Talk:Paris Métro train fire

Expansion
Just for the record, I'm the one who expanded that description of the accident. I was logged in when I previewed it; It's a bit vexing that I was logged out without warning before saving the final edit. Anyone know how to avoid this?Vremya 09:49, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

The data are lies! Even the first information the tragedy occured on early morning is false - it happened 18:53 and later... comment by 81.0.251.130, moved here from main article


 * I certainly do not claim to be infallible, and it is possible that I was mistaken about the time, but the accusation of deliberate falsification implied in the use of the term lies is uncalled for. I used three different sources to compose my contribution, all of them printed (and thus presumably at least as reliable as any online sources) and all of them in French and published in France or Belgium (thus presumably closer to the source than any English-language materials). The only one of these three sources that mentions a particular time gives "7 h 20" as the time when train 43 "tomb(a) en détresse à la station Barbès," which is the initial event that sets in motion the train of events leading to the catastrophe. I freely admit that this source does not say "7 h 20 du matin" in so many words, but (1) the 24-hour format is more customary in European sources than the 12-hour format, so if they meant "19 h 20" I would have expected them to say so; (2) all three of my sources are agreed that the disaster happened at the very peak of the rush hour (which is why the trains were so packed), which tallies with 7:20 in the morning; by 19:20 in the evening, the rush hour is essentially over. Therefore, although I may have been mistaken, I do not believe that my assumption that the disaster happened in the morning was unreasonable. Not all the information from the three sources at my disposal agreed with one another; in such instances, I have either left it out (you may note that although I identified the failed train as number 43 and the last train as 48, I did not identify the second train by number, because the available information was ambiguous) or made a judgment call based on two sources agreeing with each other against a third. If the information at your disposal leads you to believe that my account is mistaken in some particular, I suggest you provide that information; the article will be the better for your clarification. Mere cries of "lies," however, are neither helpful nor informative Vremya 23:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)