818:
judgement. Second, you are, I think, trying to add just too much detail. I do not question the accuracy of your work, nor that an article containing the detail you included may be of more interest, to some readers, than our existing article. However I find it more probable that the laborious detail of your addition will be too much information for many readers, and so unwelcome. The balance between added detail and decreased utility is subjective, clearly. It's beyond me to point, right now, to any yardsticks by which the relative level of detail on your version can be judged except to suggest that you go and read and think about many other comparible articles - e.g. on train or plane crashes - and then consider whether your article fits the profile of the articles you've read. You might also ask: why exactly does the wikipedia reader need
639:
328:
823:
altogether, with little damage to the article. That, for me, is a clear signal of too much information. All of this is not to say that profound improvements cannot be made in this article, and I don't wish to discourage you from trying again. So long as you know that the critical bar can be quite high (and probably unfair, capricious, etc) then go for it. I do, though, very firmly advise that your chances of success increase to the extent that your additions mirror 'good' practice seen elsewhere on wikipedia: so looking to featured and good articles as models will be helpful. Good luck. --
841:
to source most of it, was because I didn't know how, but if so, it would be ALL from the Hidden Report as previously stated. Heck, just above both mine and your Posts, you can see that I asked if somebody would have been kind enough to source it, but by the time I checked again, it was all removed, and I do understand that quite a bit of it WAS useless. I'll try and make a better article soon-ish and get it to be relatively shorter then my previous attempt. Thanks for the advice. --
487:
591:
318:
297:
437:
402:
692:
671:
219:
266:
615:
451:
840:
has more detail then this. Sure I could cut out some of the
Information that is a bit laborious (Like a description of the Relay Room,, the Trains that passed the Signal previously I'd say could have been removed almost entirely) but the rest of it I'd say was completely fair. The reason I was unable
764:
Although this
Accident was a rather major incident on British Railways, the Knowledge (XXG) Article of which is rather lacking in the details given by Hidden's Report. Now, I don't know why this is, but would it be okay if I could add a lot of the Detail in MY OWN WORDS to the Article, although the
817:
I'm doubtful. We had a 13,000 character article - about 2.5 screens of text on my machine. You added 19,000 (unreferenced) characters producing on my machine a 7-screen article. First: if you add text that others are doubtful of, doing so without references will always weigh against you in their
822:
level of detail? My practice in writing articles is to use as few words as possible, or, to convey as much information as I can in as few words as I can get away with. It's clear to me that fairly long passages introduced in your version could be collapsed into a very few words, or omitted
934:
may bear on the scope of the article. The memorable event was a crash involving three 'trains', whereas the causes and outcomes involved the broader 'railway' infrastructure of hardware and processes. Is there a useful distinction between 'rail' and 'railway', or are they synonyms?
860:
in that it gives a Rough
Overview, explanation on the Geography, Signalling and the like, then the Accident in greater depth. I'll try my best to source most of it, most of which will be from Hidden's Report, which I believe Tagish said is okay.
153:
855:
Alrighty, this is for anyone who wants to read about the
Article, but more especially for Tagish, the plan I have for the re-write of the Article is to slightly follow the Formula of the Article about the
780:
It would be okay, yes; Hidden is a single source, but authoritative. Equally you might get pushback if users don't think the level of detail you add is warranted. So, deep breath & go for it. thanks
862:
842:
803:
742:
147:
648:
420:
1124:
732:
44:
1099:
629:
708:
1003:
1079:
1069:
1059:
1054:
1049:
1044:
1039:
551:
374:
1104:
802:) 00:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC) Well, I wrote a much more detailed version, but it got deleted. Maybe, if I try to word it differently, it'll be better received? --
1119:
1089:
605:
79:
699:
676:
1094:
190:
561:
384:
624:
416:
1074:
1064:
638:
85:
1109:
1114:
1084:
30:
600:
523:
519:
412:
350:
168:
795:
327:
135:
230:
866:
846:
807:
766:
99:
965:
has taken place. My opinion is that we should generally avoid "accident" in individual article titles, but use that word in lists.
104:
20:
74:
988:
950:
515:
506:
407:
341:
302:
277:
129:
65:
1016:
794:
I posted, but I am unable to add
References as of yet due to being busy. If someone else can that would be very good. --
125:
857:
837:
24:
470:
185:
175:
109:
199:
283:
799:
1012:
770:
494:
141:
55:
941:
again, the more specific 'crash' specifies the memorable event, while 'accident' is a far broader term.
827:
785:
707:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
349:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
251:
247:
243:
239:
235:
962:
70:
265:
704:
486:
161:
204:
944:
Alternative titles, other suggestions, and discussion welcome. I'm not trying to start a poll.
970:
51:
824:
782:
201:
961:
I would support a proposal to move to "Clapham
Junction train crash". Recent discussion at
1020:
993:
974:
955:
870:
850:
830:
811:
788:
774:
999:
984:
946:
511:
203:
590:
436:
401:
1033:
527:
460:
333:
979:
966:
883:
317:
296:
218:
691:
670:
323:
225:
880:
Following a change to the lede bold text by an IP user, which I reverted,
1009:
I think
Clapham Junction train crash is the best title for this article.
514:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, you can visit the
614:
888:
suggested discussing a possible title change. Here are some options:
346:
450:
259:
213:
205:
15:
836:
But other articles in more minor Railway accidents, like the
637:
613:
589:
510:, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
224:
A fact from this article was featured on Knowledge (XXG)'s
982:
I'm not clear which discussion is relevant to this issue?
518:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
160:
703:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
345:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
572:
174:
911:Pages returned by Google search for each option:
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
717:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Disaster management
901:- as used in the title of the official report
8:
1125:Low-importance Disaster management articles
665:
569:
396:
291:
1100:High-importance London Transport articles
720:Template:WikiProject Disaster management
667:
398:
293:
263:
1080:Mid-importance rail transport articles
1070:Low-importance London-related articles
1060:Selected anniversaries (December 2023)
1055:Selected anniversaries (December 2018)
1050:Selected anniversaries (December 2016)
1045:Selected anniversaries (December 2013)
1040:Selected anniversaries (December 2008)
863:2A02:C7F:A817:1E00:10B5:D8AA:91B0:7A26
843:2A02:C7F:A817:1E00:4C9C:11A0:D6F7:6B13
804:2A02:C7F:A817:1E00:91BF:6588:CF9F:52E4
1105:WikiProject London Transport articles
7:
1120:C-Class Disaster management articles
1090:High-importance UK Railways articles
765:only source I have IS the Report? --
697:This article is within the scope of
504:This article is within the scope of
339:This article is within the scope of
573:Associated projects or task forces:
282:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
536:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Trains
359:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject London
14:
1095:C-Class London Transport articles
907:- recently put forward by IP user
899:Clapham Junction railway accident
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
690:
669:
485:
449:
435:
400:
326:
316:
295:
264:
217:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1075:C-Class rail transport articles
1065:C-Class London-related articles
1002:The discussion can be found on
737:This article has been rated as
700:WikiProject Disaster management
556:This article has been rated as
379:This article has been rated as
1110:Operations task force articles
1021:13:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
994:12:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
975:10:53, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
956:10:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
1:
711:and see a list of open tasks.
646:This article is supported by
622:This article is supported by
598:This article is supported by
524:WikiProject Trains to do list
353:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1115:All WikiProject Trains pages
1085:C-Class UK Railways articles
905:Clapham Junction train crash
871:22:12, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
723:Disaster management articles
625:WikiProject London Transport
918:~ railway accident: 374,000
893:Clapham Junction rail crash
858:Abbots Ripton rail accident
851:20:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
838:Abbots Ripton rail accident
831:22:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
812:21:57, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
789:11:08, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
775:00:52, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
539:Template:WikiProject Trains
362:Template:WikiProject London
25:Clapham Junction rail crash
1141:
743:project's importance scale
562:project's importance scale
385:project's importance scale
736:
685:
649:the Operations task force
645:
621:
597:
568:
555:
480:
430:
378:
311:
290:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
928:is not disputed (yet).
601:WikiProject UK Railways
542:rail transport articles
495:London Transport Portal
365:London-related articles
921:~ train crash: 474,000
642:
618:
594:
272:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
915:~ rail crash: 494,000
641:
617:
593:
276:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
100:Neutral point of view
105:No original research
714:Disaster management
705:Disaster management
677:Disaster management
1013:Dreameditsbrooklyn
932:rail/railway/train
643:
619:
595:
507:WikiProject Trains
342:WikiProject London
278:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
760:The Hidden Report
757:
756:
753:
752:
749:
748:
664:
663:
660:
659:
656:
655:
502:
501:
395:
394:
391:
390:
258:
257:
252:December 12, 2023
248:December 12, 2018
244:December 12, 2016
240:December 12, 2013
236:December 12, 2008
212:
211:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1132:
992:
954:
926:Clapham Junction
887:
725:
724:
721:
718:
715:
694:
687:
686:
681:
673:
666:
580:
570:
544:
543:
540:
537:
534:
489:
453:
444:
443:
439:
432:
431:
426:
423:
404:
397:
367:
366:
363:
360:
357:
336:
331:
330:
320:
313:
312:
307:
299:
292:
275:
269:
268:
260:
221:
214:
206:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1140:
1139:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1030:
1029:
991:
983:
953:
945:
895:- current title
881:
878:
762:
722:
719:
716:
713:
712:
679:
630:High-importance
606:High-importance
578:
541:
538:
535:
532:
531:
503:
455:
454:
424:
410:
364:
361:
358:
355:
354:
332:
325:
305:
273:
208:
207:
202:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1138:
1136:
1128:
1127:
1122:
1117:
1112:
1107:
1102:
1097:
1092:
1087:
1082:
1077:
1072:
1067:
1062:
1057:
1052:
1047:
1042:
1032:
1031:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1010:
1007:
987:
949:
939:crash/accident
923:
922:
919:
916:
909:
908:
902:
896:
877:
874:
834:
833:
792:
791:
761:
758:
755:
754:
751:
750:
747:
746:
739:Low-importance
735:
729:
728:
726:
709:the discussion
695:
683:
682:
680:Low‑importance
674:
662:
661:
658:
657:
654:
653:
644:
634:
633:
620:
610:
609:
596:
586:
585:
583:
581:
575:
574:
566:
565:
558:Mid-importance
554:
548:
547:
545:
512:rail transport
500:
499:
490:
482:
481:
478:
477:
474:
466:
465:
456:
448:
447:
442:
440:
428:
427:
425:Mid‑importance
405:
393:
392:
389:
388:
381:Low-importance
377:
371:
370:
368:
351:the discussion
338:
337:
321:
309:
308:
306:Low‑importance
300:
288:
287:
281:
270:
256:
255:
222:
210:
209:
200:
198:
197:
194:
193:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1137:
1126:
1123:
1121:
1118:
1116:
1113:
1111:
1108:
1106:
1103:
1101:
1098:
1096:
1093:
1091:
1088:
1086:
1083:
1081:
1078:
1076:
1073:
1071:
1068:
1066:
1063:
1061:
1058:
1056:
1053:
1051:
1048:
1046:
1043:
1041:
1038:
1037:
1035:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1011:
1008:
1005:
1001:
997:
996:
995:
990:
986:
985:-- Verbarson
981:
978:
977:
976:
972:
968:
964:
960:
959:
958:
957:
952:
948:
947:-- Verbarson
942:
940:
936:
933:
929:
927:
920:
917:
914:
913:
912:
906:
903:
900:
897:
894:
891:
890:
889:
885:
875:
873:
872:
868:
864:
859:
853:
852:
848:
844:
839:
832:
829:
826:
821:
816:
815:
814:
813:
809:
805:
801:
797:
796:90.218.111.72
790:
787:
784:
779:
778:
777:
776:
772:
768:
759:
744:
740:
734:
731:
730:
727:
710:
706:
702:
701:
696:
693:
689:
688:
684:
678:
675:
672:
668:
651:
650:
640:
636:
635:
631:
628:(assessed as
627:
626:
616:
612:
611:
607:
604:(assessed as
603:
602:
592:
588:
587:
584:
582:
577:
576:
571:
567:
563:
559:
553:
550:
549:
546:
529:
528:Trains Portal
525:
521:
517:
513:
509:
508:
498:
497:
496:
491:
488:
484:
483:
479:
476:May 18, 2017
475:
473:
472:
468:
467:
464:
463:
462:
461:Trains Portal
457:
452:
446:
445:
441:
438:
434:
433:
429:
422:
418:
414:
409:
406:
403:
399:
386:
382:
376:
373:
372:
369:
352:
348:
344:
343:
335:
334:London portal
329:
324:
322:
319:
315:
314:
310:
304:
301:
298:
294:
289:
285:
279:
271:
267:
262:
261:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
232:
227:
223:
220:
216:
215:
196:
195:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
943:
938:
937:
931:
930:
925:
924:
910:
904:
898:
892:
879:
876:Title change
854:
835:
819:
793:
767:5.66.251.219
763:
738:
698:
647:
623:
599:
557:
522:. See also:
516:project page
505:
493:
492:
469:
459:
458:
380:
340:
284:WikiProjects
229:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
825:Tagishsimon
783:Tagishsimon
234:section on
231:On this day
148:free images
31:not a forum
1034:Categories
520:discussion
421:Operations
1000:Verbarson
417:in London
226:Main Page
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
980:@Mjroots
526:and the
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
967:Mjroots
884:Mjroots
741:on the
560:on the
383:on the
274:C-class
228:in the
154:WP refs
142:scholar
963:WT:MOS
828:(talk)
786:(talk)
533:Trains
408:Trains
356:London
347:London
303:London
280:scale.
250:, and
126:Google
1006:page.
989:edits
951:edits
413:in UK
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1017:talk
1004:this
971:talk
867:talk
847:talk
820:this
808:talk
800:talk
771:talk
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
733:Low
552:Mid
471:DYK
375:Low
176:TWL
1036::
1019:)
973:)
869:)
861:--
849:)
810:)
781:--
773:)
632:).
608:).
579:/
419:/
415:/
411::
246:,
242:,
238:,
156:)
54:;
1015:(
998:@
969:(
886::
882:@
865:(
845:(
806:(
798:(
769:(
745:.
652:.
564:.
530:.
387:.
286::
254:.
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
