Talk:Liverpool Overhead Railway

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liverpool Overhead Railway. 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/20120717013632/http://www.localhistory.scit.wlv.ac.uk/genealogy/Parker/OverheadRailway.htm to http://www.localhistory.scit.wlv.ac.uk/genealogy/Parker/OverheadRailway.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) 17:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Formal request has been received to merge: Liverpool Overhead Railway electric units into Liverpool Overhead Railway; dated: August 2020. Proposer's Rationale: ''merge Liverpool Overhead Railway electric units into Liverpool Overhead Railway, under "Rolling Stock". The information on the Electric units article largely mirrors the information on the main Liverpool Overhead Railway article, and any information differences could be moved into the "Rolling Stock" section on the Liverpool Overhead Railway. Thanks. .'' Discuss here. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 04:53, 12 August 2020 (UTC) Don't merge: This merge would force the the detailing of the rolling stock to be kept within a range of the Liverpool Overhead Railway and not to become WP:UNDUE. Its a mix of entity types and causes some issues at wikidata. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I cannot emphasise strongly enough how this merge into a well balanced B-class rated article of the EMUs which are notable in their own right and worthy of independent and extended technical and historical information could in both the immediate and longer term cause disruption and unbalance to this article. Thankyou. Bigdelboy (talk) 08:38, 16 August 2020 (UTC) (struct as alt account and might appear as double !vote) Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:37, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The detail of the rolling stock would be excessive for the main article, which should have only a summary. Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 16 August 2020 (UTC)