Talk:First Leeds
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
First Leeds is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's assessment scale. See comments for details. |
|
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-Priority on the Project's priority scale. | |
Is it really necessary to have the companies full timetable, services and price of tickets included on the page? Wikipedia is not a timetable! The article should be about the company, not the entire list of services it provides. It seems more like advertising for the companies services. If this type of edit is acceptable should it be extended to cover every bus, rail and airline article from all around the world. It would make wikipedia a bit cumbersome! Surely the information would be better placed on the Wikitravel Travel.org website? Richard Harvey (talk) 11:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Bus services in WY can change 7 times a year or more (http://www.wymetro.com/BusTravel/ChangingTimes/CT.htm), and prices can change whenever the companies feel like it. I suggest just having a summary of both here and a link to the bus company's website for more detailed information. Unless someone is prepared to update it every time something changes, it's probably best to have "for an up to date timetable, go here".mh. (talk) 12:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- (Richard asked me to take a look at this article.) I agree that this level of detail is not appropriate for an encyclopedia entry; Wikipedia is not a directory. mh's point about maintainance is also a dealbreaker. We have a few featured articles about public transportation networks (SkyTrain (Vancouver), BC Rail, Manila Metro Rail Transit System, Manila Light Rail Transit System) that could serve as good models for this article's development. ×Meegs 14:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Likewise, I was invited to comment. I am also in agreement that the timetabling is over-detailed and can be replaced by a link to the appropriate website and a summary of the routes. There is, however, a broader point in that there are many First pages and the routing/timetabling information is in a different format in each. What is needed is someone to take an overview of all the articles and produce a consistent format. BlueValour (talk) 17:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Simillarly asked to visit here (which is great!). I'm also concerned about the inclusion of timetables, but more so in terms of verifiability and notibility. I'd be inclined to have this go too. -- Jza84 · (talk) 22:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm with Jza84 here (and have also been solicited for my comments). The big issue is notability - have the routes or fares received significant coverage in publications not connected with First? For example, major new services or severe cuts might receive this coverage and be worth including the article. Much of the current article doesn't indicate that this is the case. Warofdreams talk 23:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- I don't have much knowledge of First buses outside West Yorks/Greater Mcr (I live in Leeds) but I think a lot of First operations (especially ticket types and the "Overground" network) are pretty much the same around the country. I think it would make sense to have these in a generic article for First bus services and more specific bits (such as tickets issued by PTEs) in the appropriate "local" First article. If nothing else I think something needs to be done about Yorkshire Rider/First West Yorkshire/First Leeds/First Bradford/First Calderdale & Huddersfield. Lots of articles but they're all the same company. Lots of duplication as well. mh. (talk) 00:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm with Jza84 here (and have also been solicited for my comments). The big issue is notability - have the routes or fares received significant coverage in publications not connected with First? For example, major new services or severe cuts might receive this coverage and be worth including the article. Much of the current article doesn't indicate that this is the case. Warofdreams talk 23:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Simillarly asked to visit here (which is great!). I'm also concerned about the inclusion of timetables, but more so in terms of verifiability and notibility. I'd be inclined to have this go too. -- Jza84 · (talk) 22:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I would also include Teamdeck to the above. That is where I first noticed the problem of timetables occurring, which is why I asked for the article to be checked out as an example of all the others, to save repetitive talk page edits. I especially asked Jza84 as it would also impact on many other projects such as the Greater Manchester wikiProject that he is very involved with. Undoubtedly a large amount of hard work has gone into the various article entries, apparently by Faz2105 who is also involved in the same project. Regrettably my knowledge of the specific articles is also limited, but it is apparent the large amount of detail detracts from the articles, yet I don't want to see it all summarily deleted from Wiki. Jza84 as Faz2105 is on the Greater Manchester Project with you, could I be so cheeky as to ask if you could get him/her to condense the various timetables/ticket prices into a single article, or as Warofdreams mentioned on his/her Talk Page transfer it to WikiTravel? I think that option would be preferable as it also allows more leeway than Wikipedia for such edits and a link from the various articles could still provide the information. I have asked Faz2105 to check this talk page out as his/her comments are also very important (hopefully I can also then get enough info to amend my his/her ref). Richard Harvey (talk) 01:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sure I can ask, that's no problem at all. However, I must stress that User:Faz2105 (who seems to be rightly identified as the primary contributor of this kind of material) isn't a very chatty soul. Indeed, a quick glance through his contributions show 0 edits to talk space!
- I've just seen you've directed him to this discussion, so hopefully he/she will be here to review what's been discussed. If no comment is passed and contributions continue I guess we'll have to tackle that as it comes / make some of the suggested changes ourselves. -- Jza84 · (talk) 23:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Well having waited for some sort of response for 6 weeks, to allow for possible holiday trips etc, I note there is not only no response on this page; but additionally no further contributions from User:Faz2105. That obviously means the timetables have not and potentially will not be updated on an ongoing basis, which was my main concern. Does anyone have any particular ideas on dealing with them or if not is there any objection to removing them from the article pages? Obviously they will remain in the article history archives, so may be retrieved if required at some future date. I will leave this to sit until this coming Friday, the 22nd, to allow time for any comments, after which I will start to work on removing them, from this and the other bus company articles, as per all your initial comments above. No doubt that will probably be followed by some edit reverts from other users on the articles affected. Richard Harvey (talk) 02:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of timetable and ticket info
I've removed the long tables giving details of every service and ticket that First Leeds offers. It gets out of date too quickly, is difficult to maintain and the information is on their website anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOTTRAVEL seems to be appropriate here. I kept details of the overground services because that seems to be a reasonable summary of their major routes without being too details. mh. (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
