Talk:National Express East Anglia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Trains Portal
DYK 2006-10-13
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Low This article has been rated as low-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
Low Importance: low within UK Railways WikiProject.
To-do list for National Express East Anglia: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • rename article in February 2008 and copyedit article
  • fix inbound links and redirects following name change
  • Performance section edited to succinct summary
  • adequate referencing
  • reformat services table
Archive
Archives
Archive 1
About archives • Edit this box

Contents

[edit] Photo nonsense

We need to put a stop to this photo nonsense. In particular, Image:Mark 3 coach in NXEA Livery at stowmarket.jpg is no such thing: it's a Mark 4, and appears to be a Kings Cross. We had similar problems when the CrossCountry franchise changed: some users then were impatient regarding trying to get a photo of a train in the new livery as soon as possible, leading to all sorts of trouble. (Given that most trains will still be in 'one' livery, such a depiction is reasonable.)

Finally, some users really need to learn the difference a backquote ` and an inverted comma ' (!). Grammatically, the inverted commas are correct, not the backquotes. --RFBailey (talk) 17:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

You are completely correct RFBailey. The photo of the "Mk3" that keeps being uploaded is as you note actually a Mk4. Not only that, as you understand, it shows the train at King's Cross so clearly people are attempting to mislead. I also understand it to be a computer generated image copyright National Express so if we were to use it some source info and a fair use rationale would we required. However, seeing as we can't justify using copyrighted images in this instance then it simply shouldn't be used.
I'm not aware of the fun and games that were had with CrossCountry but am not surprised. When the East Coast franchise was launched I managed to find an image which the photographer agreed upon request to release under an appropriate licence then shortly afterwards managed to upload a number of images of the new livery taken myself. This is what we should be attempting to do in this case also. Adambro (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Photo req

Just requesting a photo of the new brand. Simply south (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Go out and get one yourself? Or how about attempting to contact their press office with a request for photos to be released under suitable licensing? Has anyone tried this before? Cambridge al (talk) 14:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] One Railway

Why don't we create another article dedicated to 'One' railway, this way, the NXEA article can be less cluttered with information about 'One'. Please get back to me on this! Britishrailclass91 (talk) 14:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

It is important to note that NXEA is 'one', simply with a new name. This is unlike the situation on the ECML where NXEC is a new company that won the franchise after it was taken away from GNER. Adambro (talk) 15:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so we simply take away the info about 'one' railway and put it in a seperate section to indicate life before NXEA so as to "declutter" the article without having to make a new one? Britishrailclass91 (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure there really is anything to separate since, as I've noted, NXEA = one so anything which forms history etc of one is that of NXEA also. Could you highlight any text which you feel in particular should be separated? Adambro (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Adambro: they're exactly the same company: a company that recently happened to change its trading name, that's all. The history of NXEA is the history of 'one'. A split would be a really stupid and unnecessary one. --RFBailey (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image:90012 at Liverpool Street 2.jpg

This image has been put in the fleet section, however upon futher investigation, I notice that the image is very blurred, what should I do about it? Britishrailclass91 (talk) 16:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it is very blurred, maybe a little. Is there a better alternative? If not then it is fine as it is. Adambro (talk) 16:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Not the best photo in the world, but it doesn't seem overly blurred. So it seems fine to me. --RFBailey (talk) 16:41, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
OK, that's fine, I just wanted another view on it, by the way, it's not in the commons Britishrailclass91 (talk) 17:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
It is on Commons. Adambro (talk) 17:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
No, I meant it's not in the NXEA section on Commons Britishrailclass91 (talk) 07:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Ah right, indeed, I understand. I've added it to the NXEA category now. Thanks for spotting this. Adambro (talk) 09:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Your welcome (for the thanks for spotting this section), and thank you for adding it to the NXEA section on commons. Britishrailclass91 (talk) 16:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Class 47s

I read in an issue of Railway Illustrated that NXEA are taking on an unspecified number of class 47 trains along with Mark 3 stock and DVTs, I thought I'd better let you all know that I am going to at a future fleet table to this article, Thanks and Regards Britishrailclass91 (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)