Bmrbarre 00:12, (UTC) Usually hitting the "back" browser button should allow you to recover the text, unless your browser does not do caching. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk ) 02:59, (UTC) no, i lose it all. It goes back to the edit page, but nothing that I had typed is still there. Ben 18:59, (UTC) so i guess your browser does not do caching. Firefox does it by default, don't know about other browsers. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk ) 02:01, (UTC) I'm just saying that they're annoying for some people, notably me, and that the placement is horrendous and has cost me several hours of time. Ben ja min 02:57, 13 november 2007 (UTC) Page doesn't look right at all I'm using Firefox and the main page has a large gap between the first line and the summary box.
That, was, then, this, is, now - plot, summary
However, i checked back and it said 4,984 bytes is there a reason? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 06018 ( buy talk ) 12:34, (UTC). Never mind Andrew Marsden 07:48, (UTC) wikipedia's software generally gives the page size, in bytes, with every edit. Don't panic about not giving an edit summary - they're useful but if you who forget, it's no problem. h2g2bob ( talk ) 08:14, (UTC) On talk pages too? Should comments on talk pages have edit summaries? apoc2400 08:25, (UTC) It could be nice, but it is not so important as in article pages, and they don't have to be so detailed. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk ) 15:06, (UTC) Annoying i accidentally hit this little link, which is located mere millimeters away from the Edit This Page button, and I lost my entire page when I was just about to enter an edit summary. Why must it be 1: placed there, and 2: linked? I'm sure this has happened to other users, and I would make a suggestion of moving the link somewhere else.
It was to me when paper I first read this page.) 00:45, contribs) (focus the introduction on the importance of edit summaries, rather than technicalities.) 16:27, contribs) m (rm ugly box, as it obstructs reading. Let the reader read what he came after, that unimportant observation does not deserver such proeminence on top.) 08:17, 20 February 2006 contribs) (some cleanup) 23:39, 1 February 2006 contribs) m (Edit summary - update wikilink dummy edit) 13:45, contribs) m (Edit summary - em-dash. However, such code works also if one enters it oneself.) 02:16, contribs) m (reverted edits by to last version by pianoman87) 12:04, contribs) m (Upload summary - sp) 11:30, user: (Edit summary - fixed grammar of sentence) 08:06, contribs) (newan edit summary of a page. help:Interwiki linking) 12:16, contribs) (reverted to last version by patrick) 20:18, contribs) m (reverted edits by to last version by ) 15:45, 19 February 2005 contribs) (Upload summary -*as text in the entry of the image history) 04:25, 12 February 2005 contribs) m (Upload. 10 characters in a line of 195 characters results in the first 5 characters being inserted.) 09:02, contribs) (The capacity is one line of 200 characters, with horizontal scrolling. A copy action of more, results in the rest falling off. Insertions do not work if the line is full, one has to delete text at the) 08:57, contribs) (One possible workaround for a new list is putting the list on one line, copying it to the edit summary box, and then, in the main edit. A bulleted "see also" list is cumbersome to put in the edit summary box.) 08:26, contribs) (Unfortunately one can copy only one "line" (in the sense of the text until a newline) into the edit summary box. However, the contents of a second line can be pasted at the end of the line.) 22:35, contribs) (Upload summary -text in edit summaries is not interpreted, except for internal links, including piped links, and links to pages in other wikimedia projects, even when enclosed.
12 Edit summary interface 13 Comments 14 Requested move 15, always adding edit summaries? 16 Edit request from, 17 Links in the edit summary? 18 Edit request from, 24 September 2010 19 "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" suggestion 20 Edit an edit summary? 21 Blank edit summary may be vandalism 22 Undo some Editing to Prince rashed Al-Khuzai article 23 database Abbreviations 24 Edit request from azelle, 25 February 2011(Azelle (talk) 25 Edit request from Pwenham, 26 Abuse 27 The content of the page owl has no relevance to the. 28 Edit request from, 29 Can admins remove edit summary without reversing the edit itself? 30 Edit request from, 31 Edit request from, 32 Should be a guideline. 33 question concerning requests for edit summary removal 34 protect? 35 Tense 36 revision number 37 need to clarify relationship between edit summaries and civility 38 Edit summaries - good and bad 39 Edit request on 40 Edit request on 30 november 2012 41 Pop-up window 42 Change 43 Edit summary standard options 44 Edit. 10:04, meta:User:Burhan Salay contribs) (The introduction part, the definition section, geometrical interpretation of the indices section, signature in physics section, and How to compute the signature section are modified) —Preceding talk with onisty contribs ) 22:55, 2 December 2006 contribs) m (self revert, image has.
This included major electrification schemes that indicated a huge investment payback. It was referred to Mrs Thatchers economic adviser Alan Walters who it seems, vetoed these plans. But, br did close Crewe for 6 weeks in the summer of 1985 and remodel the track layout lifting the linespeeds from 20mph to 80mph. It was beeching but if he had not been around, it would have been somebody else who may not have grasped the problem so well. The next beeching was Sir david Serpell who died recently but was instructed by the Thatcher government in may 1982 to review railway finances. That is another story which will report on shortly to mark the 30th anniversary of the debate on the report issued in 1983. Written by, phil Marsh. Contents 1 Meta:Help:Edit summary authors and history 2 Oddity 3 On talk pages too? 4 Annoying 5 Page doesn't look right at all 6 Suggesting a new section: what not to put in edit summaries 7 Summary box missing in Chrome 8 Edit summary for edits that a part of a series 9 suggestion 10 searching not supported.
That, was, then, this is, now, essay questions Gradesaver
It was in Mrs Thatchers time as pm that the last fishvan operating from Fishguard was withdrawn as being uneconomic not many people know that! Thatcher or beeching who was worse for our railways? This is a debate that will run forever but famously, mrs Thatcher claimed never to travel by train. Whether this is true or not it sums up her attitude to the railways. She authorised the closure of the electrified line via woodhead and Penistone which carried coal whether this was a factor or not we will probably never know.
Railway investment dropped but the railways had a glossy advertising side which hid the real state of most of the railways in the first six or seven years under Mrs Thatcher. This was despite (re)opening 56 stations in five years from 1982 including now booming places like milton keynes station. It also included Bedford. Johns which was to replace another station at Bedford which had been closed so these new station claims were not all they claimed to be! But he essay 1950s and 1960s new trains and locomotives were wearing out by the early 1980s and big investment was proposed in 1981. Some railbuses were built as a stopgap and they are still used today to the annoyance of passengers biography and train operators.
The team looked at some costs and proposed savings mentioned in the beeching Report and at todays process they proposals equated to around a billion pounds a year. Curiously the McNulty report which was published in may 2011 said that a billion pounds a year could be saved if his recommendations were implemented. Beeching was wrong claim. One participant said that the answer is that beeching was wrong and that the uk rail network was Europes most expensive despite his cuts! We need expansion such as HS2. Phil Marsh met up with several groups of former colleagues who were working on the railways in 1963 and asked them what did they think about it at the time and how did the report affect them.
Footplate crews said that there would always be a need for traincrew so they werent worried as they could transfer to a depot which would remain open if they were at one marked down to close. Others who worked at stations said that stations were overstaffed and so it was obvious something had to happen. There was always a need for booking clerks and as computers were nearly 25 years away, booking clerks were still required to sell tickets. A colleague who was a parcels clerk in 1963 said that the system was ridiculous! For example, a box of fresh fish would arrive at his station and he would have to send the empty box back to the fish wholesaler. British rail was a common carrier and could not turn away any traffic unlike the post office at the time, who had size and weight restrictions on their services.
That, was, then, this, is, now, worksheets - resultinfos
In fact they are especially expensive if you travel on a route which serves any part of the european Parliament such as Brussels or Strasbourg. This is because most travel is on expense accounts so market pricing can be and is employed. Old lines reopening and cycleways was asked if it had seen /news/uk-219515 concerning restoring the line linking Edinburgh with the Scottish Borders. We said that a few routes had been reopened or were currently being rebuilt and it was commented that, yes this is good news especially that part of the borders line is currently under construction to Tweedbank from Edinburgh. This then prompted an interesting suggestion that should the cycleways created out of old trackbeds be converted back into railways? This happened to a degree on the airdrie-bathgate line in Scotland and the cycle track had to be moved to accommodate the railway. Sustrans would probably have something to say about this though as they are the charity that converts disused trackbeds to cycleways. But this does apple create a talking point because by default, if the trackbed is now a cycleway then it means the route should still be pretty much available for relaying a railway with minimum land-take required. 50 years apart the same goal was being chased!
Beeching ultimately worked was tweeted back. We still have a train system today that serves most peoples needs unlike amtrack, the American railways network. The paper decline of American railways was we thought, because of the huge distances travelled in America, being a far larger country than the uk, the comparison was not one that could be really made. The vast distances in America don't lend themselves to railways unlike in the. Europes social railway network, railchat was told that parts of the european rail network are cheap because they are operated for society and not as a business. This is a true statement for many countries but many people suggest this is true of France in particular. Tgvs are fast and pretty reliable but not cheap.
the real test will be in another 50 years. Will there be a railway or will we all be driving round in hydrogen cars? The report recognised air transport was competitive over 200 miles and threatened Anglo Scottish services. So even half a century ago, air had become a threat to the railways as it became more affordable. Others disagreed saying that a once great railway system is now a network of over stressed corridors and that expansion is the answer. Consensus that beeching was right? 50 years on, the consensus is that beeching was right. Do you agree we asked?
We looked at some statistics taken from the report and other primary documents and in 1963, 938 million passenger journeys were made by train, while last year there were.46 billion journeys made but the rail network was only 50 of the network 50 years. In the sidings, the report carries some fantastic statistics such as 6000 carriages that were used under 18 times a year. These were kept in sidings and used in the peak holiday season but cost.4m to keep serviceable while only earning 500,000 ticket revenue at 1963 prices. It appears that in the last 50 years, costs have multiplied by a factor of 35 so in todays prices, these carriages lost 100million a year. Why did they cost so much? They had to be maintained to safe standards, sidings had to be kept operational to stable these carriages and staff had to be employed to look after the sidings and trains. Action stations or not? The beeching Report says that around 7000 stations were open in 1963 or 1 for every 2 1/2 miles. One comment to this was that roads cant be held up as a success and that it was unfortunate the rail network couldnt cope and were in a state of disrepair - like our roads.
This Is Now (1985) - imdb
Rail Chat Summary: beeching 50 years on was he right or wrong? Railways or cycleways, return to sender. This is the summary of a railchat held on April 11, 2013 where we used the benefit of hindsight to look at the beeching Report half a century proposal after it was published. This railchat was hosted by our news editor Phil Marsh who joined the railways in 1973, a decade after the beeching Report was published and by when the associated closures had been completed. He was interviewed by 14 national and local bbc radio stations on the subject and the consistent theme was that beeching got it right. The session was opened asking the fundamental questions; Was he right? Were the cuts worth it?