredStreet! (talk) 10:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)