Talk:High Speed 2

larification

Have 'rail ridership is now at 90% of pre-pandemic levels, with some sectors (long-distance leisure travel) in excess of 115%.' This does not make sense. Perhaps 'Total rail usage has returned to 90% of pre-pandemic usage/the equivalent figure for (May 2019), while some sectors have shown an actual increase, eg long distance leisure travel being 115% of that for (relevant period in 2019).' (Due allowance being made for strike action; and possibly making comparisons for 1st class and 'standard' travel.) Anna Livia (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

nimbyism

it is false to suggest this forms the majority of opposition. there is substantial opposition on environmental grounds and on financial grounds. needs citations and must do better than hand wave concerns away as 'nimbyism'. we have a a page on high speed rail already, if this is needed then do it properly AMassiveGay (talk) 09:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

And we

And we have this article because ...??Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:49, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Because 'high speed' with regards to the construction timespan is a good example of an oxymoron? Anna Livia (talk) 14:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that we are not "Oxymoron wiki" (or - for that matter - rail-wiki).Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

i suspect this is here because its main author enjoys politicking and trainspotting so thought to combine the two with a bit of campaigning for hs2 ltdAMassiveGay (talk) 15:25, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure that's probably the case. But we don't exist so that everybody on the net can just create article about their particular hobby-horse. After trainspotting - will stamp collecting be next?Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 16:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

There are wikis elsewhere devoted to railways and stamps (and most of us cannot see why trivial differences in design make some stamps vastly more valuable than others 'and all the other nooks and crannies of stamp collecting'). Anna Livia (talk) 18:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

On the topic of HS2 Ltd, I would gently note that I did describe them as a bag of dicks ;) . I'm not sure how "for" them I am. It is possible to support a project and criticise its implementation.FinestTransit (talk) 10:41, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I believe this article adds value to rationalwiki as an exemplar and case-study of many political challenges and pseudo-science faced by large-scale public works and infrastructure projects, particularly (it would seem) in the Anglosphere where flavours of Reagonomics still seems to hold sway (whether the UK, US - e.g. California High Speed Rail, or Australia - e.g. NBN). Having a project-specific article for HS2 is no different to articles such as the Affordable Care Act (vs. just an article on healthcare around the world), and there is more to be said than just a couple of paragraphs on the High speed rail article. I would gently contend that the UK's biggest infrastructure project since the building of the motorways in the 1970s is hardly a niche hobby horse.

However, I do appreciate that it still requires significant improvement and the "general" statements need firming into more specific examples/debunking of the pseudo-science and pseudo-planning arguments made around HS2, particularly responding to points 1 & 4 of the mission statement. It is not my intention to abandon it as is - it was moved out of Draft into mainspace once the framework and general subject areas were covered to encourage collaboration, not because it was "done" (as if a wiki article can ever really be "done"). This being a wiki and not a blog, those with an opinion are of course more than welcome to add their POV!

I would also add for the record that I am not a train spotter (to each their own), my one daliance being dragged to the station by a friend on our way to dinner because they had heard the Flying Scotsman was coming through. We joined many anoraks in the drizzle. I have not repeated the experience.FinestTransit (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@FinestTransit

You write: " exemplar and case-study of many political challenges and pseudo-science faced by large-scale public works and infrastructure projects"

Could you tell me where it's focusing on the pseudo-science? I can't immediately see it anywhere.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 12:24, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

One can be 'willing to observe such things because they are there and it is convenient' without being a topic-geek (and eg 'a collection of stamps on a theme of the images').

Sometimes it is not 'the topic itself' which is RW-worthy (or other-wiki-worthy) but what it reflects about society, woo-iness etc that is on-mission. Anna Livia (talk) 12:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

The "Fallacious Opposition" section refutes what could be considered crank ideas. Wishingwell (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I've put a mission template on it to give the author(s) an opportunity to respond.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 08:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

also there is already this High_speed_rail AMassiveGay (talk) 08:37, 1 July 2022 (UTC)