Talk:Wide Gauge

Standard gauge
what is the standard guard of reailroad tracks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.74.23.67 (talk • contribs) 05:44, September 26, 2007
 * You mean standard gauge? Slambo (Speak) 12:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge
I think Standard gauge in Model railways section of the Standard gauge article would be better merged here with a link from that article. -- Zabdiel (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 11:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Merge
The article Standard Gauge (toy trains) covers much of the same ground as this article, in less detail. Furthermore, this article is mostly talking about Standard Gauge and not Wide Gauge. It's all a bit of a duplicated mess.

Note that the hatnote at standard gauge may need adjusting if the merge takes place.

EdJogg (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Either one or the other would become a "redirect". Peter Horn User talk 19:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * watch out for wide gauge!!! Peter Horn User talk 20:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. That was the original name of the article, before the move in 2005. Not convinced it needs emphasising. -- EdJogg (talk) 00:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Wide Gauge and Standard Gauge (toy trains) are the same thing but is more commonly know as Standard Gauge. Therefore I suggest that all appropriate info be merged from Standard gauge to Wide Gauge. Wide Gauge should then be renamed Standard Gauge (Toy Trains)


 * Merged all relevant information from Standard Gauge (toy trains) to Wide Gauge. Wide Gauge was then renamed Standard Gauge (Toy Trains). Standard Gauge (toy trains) was then nominated for proposed deletion.--Ssmcmahon9 (talk) 05:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for tackling this -- lets me off the hook! I'm not sure about the article naming -- 'Toy Trains' seems less in keeping with WP standards than 'toy trains' -- but others will no doubt comment further on that. (You might need admin help to untangle the edit histories (which MUST be retained) and redirections.) As for the revised article, your references could do with templates to make them easier to follow.
 * -- EdJogg (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2010 (UTC) -- NB -- no longer watching page