h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: British Trains - A2844335
Author: Oberon2001 (Scout) - U204088

Update of entry A603703.
Mostly just replaced Railtrack with Network Rail and got rid of the table as the areas keep changing that train companies run.
Oberon2001

Hi, Oberon --

First, you need to drop messages by for the original authors, letting them know that you're updating the entry and seeing if they are interested in being involved.

Second, were you able to incorporate any of the comments and nitpicks in the threads hanging off of the original entry?


Mikey

... And done!
Oberon2001

"...and accidents more common". Actually, that simply isn't true

The highest number of fatalities since 1975 was 40, in 1988, well prior to privatisation. Last year there were just 10 fatalities. Want to try comparing that to road stats?

Just to mention, "fatalities" isn't really a good measure of how motor vehicle accidents (whether auto, rail, etc) have changed over time, since the overall case fatality rate has changed significantly -- i.e., it's quite possible to have more accidents than before and yet still have fewer deaths.


Mikey

I've updated the entry to take these comments into account. Two links have been added. They should address KerrAvon's point.
Oberon2001

I don't see what changes you've made?

If you don't use fatalities, what do you use? Number of accidents? That gives you the problem of how do you define an 'accident'. Does a minor derailment in a station, that causes nothing more than a bump and a 20 minute delay, constitute an accident? Or do only incidents where a passenger is injured count? Well that just brings us back to your point about improvements reducing fatalities...

I think Mickey's point is the number of fatalities is as related to the changes in medical care as it is to the number of accidents.

You could use the number of people admitted to hospital overnight as a result of a rail accident, but even then that would change as hospitals became more reluctant to admit more people..

The usual standards are "accidents in which any injuries are sustained" and "number of people injured from accidents" -- with injury being defined as anything serious enough to require any level of medical care -- be it hospitalization or from a GP.

Under 'Who Runs the Trains'
differentRail -> different Rail

Good enough for me. I've never been on a British train, and I think this entry gives some incentives on why not to.

I suddenly feel oblidged to defend British trains, I use them every day and I'm not often delayed.

I usually have a seat, and the costs of an area wide season ticket + the odd ticket to places that are futher afield are considerably less than the cost of running a car would be.

IMHO opinions the major disadvantages are the fact that they've insisted on putting bl**dy TV sets on local trains getting in the way of my reading/sleeping. That and the fact you need a degree in idioscricies to get the cheapest and fasted route.

I've amended the spelling mistake Jodan.
Oberon2001

I've read through this entry and find it very jumbled. It rants about how bad the service is and then without a break starts talking about the best games to bring. I think it could benefit from being re-organised slightly, with a better introduction.

Some spelling mistakes etc. which should be corrected:

their were Problems --> there were problems
it's predecessor --> its predecessor
maintance --> maintenance
neccessary --> necessary

I also think that this should be rephrase:

heavy items that are not necessary --> unnecessary heavy items

Well done for taking the time to update this!

I've amended the typos.
As for the organisation of the entry and intro, that's from incorporating the previous entry, so gonna have to take a deeper look at that during the week.
for the help Gnomon!
Oberon2001

It's much improved from what it was, the trouble with me I think is that I still don't really like it as an entry. I travel on trains quite a lot and they work for me most of the time...

I agree Six. Apart from anything else, it just seems such a bitty entry. There'sso much more to be said about British trains than 'here's some games to play, and they break sometimes'.

Would you guys be okay if we leave this open as an update in progress? I think this is an improvement on what we have already, but it's clear there's more to be said. Feel free to make your own suggestions for additions, by the way, or links to entries that might be peripherally related to the subject.

Ok, done a minor update, mainly just adding headings for people (or myself, at some stage) to expand on.
Oberon2001

Any more comments? Is this ready to become the update?

That last 'trivia fact' is going to mean that the entry is going to need updating again. For a start, it's wrong now, it's 2005, and also it's going to go out of date whenever there's a change in the project's status. Why not lose it?