Talk:OO9

Merge proposal
I'm proposing merging this article with HOe scale and HOn30. HOe is another term for HOn30 so the two topics should be merged as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. OO9 is another scale but extremely close, and often interchanged. As an example, view On30. --Michael Johnson 11:16, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * No, OO9 is 4mm scale, and has other narrow gauge relatives (e.g. 8mm gauge finescale), whereas HOn30 is 3.5mm scale. &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 16:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It would be the same as combining OO and H0 and half a millimeter can make all the difference! (I was looking at some HO British stock compared with OO Equivalents at an exhibition last week - there is a marked difference, so I would say they should be kept separate. Lynbarn 10:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No - I agree with the last two comments Zabdiel 09:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The proposal was put up because both articles are stubs. Combining them would make one decent article. It is good to see the support, maybe we can see some more content. --Michael Johnson 13:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

OO9 or 009?
I thought it was called OO9 rather than 009 (Oh Oh Nine rather than zero zero nine). However the 009 society uses the number instead of the letter yet the wikipedia uses the letter. I thought that OO9 was correct - as the OO comes from OO gauge. --Zabdiel 13:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The "0" in O, OO and HO scales was originally zero, as the it related to the old numerical scales, ie 1, 2, 3 etc. Common usage has tended to use the letter O, however this did not matter, at least until the arrival of computers which obviously treat O and 0 differently. --Michael Johnson 21:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * 0 is European, O American. The UK, the focus of 009, is unclear: 00 was always pronounced as "double-oh", which is itself unclear as to which it means.
 * H0m and HOn30 are very clearly either 0 or O, as appropriate. 009 though is never likely to be sorted, although the 009 society might be considered authoritative. Wikipedia, as usual, invents its own formats regardless and claims them to unimpeachable. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)