Talk:FirstGroup/Archives/2013

Untitled

Do the ticket restrictions apply to all First TOCs? Simply south 19:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

First city line is a part of first and it is big enough to have its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark999 (talk • contribs)

I disagree that it is big enough for its own article as there is not enough that is encyclopaedic that can be said about it. A list of bus routes is suitable for a travel guide (see Wikitravel) not an encyclopaedia. Thryduulf 21:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree because more info has been added and is being added to make it more relevent about what it provides.

Mark999 13:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

If First CityLine doesn't deserve an article on its own, the other subsidiary companies shouldn't have their own articles either. There must be consistency! Kev ^(talk) 10:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• Am I missing the point here? Why should FirstGroup plc have an encyclopaedia article anyway?! Isn't this just shameless advertising and company history? I don't see why this company should have a page if Sabirock isn't allowed one! (Mawkish1983 09:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC))

I think it may merit an entry, but I think it should cover how often it is viewed as part of the transport problem, not the solution. for example, the First GWR fare strikes, its apology to customers and atrocious record, or its role in the Bristol Bath Railway Path Bus Rapid Transit scheme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveLoughran (talk • contribs) 16:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Scottish Flag

Why? A London-based company has a Union Flag next to it, not a St George's Cross. Why does a Scottish company get a St Andrew's Cross next to it?

I suspect SNP spies ;) BriKaBraK 11:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

according to the information the first headquarters are in scotland - Derob ecnirp (talk) 20:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

erm, did you even read the question? BriKaBraK is not questioning the location of the HQ. Joe D (t) 20:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, it does seem a bit odd — First is quite definitely a national company, rather than just a Scottish one. David Arthur (talk) 02:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Operates in Ireland?

Can anyone provide a reference that the company operates in Ireland. I can't find anything on any of their websites to make this claim. --Bardcom (talk) 23:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Nor can I, for sure. The 'operates in' claim in the lede and infobox is presumably a summary of the various references in the text to FirstGroup owning Aircoach in Dublin; and if we can get a decent cite to that, then the lede and infobox claims would be carried on the back of that. So I've moved your fact tags to those more explicits claims.

But the big but is that I cannot find anything definative on FirstGroup ownership of Aircoach. There is a news article ([1]) on the Aircoach web site dating back to 2003 announcing that FirstGroup had injected 15million Euros, but there is no clue as to whether that gave them ownership or just a minority interest. Nor whats happened since. -- Chris j wood (talk) 10:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Aircoach - I've dug up some references. --Bardcom (talk) 12:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Presumably if it turns out that First Group do operate in Ireland then we can restore the British Isles usage. This would be consistent with the North America usage, to describe that particular geographic area. CarterBar (talk) 20:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent point CarterBar - thank you. I've changed to use country names - e.g. North America to USA and Canada. This is consistent with the Greyhound Lines article, etc. --Bardcom (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I don't know why, but I had a funny feeling that you might do that. Incidentally, have a look at First Group website main page - in big bold letters we have "North America", and they use that geographic term several times on their site. CarterBar (talk) 21:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you think is best? --Bardcom (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd favour North America in the first instance, if only to be consistent with the website. Later in the article clarification could be given about the operating areas of USA and Canada. CarterBar (talk) 21:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, there's another big can of worms to be opened with the term "North America". (Who knows, it needs doing, and I'm near the end of B.I.) Does it operate in Mexico? --Bardcom (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Logo

I would argue that there is no need for a logo which includes the slogan, especially as the slogan can be writing in the infobox and it rarely appears on any vehicles etc any more. Does anyone have any ideas? Also, it would be nice the the bottom of the G wasn't cut off. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 16:30, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

You know you are right! Without the slogan there would be no 'g' FairFare (talk) 22:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I meant if we were to keep the slogan...! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 22:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Logos should not include slogans. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

OK. I will revert to the old logo soon if there are no objections. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Now done. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 17:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Removal of content

Was there any reason a user just removed several paragraphs of this page? (Guy named Pingu?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.125.84 (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't look like it, they didn't give an edit summary explaining what they were doing so probably just vandalism. Thanks for reverting. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 07:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

New main photo needed?

The guilty party

Looking at the main photograph in use in this article it shows Tramlink to be one of FirstGroups services but it has not been so for a few years now. Should this image be changed/replaced? Metrolink-Boy (talk) 03:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, maybe swap the tram image for a Greyhound UK one when available? Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 16:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. Anyone round Portsmouth or Southampton wanna get us a pic? Metrolink-Boy (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed template User:Dudleybus/Template:FirstGroup for bus operations

Hi All

I have developed a template for all FIRST BUS operations as shown below.

Could people give their opinions please

Regards [[User:Dudleybus]] [[User talk:Dudleybus]] (talk) 15:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Numbers - removal

removed this: ==Fleet numbers== In 2003 First introduced the SemaVoyager system of fleet numbering across all its fleets within the United Kingdom. Vehicles carry five-digit fleet numbers, with the first digit denoting vehicle type, as follows: *1xxxx: [[Articulated buses]] *2xxxx: [[coach (vehicle)|Coaches]] *3xxxx: [[double-decker bus|Double-deck buses]] *4xxxx: [[Midibus]]es *5xxxx: [[Minibus]]es *6xxxx: [[single-decker bus|Full-length single-deck buses]] *9xxxx: Other Vehicles

Apart from being confined to the UK (in an internationally operating company) - it's not clear if this is the sort of information that needs to be covered, or why. Also no reference.

Is there an article for the UK operations?Sf5xeplus (talk) 21:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

criticism

An edit was just removed "known for operating a very unreliable bus service, and charging high amounts to travel on their crappy old buses". While this is badly phrased, FirstBus are not exactly well regarded. Does anyone have any defensible citations on the QoS of FirstBus services?

All I have to hand is [[2]]

Renaming

Hi, just to let you know that we should use the name given to the individual bus companies taken from their website (e.g. First in Leicester, First in Suffolk & Norfolk etc). --MSalmon (talk) 14:28, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Tramlink

First Tram Operations still operates the trams in Croydon. The thing which TfL bought was the concession to operate the system as a whole, with the subcontract for FirstGroup to undertake day-to-day running remaining in place. The structure of Tramlink is all very complicated! Wheeltapper (talk) 19:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)