User talk:Yvícxcxvcxyv

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Danners430 (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Danners430 (talk) 11:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources I have gve the previous figure, the source in the article was also for the previous figure, see WP:HIJACK Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source in the article actually does not have the "previous figure" in it. That ref states on pages 2–4 that the tractive effort is 15,300 lbf and not 15,650 lbf, I didn't "hijack" your source, no one seems to have checked the accuracy of the data against the source since 2016, when the ref was added in. The new ref (official BR driver's manual) that I added in with my edit also supports this figure. Yvícxcxvcxyv (talk) 12:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a set of Ian Allan ABCs dating from 1959 to around 1980, they all give the higher figure. My apologies, you were right in that the source quoted gives the lower figure. However that appears to be a self-published source, despite claiming to be an official document. NB please take note of Danners430 comment about providing edit summaries, if you had put "per source cited" or similar it would have given a heads-up as to why you were changing it. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]