Talk:GWR Star Class

Merge?
Merge with Star class locomotive? &mdash; Catherine\talk 21:29, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * (This is an old suggestion, but) No, it's a different group of engines altogether. Moonraker12 12:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the wikification of the list of individual locomotives
Linking the names in the list to articles that are not about locomotives at all, but which just happen to have the same name as the locomotives, is confusing and unhelpful. The list of names of locomotives should either be linked to articles about the locomotives, or not linked at all. I favour the first of those two options. I see no reason why we shouldn't aim to have a separate article for each locomotive. There are already articles about individual locomotives - see, for example, Evening Star (locomotive), (evidently a different, later Evening Star). GrahamN 23:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree; I've come across this on other pages, and posed the same question.Moonraker12 12:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe that there are times when people (such as myself) wonder where a name comes from, hence the explanation at the bottom of the locomotive's section. In wiki these things get linked to the page explaining the concept...


 * A locomotive should only have a page where it is notable in itself. North Star might qualify here but the vast majority of locomotives do not as they were just one of a class; they are only of interest when compared with similar locomotives, hence their being grouped by class. If you come across any where it is not clear that this link is not pointing to the locomotive then please re-word it so that the mistake cannot be made. Geof Sheppard 12:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

About the meanings of the Star loco names
I found this page with most descriptions of the stars associated with the locomotives' names more than a bit woolly. They included some errors, and they also read like "add-ons" just dropped in. So I corrected all descriptions, keeping them as short as possible. I'm sure a good argument can be made for dropping them out completely, but it seems to me that 1) they're useful, as some of the locos would have a blank space otherwise, and 2) they do have an extra use - the explanations of names throw interesting light on the "mindset" of the company at the time. It seems to me they not only wanted to get away from the "Planet type" locos of other companies by choosing stars, but also deliberately chose a romantic, poetic-sounding set of star names, soft sounding rather than hard. Kind of like an 1840 version of Saatchi-&-Saatchi marketing, maybe! Interesting. Pete Hobbs (talk) 17:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The best source for the origin of GWR loco names is
 * I'll put some refs to this in when I have time. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll put some refs to this in when I have time. -- Red rose64 (talk) 18:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GWR Star Class. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715135017/http://www.queenofcups.com/AR27article.htm to http://www.queenofcups.com/AR27article.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:13, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Delivery of North Star
Regarding : I find it highly unlikely that ", for three reasons:
 * 1) Twyford is more than seven miles west of Maidenhead Bridge
 * 2) Twyford is not on a navigable waterway: the river through Twyford is the Loddon, which is not deep enough; the closest approach of the Thames is at Sonning, more than two miles further west
 * 3) the locomotive would surely have been delivered at a point where it could be unloaded from the boat and placed near to, if not actually on, the (uncompleted) railway.

According to "North Star was delivered by barge on the Thames at Maidenhead at the end of November, but there she had to stay for lack of rails until May 1838""North Star was delivered at Maidenhead on the 28th November 1837, and had the honour of working the Directors' train on the 31st May 1838, preparatory to the opening of the lineit worked the first Great Western Railway passenger train—a 'Directors' Special'"

Similarly, according to "North Star ... [was] delivered by barge at Maidenhead on 28th November 1837, nearly six months elapsed before the railway reached it! Then, on 31st May 1838, it worked the first Great Western Railway passenger train—a 'Directors' Special'"

I see two possibilities: Certainly, as the line between Maidenhead (Old) and Twyford was not opened until 1 July 1839, Twyford is highly unlikely. FYI. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 19:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) it was unloaded at Maidenhead Bridge and carted eastward along the A4 road to the bridge where the railway crosses over the road;
 * 2) it was unloaded at the eastern end of the uncompleted Maidenhead Railway Bridge and placed on the railway there.


 * Sorry, but Maidenhead Bridge station was near the Bath Road at Taplow rather than Twyford. Geof Sheppard (talk) 22:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * So why did you ? Are there any sources which conclusively show that the delivery by barge was not "at Maidenhead"? -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 23:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)