Talk:Philippine National Railways

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Philippine National Railways has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Trains Portal
DYK 2007-02-16
Sel week 31, 2007
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
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of Tambayan Philippines, the WikiProject and notice board for topics related to the Philippines. To participate, visit the Tambayan for more information.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

had a look at improving it but it's difficult because the meaning is usually not clear.

It appears to be duplicated at http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Philippine+National+Railways but i don't know which came first... --Tomheaton 16:21, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

We came first -- there's a little note in small type just above their logo at the bottom of the page! -- Arwel 16:34, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I have attempted to do a thorough tidy-up of this page. There may be some chronological errors, however, as the original was not always clear about differences between past and present, and other sources are not easy to come by. In particular: I wonder if all those different classes of passenger accommodation are still operated? Any comments, further info., etc. will be welcome, with a note to my user page. Picapica 18:59, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Example Draft of infobox

Philippine National Railways
Locale Philippines
Transit type railway
System length 1,060 kilometres
Operator(s) Department of Transportation and Communications

Philippine National Railways, also known by its acronym, PNR, is a state-owned railway system in the Philippines, organized under the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) as an attached agency. Established during the Spanish colonial period, the modern PNR was developed only in 1984. It currently operates around 1,060 kilometres of track on the island of Luzon, where most Philippine rail infrastructure is located. Because of this, PNR has become synonymous with the Philippine rail system.

A portion of the PNR network, specifically the Metro Manila portion of the network, is part of the Strong Republic Transit System (SRTS),[1] and overall public transport system in the metropolis. It forms the backbone of all of Metro Manila's regional rail services, which extend to its suburbs and to provinces such as Laguna. However, other than reducing growing traffic congestion due to the rising number of motor vehicles in Metro Manila,[2] PNR also aims to link key cities within in the Philippines efficiently, a goal since marred by the overall degradation of rail infrastructure, as well as a lack of funds to fund the network's rehabilitation. The rehabilitation of PNR, which has been touted by various administrations, seeks to not only tackle those problems, but also to spur Philippine economic growth through an efficient railway system.

[edit] GA status

I have reviewed the article and think it is almost there. The prose, images, references in general all good. I do however have a few concerns, mainly in regards to the need for a few more references and with regards WP:NPOV on a few sentances. As such the article does not yet meet Wikipedia:What is a good article? numbers 2 and 4. A few improvements should bring the article up to GA status. These are in the history section:

  • Add a reference to support claim of financial difficulties WP:REF - "Even while suffering financial difficulties from 1957 to 1963, the pinnacle of Philippine passenger railway operations was reached during the late 1960s and early 1970s."
    • Reworded. Financial difficulties are most likely attributed to the dieselization of PNR. The statement of Philippine rail services reaching its "pinnacle" has been removed until sources have been found.
  • Suggest Removal of phrase "albeit modest by comparison: the Prestige". - WP:NPOV
    • Removed per above.
  • Add a reference to support claims of recovery under Ramos WP:REF - "It was only during the presidency of Fidel Ramos that a semblance of recovery was seen at PNR".
    • In progress Done. It is true that in the post-Marcos era, it is during the times of Ramos, (possibly) Estrada and Arroyo that PNR was recovering from the Aquino era. I will reword that statement (As of 22:37 UTC (17:37 or 5:37pm EDT), this statement has been fixed)
  • Suggest Removal of phrase "Being lower and slightly narrower they provide a much better ride than the 30-year-old coaches built in Madras". - WP:NPOV
    • Removed per above. Much of the PNR fleet today consists of Japanese-built trains.
  • The last paragraph of the history section seems inappropriate for the article - Wikipedia:No original research. I suggest a rewrite, citing trains may be late but removing the indepth reasons as to why, they dont seem relevant or necessary. Furthermore I recommended creating a new sub section with history e.g. "The PNR today" as this is more present, than past: "Today the southbound overnight train leaves Tutuban station in Manila at 16:00 and on a good day arrives in Legazpi at around 7:00 the following morning. Trains often arrive late, however, one of the main reasons for delay being the need to slow down for the many level crossings. Despite constant application of the train's horn and the provision of "stop-look-and-listen" signs, road traffic frequently ignores these signals, resulting in a large number of crossing accidents, although the number has reduced in recent years."

Other things that I would recommend would be to improve the image captions, in particular the one relating to Vito Cruz station - Wikipedia:Captions. I would also recommend trying to improve the lead section. In particular add citations or remove the following claim if cannot be sourced - "PNR also aims to link key cities within in the Philippines efficiently, a goal since marred by the overall degradation of rail infrastructure, as well as a lack of funds to fund the network's rehabilitation." Give a reference for a.) the claim to link cities and b.) how the goal has been marred. If these things are addressed I would pass it for GA. LordHarris 23:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I will need to find all the resources that I used to make the article (which for some reason have been lost, but I will look for them). Some questionable phrases will be changed, and I guess I can change the captions. I will need some time to implement these changes. --Sky Harbor 12:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, well if the on hold status ends after 7 days and you decide to renominate at a later stage when youve made the changes, then let me know and I will be happy to review again. Just of note for those pieces of information that your having difficulty finding a reference I suggest rewording the information so it becomes less of an assertation that requires verifiability e.g. rewording of financial difficulties and removing the phrase 'reached the pinnacle of passenger operations' would improve it. LordHarris 11:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Please see the changes per above (second level of bullets). I improved the caption on Vito Cruz station, and I will add further sources on the lead (PNR's goal of linking the Philippines is true; it's in one of Arroyo's State of the Nation addresses). As per how the goal of rehabilitation has been marred, I intend to rewrite the section to discuss problems with rehabilitation instead. --Sky Harbor 20:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok well great effort on all those improvements! With the exception of the two points that you are in progress rewording, the article is GA status. So when you finished rewording those two points drop me a message and ill update the article to GA level. Regards, LordHarris 20:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Only one left...how the PNR's goals were marred. I have to find some way to reword that statement. --Sky Harbor 21:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
As of 14:00/2:00pm EDT (19:00 UTC), all issues surrounding the article that were brought up have been fixed (more citations in the lead, and a minor rewrite). I think this article is now ready for GA status. Just waiting now for the signal. --Sky Harbor 17:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
GA status confirmed. Good job! LordHarris 18:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced statement

Can someone confirm the veracity of this statement (I know this might be true, but I need sources badly):

The pinnacle of Philippine passenger railway operations was reached during the late 1960s and early 1970s, when there were four daily runs to the capital from Legazpi: one "ordinary" morning departure, followed in the afternoon by the all-economy Bicol Express (scheduled to leave at 15:00), the popular Mayon Limited one hour later at 16:00, and finally by the PNR's answer to the Orient Express, albeit modest by comparison: the Prestige.

If anyone can verify this with reliable sources, that would be greatly appreciated. --Sky Harbor 20:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)