Talk:ScotRail (disambiguation)

Scope

This article seems uncertain of its scope. At times it is restricted to National Expresses, at other points it also covers British Rail, and in a few areas even First is included. Perhaps the British Rail and National Express sections should be separated, and the First information removed to First ScotRail? David Arthur (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

New ScotRail brand/Merger with First ScotRail

Transport Scotland have now introduced a new ScotRail brand, to be rolled out across Scotland. Therefore, this page should be moved to ScotRail (train operating company), and a new page created about this new brand. This page would also include information on the origins of the brand from British Rail. See this link for more details. --Jorvik (talk) 20:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. This page and the current First ScotRail pages should be merged. Seeing as ScotRail will now be the brand no matter who is operating one concise ScotRail page with historical information on the brand and past franchises along with information on the company today would be desirable. (Jacqueline2008 (talk) 11:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC))

If we're going to have one article covering the entire history of ScotRail, which sounds like a good idea to me, isn't the suffix (train operating company) unneeded? David Arthur (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, simply ScotRail seems the way forward, with older pages redirecting to it. (Jacqueline2008 (talk) 14:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC))

Disagree. Keep Status Quo. To combine the articles is not the way forward. Take other now defunct TOCS, like GNER whose services are still largely the same, with just a different company operating it. They still have an separate entry. How would this fit in with the Template:Defunct_UK_TOCs? It's just because the names are similar that confusion happens. This is not good enough reason to merge.--86.155.186.118 (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The situation here isn't parallel to GNER, though. The ScotRail franchise is let under different terms than those under the control of the national government, and the Scottish Executive have chosen to give it a permanent identity separate from that of the franchise-holder. I'm not saying that this automatically means they should be merged, but there are strong arguments in favour of it, and the convenience of the template system should not be allowed to override editorial judgement. David Arthur (talk) 16:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Disagree. It is parallel. GNER and NXEC are the brand names used to identify the InterCity East Coast franchise. ScotRail, First ScotRail, and now ScotRail Scotlands Railway are brand names used for the franchise in Scotland. Just because now the franchises are let by a different body should that make a difference? Not really. The NEG franchise was let by the Franchising Director, as was FSR at the initial period, on behalf of the Scottish Executive. If the Scottish Government had of called the franchise SuperFunTimeHappy Railway would you merge that with ScotRail?--86.155.186.118 (talk) 21:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Not, it isn't parallel. GNER and National Express East Coast are the names of companies that have operated that franchise (as was the case with First ScotRail). The Scottish Executive have now decreed, however, that the service will be called ‘ScotRail’ no matter who runs it; First ScotRail retain the franchise, even though their name is being taken off the trains. ‘ScotRail’ is a concept going back to the days of British Rail, and at this point it seems like it would be more productive to have a single article covering its history. The structure that has been used for England's railways makes it useful to have an article for each company, but things haven't worked quite the same way in Scotland. David Arthur (talk) 22:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

It maybe true that franchising has not worked out the same way for Scotland as it has in England now, however in the past it certainly has been the same. To change history somewhat, and create a year zero from now is not the way forward. ScotRail (NEG) company name was ScotRail Railways Ltd. It traded as "ScotRail". It was authorised under the Railways Act 1993, from the United Kingdom Government, the same as all the other first generation contracts in England and Wales. The 2005 Railways Act created the ability of Scottish Ministers to appoint First ScotRail which has a Service Quality. Incentive Regime (SQUIRE) franchise agreement. Totally different from the previous one. Just as Network Rail effectively does the same job as Railtrack, they merit separate articles, as they are different. If you propose to lump all these Scottish Railways together, just where do you stop? The Kilmarnock and Troon Railway??--86.155.186.118 (talk) 23:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay I think some compromise is required here. Status quo is not desirable, when future franchises come into being and FirstScotrail becomes defunct it'll mean another company another page and another fragmented account of the franchises history. I think it still makes sense to have one coherent ScotRail brand page, while still maintaining separate pages on the TOC's providing outline details about those companies. Who knows though, there are more important things in the world that Wikipedia articles. (Jacqueline2008 (talk) 23:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps then there should be a main article for the ScotRail Franchise giving a brief description of the individual operators and type of franchise, with links to a page showing greater detail for individual operators? Personally, I would use the 1993 Railways Act on as the starting point for any franchising article. Including BR could be confusing. How the articles are named is another matter.--86.155.186.118 (talk) 11:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)