User:Robevans123/sandbox/GWR 5700 Notes

(local government) community
Looked at how the neighbours deal with the problem of "parish" which can mean a civil parish or an old or current ecclesiastical parish.

Ponthir (Welsh: Pont-hir) is a large village and local government community in the county borough of Torfaen.

Ponthir (Welsh: Pont-hir) is a large village at the south-west of the county borough of Torfaen on the boundary of the city of Newport, Wales. It is approximately six miles from Newport city centre and 3½ miles from Cwmbran, lying between the settlements of Caerleon and Llanfrechfa. Ponthir is also a local government community and part of the electoral ward of Llanyrafon South for Torfaen.

Accessibility notes
Notability

Notability (Railway lines and stations)

Not a travel guide - agree that wp is not a travel guide - but - many station descriptions provide an overview of services, often including frequencies of services and routes, operators, and a selection of destinations (often an area of contention on the amount of detail to be included - which is another area where a guideline might be useful...), so again I can't see why at least some mention of

Sewta Rail Strategy 2013 Final Report
Quick summary of contents. And a ref:

Table of Contents
Executive summary

Section 1 Introduction 1

Section 2 Policy Context 3

Section 3 Rail Context 13

Section 4 Sewta Rail Strategy 23

Section 5 Strategy Delivery and Programme 32

Section 6 Rail Strategy Costs and Outcomes 40

Section 7 Recommendations for Further Work 42

Appendix A Summary of Capacity Analysis Issues

Appendix B Summary of Rail Freight Issues

Appendix C Network Capacity / Operations Review

Appendix D Summary of Engineering Reviews

Appendix E Summary of Scheme Appraisals

Precision

 * The precision of a measurement (or definition) is not determined by what it is you're measuring but (or defined) - although the object of the measurement will often give a good indication of how accurately it is  to have been measured.
 * For a measurement reported as a single digit, the idea of significant figures completely breaks down is sort of true (technically speaking it does have one significant figure, and it might have more) but incomplete: the same can be said of any whole number with trailing zeroes: for example, 1,000 (miles) has only one significant figure.
 * The only way to be completely sure of the number of significant figures is if the number has been given:
 * in scientific (or engineering) notation: 1.000×103 (1,000) miles has four significant figures, but 1.0×103 (1,000) miles has only two significant figures
 * or using another method of indicating significant figures, such as a bar above or below the least significant figure: 10$\overline{0}$0 has 3 significant figures, but 1000 only has two significant figures
 * or the source (as mentioned above) says something about the accuracy and precision of its own figures
 * the big problem is that many (a large majority of?) sources give little or no indication of the precision of the figures given (accuracy is another thorny issue...).
 * As already said good sense and good judgment have a large part to play, and it is always worth looking at any other figures given in the source. If the source gives a distance as 1,000 miles, but also gives other distances as 1,263 miles and 1,579 miles then you can be reasonably sure the figure of 1,000 miles has four significant figures
 * However, it is important to have a reasonable understanding of significant figures (they don't just apply to single digits but to what might be rounded numbers), and that single digit figures may often have more (implied) significant figures.
 * I still contend that the statement in the MOS Small numbers may need to be converted to a range where rounding would cause a significant distortion, so one mile (1–2 km), not one mile (2 km). is profoundly misleading, and is probably the basis of statements like "technically, 5 ft should be converted to 2 m" and should be changed.

Appraisal
Notes from Red Panniers book.



Individual loco histories
Not sure what their sources are but they put 1933 as n/a a lot. They must have been looking at a general shed allocation doc and not the individual loco sheets.

L89 (5775)
Page 159 from Scott-Morgan and Martin (Red Panniers)

L90 [2] (7760)
Page 161 from Scott-Morgan and Martin (Red Panniers)

L92 (5786)
Page 164 from Scott-Morgan and Martin (Red Panniers)

L94 (7752)
Page 166 from Scott-Morgan and Martin (Red Panniers)

L95 (5764)
Page 167 from Scott-Morgan and Martin (Red Panniers)

L99 (7715)
Page 171 from Scott-Morgan and Martin (Red Panniers)