Talk:Norfolk and Western 611

Structure of body
Don't have time to do a full review right now, but I saw this on article alerts and skimmed it. I suggest breaking up the history section into several top-level sections, due to its length. At minimum, revenue service can be a top-level section, along with excursion service. The article is generally in very good shape though, and I expect it will pass GAN easily. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

611 Leaving Strasburg Railroad
Hello, I would like to know that if there are any plans for 611 to go back home to Roanoke Virginia? 70.188.111.54 (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Just wait and see, man. There’s yet to be an announcement of her leaving Pennsylvania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.169.64.51 (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, thank you, that would be nice. 70.188.111.54 (talk) 08:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Right now, the 611 is on display at the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania until further notice. 611fan2001 (talk) 14:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you. 70.188.111.54 (talk) 15:52, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I heard that No. 611 will be leaving the SRC probably at the end of May or the start of June. 611fan2001 (talk) 03:34, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Why remove the 1956 wreck from the body of the article?
@ 611fan2001, why remove mention of the 1956 train wreck from the body of the article? Yes, as you mention, there is a detailed description of the wreck near the bottom of the article. That is why the description in the body was brief. But it was also important. The wreck is historically important, as the last country's major steam-powered revenue passenger train wreck. It is also why No. 611 has survived into its eighth decade, why it was not scrapped after less than a decade's service, and indeed why all of this was possible: Finally, it makes little sense to refer to the wreck offhandedly ("...thanks to the extensive overhaul that followed its accident in early 1956"); service to the reader, at least, demands some earlier mention. Particularly in view of the myriad of less-important detail, can you explain why you believe this crucial event in No. 611's existence should be relegated to a bullet point in a list? PRRfan (talk) 17:17, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * 1.4 First mainline excursion service
 * 1.5 Second retirement
 * 1.6 Second mainline excursion service
 * 1.7 Shortline excursion service


 * Alright, I've moved this 1956 wreck information back to the revenue service section. I'm sorry if I yelled at you. XP 611fan2001 (talk) 17:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries! I didn't take it that way at all. Sometimes WP is no better than email at conveying a reasonable tone of voice. :) PRRfan (talk) 20:52, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
 * There's already a link to the Cedar Train wreck in the lead section. :P 611fan2001 (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Let's link to Cedar train wreck in the body of the article
I see the link in the intro. But I think readers would be well-served by links to Cedar train wreck in the History (more than one thousand words after the intro) and Accidents sections (more than 5,000 words after that). This is explicitly permitted by MOS:REPEATLINK ("Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but it may be repeated if helpful for readers, such as...at the first occurrence in a section"). PRRfan (talk) 19:06, 4 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Alright, I've moved the 1956 wreck link back to the revenue service section. 611fan2001 (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC)