Talk:KeolisAmey Wales

Abbreviation
Does anyone know why the Welsh abbreviation is “TrC Trenau”? Apart from using the first two letters of “Trafnidiaeth” instead of one, I’d have expected that  “Trenau TrC” would be more grammatical and euphonious (compare with “Trenau Arriva Cymru” on the outgoing franchisee). — Arwel Parry (talk) 16:13, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Name
As far as I am aware the company is just called Transport for Wales - to differentiate from Transport for Wales should the article be renamed Transport for Wales (train operating company)? I'm not opening a formal move request yet as I'm not 100% sure whether I'm correct in assuming "Rail" isn't actually a part of the TOC's name but I'm sure someone can back me up or more than likely correct me! Buttons0603 (talk) 21:20, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree this article and Transport for Wales is or can be confusing, FWIW their twitter account goes by "TrC Trenau / TfW Rail" and their facebook page goes by "Transport for Wales - Rail Services" which I believe is to try and differentiate themselves from Transport for Wales, Personally I would say this should be moved to "Transport for Wales (train operating company)". – Davey 2010 Talk 21:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I would support a move to "Transport for Wales (train operating company)". Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 06:51, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. . I am not going to do any post-move gnoming in the lead here, you fine train connoisseurs know best what needs doing. Sam Sailor 20:24, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Many thanks Sam much appreciated :), – Davey 2010 Talk 21:08, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Lede
Hi, I've removed "Rail Services" from the lede as per the article-move - I don't see the point in having it as "Transport for Wales Rail Services (trading as Transport for Wales" .... I have however left the full name in the infobox, I have no objections if anyone wants to revert my changes or obviously change the whole thing. Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 21:29, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Class 769 image
This is not being allowed onto the article due to it being a side-view of the unit in question. I can understand this reasoning and why it shouldn't feature, but surely there should be an exception for this temporarily while we await a better 769 image to be uploaded? Even alongside this, this same image is featured on the Great Western Railway article. In my opinion, this image is certainly better than no image and with it being on the GWR article, perhaps it should be kept for now? Just wondering what everyone else thinks. Thanks, --SavageKieran (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I can't understand why the image has to be of the front of the unit. It is the most accurate image of a 769 we have so far. How it possibly detracts from the article, I can't fathom, it's not confusing, misleading, inaccurate, or outdated. There is no policy on choice of train photographs on Wikipedia as far as I know. Think this is just a case of users trying to maintain a visual style to the article but that doesn't justify leaving the space blank with no photo (which I feel looks worse). Llemiles (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2020 (UTC)


 * OK then I'll put it back in, but don't be surprised if Coradia175 removes it again --143.159.50.64 (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I do hope User talk:Coradia175 doesn't do that and start an edit war. I am happy to launch a RfC further here if this becomes disputed. Llemiles (talk) 22:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Welsh translation of company and brand names.
I have removed Gwasanaethau Rheilffyrdd Trafnidiaeth Cymru as the Welsh translation for Transport for Wales Rail Services. Although it is the literal translation, it does not appear to be a form that TfW use themselves. It wasn't supported by the references given, so at first I flagged it as a failed verification - see. This is because the source given was the T&Cs page of the website which says: "1.1 This website is operated by Keolis Amey Operations/Gweithrediadau Keolis Amey Limited (trading as Transport for Wales Rail Services)"

- https://tfwrail.wales/terms-and-conditions

The equivalent page on the Welsh-language website says: "1.1 Gweithredir y wefan hon gan Keolis Amey Operations/Gweithrediadau Keolis Amey Limited (yn masnachu fel Transport for Wales Rail Services)"

- https://trctrenau.cymru/cy/telerau-ac-amodau

As the source given for the reference didn't support the translation, I though it was probably best to remove it - on the basis that TfW weren't going to use that form of words in Welsh. Instead, I inserted references for translations that could be sourced and verified - see. And I hoped it would make it clearer to the average user how the brand names are used and why there are two Transport for Wales's.
 * DrFrench (talk) 23:16, 18 February 2020 (UTC)


 * https://cdn.prgloo.com/web/ArrivaTrainsW/TfW%20Rail%20Services%20logo.jpg I'm not sure why that isn't the logo used in the article really. Anamyd (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2020 (UTC)


 * there are plenty of sources available. For example https://trc.cymru/cy/amdanom/gyrfaoedd (the company's Welsh careers page) cite their name as Gwasanaethau Rheilffyrdd Trafnidiaeth Cymru. Further, Wicipedia Cymraeg uses the same name. Can we agree to go with Gwasanaethau Rheilffyrdd Trafnidiaeth Cymru using the Careers source? Also ::: I would disagree with using that image as it is not part of any visible branding used by the company on their trains, websites, or at their stations. It is their official name but it is not part of their visual identity, which is what a logo should represent. Llemiles (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Mk2 carriage photo
is there any specific reason why a photo of an ATW mark 2 carriage is used when the ones used on rhymney services last year were BR blue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MJ9674 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure . Should probably not use that image. I'm trying to remember what the exact livery was, do you think File:BR Mk.IIf TSO No.6117 (6801455205).jpg might be close to what it looked like? I can't find any Commons images of its service with TfW. Llemiles (talk) 12:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Services
Is it really necessary to have a full list of all TfW services and frequencies in the main article? Esp as currently (July 2020) there is a greatly reduced service due to Lockdown restrictions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.1.174.184 (talk) 14:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Article name post 7 February 2021
With the Wales & Borders franchise to be nationalised on 7 February 2021 and the existing trading name to retained, propose that this article be renamed back to KeolisAmey Wales and the article about the new operator (Transport for Wales Rail (2021)) be renamed Transport for Wales Rail.

Will be a bit of a round robin that may require administrator assistance to ensure history is retained. This is what happened when the Northern franchise was nationalised in 2019 with the outgoing franchisee's article renamed Arriva Rail North and Northern (train operating company) redirected to Northern Trains. Will also mean that relatively few of the 900 incoming links will need to be updated.

This should only be actioned on or after 7 February 2021. Shenkdwood (talk) 00:30, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Franchise termination date
Modern Railways December 2020 states the franchise will be handed over on the 7th. Franchise changeover dates are always timed to coincide with the end of a railway accounting period which starts on a Sunday and concludes 28 days later on a Saturday. So KeolisAmey will finish at the conclusion of service on Saturday 6th, the new operator will commence on Sunday 7th. The exact handover time will probably be in the early hours of the 7th to coincide with no trains being in service. Shenkdwood (talk) 06:02, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 28 January 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved (non-admin closure)  —  Paper9oll  (📣 • 📝)  16:19, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

– With the franchise to transfer from KeolisAmey Wales to the Welsh government operator of last resort on 7 February that will continue to use the Transport for Wales brand, propose that the Transport for Wales Rail Services article revert to being named KeolisAmey Wales. This will free up Transport for Wales Rail to allow for the Transport for Wales Rail (2021) article to be renamed, as it will become the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC when the franchise is nationalised on 7 February and thus should be renamed Transport for Wales Rail. See a previous discussion from when the Northern franchisee was nationalised that resulted in the same thing happening. Bx16 (talk) 03:48, 28 January 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:53, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Transport for Wales Rail Services → KeolisAmey Wales
 * Transport for Wales Rail (2021) → Transport for Wales Rail


 * Note: I have merged the two separate requests into a single multi-request. BegbertBiggs (talk) 11:26, 28 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose: This seems an enormous mess, with unclear article scopes and consequent frequent bold moves. Any move without a clear and thorough plan as to article scopes will just muddy the waters. Probably several article splits would be a good idea. Andrewa (talk) 08:38, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Transport for Wales Rail (2021) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:21, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Redirects
The following three pages currently redirect here, at the old company. Shouldn't these be made into/redirect to a disambiguation page or at least redirect to the current operator?--YTRK (talk) 11:09, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Transport for Wales Rail - 515 mainspace pages linking here!
 * Transport for Wales (train operating company)
 * TfW Rail


 * Problem still exists four months after the operator changed with over 650 incoming links to this article, mostly towns and railway stations, which in most cases should be pointing to the current operator, not the old one. The 28 January requested move would have gone a long way to addressing, but didn't gain any support. Leadelape (talk) 05:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Transport for Wales Rail Limited which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Service table
This Talk post is in response to a recent reversion of my removal of the (seemingly) outdated service table. Since this TOC was replaced by Transport for Wales Rail, would it instead make sense to move this table over there instead, which would effectively replace the current table that's already over there. An observation of the TfW timetable shows relatively similar services to what's already here, just some minor changes would be needed. Jalen Folf  (talk)  19:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Have to agree with on this matter: just like Virgin Trains East Coast, it would make sense for a fully sourced table (I haven't checked the sourcing on this but assume it's okay) to remain for historical purposes. Whether it should be copied over would depend on the current service levels, which may or may not significantly differ from this table. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 19:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the lapse, but as Mattdaviesfsic has said, the franchise ending does not strip the table of its purpose.
 * That said, I am not entirely doubt-free on whether the table (showing, I assume, services as of January 2019) is sufficient (perhaps services at the start and the end (although what with Covid, January 2020 might be better) of the franchise ought to be shown to allow a comparison), or even, on the other hand, necessary (are service tables meaningful as content of an encyclopedia?). For that, though, discussion at WP:UKRAIL level would be called for.--YTRK (talk) 13:30, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Reverted rename
The recent rename to Keolis Amey Operations has been reverted at my request. Per WP:BRD, it was a bold move (not a bad move!) but it was reverted and so it's time to discuss should anyone see the need to.

My criteria for objection is a simple factual one - Keolis Amey Operations is a company that runs (ran) both KeolisAmey Wales and KeolisAmey Docklands, the latter being the TOC for the Docklands Light Railway. This article is (currently) about the Welsh arm, not the wider operation. Obviously I'm very happy to see this discussed so consensus can be reached if needed. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Courtesy ping on this discussion, as this was the first user that made a page move. Similarly, as the move discussion above reached a consensus, I am in agreement that a new discussion is needed.  Jalen Folf   (talk)  18:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd also been questioning whether the move was suitable, so thanks for doing this. My preference is very definitely to keep this title now, per WP:COMMONAME (and including the unspaced "KeolisAmey" as this was and remains the company's own style of presentation). I would note, for completeness, that there might be a bit of confusion around the TOC's legal name. This RailEngineer article from July 2018 notes KeolisAmey had won the £5 billion contract to run the Wales and Borders rail franchise over the next 15 years as the Operator and Development Partner (ODP) – a new kind of combined operator and infrastructure manager. This is interesting when read in conjunction with the ONS determination that Emergency Measures Agreements constituted public control, as it holds that the companies affected by this classification decision are: Keolis Amey Wales Cymru Ltd (the ODP); and Keolis Amey Operations Ltd (the OpCo, also known as Transport for Wales Rail Services). Keolis Amey Wales Cymru Ltd is E&W Company Number 11391059, renamed Keolis Amey Rail Ltd with effect from 27 October 2021, while Keolis Amey Operations Ltd is Number 11389531 (and the company's legal name includes the Welsh in full, so it's actually Keolis Amey Operations / Gweithrediadau Keolis Amey Ltd). Both of these companies were incorporated in May 2018. There is a separate Keolis Amey Docklands Ltd, Number 09113304, that was incorporated in July 2014.  XAM2175  (T) 18:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)


 * This situation is more complex than I originally thought since the last RM, in terms of the current name "KeolisAmey Wales" has indeed been used in sources more than "KeolisAmey Operations" per WP:COMMONNAME, and where KeolisAmey Operations is used (mainly legal documents), it has a space, hence why I moved the article. KeolisAmey seems to be a stylised name used by them and has been used with Wales tagged at the end, but not a lot with Operations at the end, and as the reasoning was to use the legal name and the legal name has a space, I moved it, probably making a mess. While "Transport for Wales" and "Transport for Wales Rail Services" are more likely to be more common than "KeolisAmey Wales" for the operator, the current name is a natural disambiguator with some usage, therefore preferred.
 * Although my second concern is whether KeolisAmey Wales is the actual operator at all, in which this article discusses, assuming KeolisAmey Wales is a shortname for Keolis Amey Wales Cymru Limited, per the company's full accounts, KAWC is the Operator and Development Partner and it manages/oversees? its operational commitments which are given to Keolis Amey Operations (with a space) to perform, hence the name. Therefore KAWC is the manager of KAO? not the other way round. Keolis Amey Operations describes themselves clearly as the operator of the Wales and Borders franchise. (click full accounts). Earlier full accounts of both state they both traded as Transport for Wales Rail Services which is confusing.
 * So the actual operator may indeed be Keolis Amey Operations (with space!), I assume that's why the lead was never changed, therefore does that mean KeolisAmey Wales is incorrect? Or is the current name a more generalised non-legal name (i.e. means KeolisAmey in Wales), which may need explaining in the lead? Keolis Amey Operations never operated the Docklands, KAD formed in 2014, and their full accounts only state Keolis UK and Amey as owners, no KAO. KAO was formed in 2018 and intially based in Cardiff, KAO only operated Wales and Borders. Should the recent lead edit be reverted? The simplest way would be to literally leave it as it was, KAW in title, KAO in lead.  Dank Jae  21:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)