Talk:Trackless train

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Transport

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merging Land train into Trackless train

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result was merge into Trackless train. -- Bonadea (talk) 10:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't in any way different than land train, and the articles should be merged ASAP. --82.128.240.106 19:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Will do it tomorrow if I remember. The question is: which title is to stay? --Bobyllib 02:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please merge. Both "land train" and "trackless train" get about 20,000 Google hits - crude method but it seems the terms are roughly equally common. The Trackless train article has been around for a couple of years longer, but that's not really a criterion either. "Land train" can be used for a very long truck, I think, so maybe "trackless" is the less ambiguous term. --Bonadea (talk) 08:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dead links...

I think this must be a new record, out of the many cited links at the bottom of the page, only one appears to still be valid (I won't spoil the surprise...). Can we get updates, please? 193.63.174.115 (talk) 11:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]