Talk:Great British Railway Journeys

"Michael"? repetition
Is Mr Portillo a personal friend of the editors? And why is the episode heading needlessly repeated in the next line, for example "Alphaville to Betaville" is followed on the next line by "Michael travels from Alphaville to Betaville"? 92.15.2.19 (talk) 09:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah it does need sorting. Funny thing is, in the episodes themselves everyone has been told to greet Portillo as "Michael" lol! David (talk) 15:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Changed to surname as is normal practice. MilborneOne (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Is it against copyright laws to...
...copy/paste the description from the BBC website about each programme? Rather than just have "Michael travels from Blah to Blah" there could also be the brief summary from the BBC programme guide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ic1male (talk • contribs) 16:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, it would need to be in quotation marks to avoid plagiarism. I'm not sure whether it would constitute copyright infringement though. WP:NFC states that: "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea". WP:QUOTE, meanwhile, states: "The copied material should not comprise a substantial portion of the work being quoted, and a longer quotation should not be used where a shorter quotation would express the same information. What constitutes a substantial portion depends on many factors, such as the length of the original work and how central the quoted text is to that work". Cordless Larry (talk) 18:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * As mentioned above, the episodes section needs sorting and expanding. Something for someone with the DVDs to do? David (talk) 19:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

"This is further confirmed by users on Twitter..."
I'm not sure that really satisfies WP:RS! 86.132.137.129 (talk) 23:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I have removed it, now the third series has started it doesnt have much value. MilborneOne (talk) 19:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Session on BBC Four
I thought I had better amend something in the article. The article says that the programme was originally broadcast on BBC Two, but the most recent edition as of December 2012 has been on BBC Four. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:12, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

WRONG. The programme is repeated on BBC Four however premieres on BBC Two. Get your facts right. Mcs2050wiki (talk) 16:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Closely paraphrased BBC summaries
A large portion of the episode "summaries" on this page are either verbatim taken or closely paraphrased from the BBC website episode pages. I lost patience in clicking through all 140 of them but flagged the ones I found.–Dark Cocoa Frosting (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've revised the first leg of GBRJ Series 7 to remove "copy & paste" but seeing your suggestions in talk further revision may be appropriate. I will give priority to the next leg where entries are still "copy & paste" rather than to this reworking but will aim to be more thorough. Would making notes from the programme itself be original research? JDE 2.97.35.238 (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No: Writing episode summaries directly from the primary source (the TV programme) is allowed (if you do not add your own interpretation). –Dark Cocoa Frosting (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for feedback. JDE2.99.45.31 (talk) 16:45, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Writing summaries directly from the primary source may be allowed, but Wikipedia is not a magazine and several examples sound more like press releases than encyclopedic synopses.
 * Eg. Series 4 ep12.
 * Dundee to Aberdeen
 * "Portillo learns how Queen Victoria used to hide from her subjects, discovers how factory workers went deaf and goes out with a bang in Aberdeenshire."
 * If the text is copied verbatim from the source surely it must at least be put in quotation marks. 95.145.86.26 (talk) 12:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Inappropriate images
A photo of Michael Portillo is clearly appropriate in the article, and that at Taunton station is fine, although I have deleted the superfluous editorial comment. But the photo I have removed looks more like 'Fan with MP' than 'MP with a fan' - this is an impression which is heightened by the caption, "Ambushed by a fan..." For all we know, this could be simply an attempt to get a photo of the editor, or their relative or friend, onto Wikipedia. In any event, if photos like this were to be allowed, W. would soon be filled with such pictures and selfies taken with public personalities and celebrities of all kinds.

The Wikipedia policy paper on "User-created images" WP:IUP states: "Images with you, friends or family prominently featured in a way that distracts from the image topic are not recommended for the main namespace; User pages are OK. These images are considered self-promotion and the Wikipedia community has repeatedly reached consensus to delete such images." Blurryman (talk) 23:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Agree entirely with the above. VG31 00:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't be pathetic. I have no idea who this person is, and the photo has languished unused on Commons for some years I think before I added it. Johnbod (talk) 04:43, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It's always a pleasure to engage in civilised, rational discussion with other Wikipedians. So it's sad that, on this occasion, such a long-standing member should resort to such puerile personal abuse of other editors for simply trying to uphold clearly expressed Wikipedia policy. Blurryman (talk) 00:20, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So you think upping the ante is the way to go then.... Johnbod (talk) 02:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No, you did that with the gratuitous insult. I'm just calling you out on it. If you'll retract it, I'll say no more and I'll send you a Xmas card. Blurryman (talk) 01:16, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Padding
The article says that the channel "Yesterday" shows versions which have been edited down to 23 minutes. Shouldn't it say that the BBC shows versions which have been inflated to half an hour by tedious repetitions of the introduction and of highlights of this and tomorrows programs? Davidnugget (talk) 17:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, because the programmes were made for the BBC and first broadcast by the BBC. So the BBC version is the original version. --  Dr Greg  talk 18:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * From editing experiments I've done, 'unpadded' BBC versions still run for about 26 minutes, so broadcasts which have to accommodate commercials are slightly edited, and occasionally I've noticed what has been cut out. Blurryman (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Series 10
The article refers to there having been 10 series and the series 10 DVD having been released in July 2018. Has there not only been 9 series so far?
 * Yes. I've removed it now. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:22, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Victoria Wood
Why is there no mention of the episodes presented by Victoria Wood? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.3.109 (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Answering 3 years later, but I'd suggest it's because that was a different series: Great Railway Journeys, of which she made 1 episode I think. 95.145.86.26 (talk) 12:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Going off the rails?
As the start of Great British Railway Journeys, Michael Portillo would attempt to avoid giving his views as an ex-Tory Minister. Sadly, and of late, the BBC is starting to allow his right-wing opinions to appear on the show. Is not this an issue that this article might highlight? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.69.169.27 (talk) 12:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Tourism
The place where tourists sleep during their travels 41.113.180.79 (talk) 06:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC)