User talk:JMF/Archives/2010/March

tph

Trains per hour details are on WP pages for countless stations up and down the country (e.g. London Marylebone) - it's not being a directory, it's there for enthusiasts interested in the services rather than travelers. I'll update the frequencies on WCML stations south of Rugby at the next timetable change. Tom walker (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Additional: The IP that added the Virgin details has nothing to do with me!Tom walker (talk) 20:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Additional additional: the service cuts thing is over a year old. Normally timetable changes occur twice a year in May and December, and major ones less freuquently. Tom walker (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

High_Wycombe_railway_station is the level of detail I think all stations should have (I haven't edited that article, or at least I don't think I have). Reverting Bletchley was completely unnecessary, the information is interesting and pertinent, and would only have to be updated twice annually, and only that much in the unlikely event LM or Southern make changes every single time. As for the MKC article, it's even more important to show TPH details, as it serves to indicate how well-connected and well-served the station is or isn't when compared to others in other cities. Tom walker (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, that sounds like a plan. Besides, you're an excellent contributor to MK articles, so I respect your judgment. Tom walker (talk) 15:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

You've represented it fine. Looks like the discussion's already taken off - I'll refrain from throwing my tuppence in until a few more views have been thrown around. It'll be interesting if nothing else to see where this goes! Tom walker (talk) 17:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The straw poll seems to have dried up, what shall we do now? Tom walker (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I think as a general rule (this is what they did before mostly) UK station articles should use the off-peak daytime weekday figures. So at MKC that's seven to london, one to crydon, and six north. The general blurb in 'services' can mention any notable irregularly-timed services. Tom walker (talk) 10:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: British Rail

Thanks for your comments. Actually, for the most part I've stopped logging in specifically because I don't want to get too involved or too attached to my edits or to "debates" on hot topics, I'll just fix things occasionally when I see them. Of course, it's British Rail, an institution that so many people have strong feelings about, so I know what you're referring to and I'd probably be safer posting fixes to articles like Abortion, Evolution, and Dane Cook. ;-)

I don't think much needs to be done to that section now to make it right and encyclopedic, and I hope that whoever stuck that tag there (I hate those things anyway) will remove it. The section needs a few more cites, but I think I've removed most (all?) of the subjective assertions and some of the sillier stuff (the "Some people, who I can't be bothered to name, think something that I believe is wrong though I can't be bothered to explain why either" stuff that appeared twice!) I did some minor fix-ups this morning. If people want to argue about it, well, that's fine, I'm just hoping that the general tone of the article is more able to provide the reader with an objective, informative, view as a result of these edits. And I hope that whatever else happens, debates about whether Beeching's actions were positive or negative stay out of the article, with only statements of fact going into it.

(My bias is against Beeching, but my edits would have been the same even if I hated railways.) --66.149.58.8 (talk) 14:22, 5 March 2010 (UTC)