Re: Australian Railway Magazines which is best

[nldoncas@cobweb.com.au (Nic Doncaster)]

markbau1@aol.com (MarkBau1) writes:
> Of course the need to have a "corrections column" could indicate that the info
> is not checked properly prior to printing.
> 
> Personally I think the RNV was a great step forward as it freed up Newsrail to
> print worthwhile articles. With a fixed passenger fleet in Victoria does the
> consist of the xxxxpm down Albury really matter?
> 
> But to each his own I guess!
> 
> Mark.
> 
> 
> THE ROCK is dead
> Long live THE ROCK!

Unlimited screeds of crap re train details does not interest me, but it pisses 
me off when the editors do not get it right.

There is An example of a local rag publishing some crap about a "Special train" 
a few years ago that the editor made up, as the event was so close to his 
deadline. He failed to account for the crappy track, a big derailment occoured, 
his "Special" did not run, and yet depsite photographs to the contrary in two 
separate magazines, no retraction or correction was made.

Anyway the point is, yes editors do accidently publish errors, despite cross 
referencing, however it is up to them to correct these errors as soon as is 
practicable.

(one recalls a certain book getting a bagging because the data was crap, I now 
no -longer use previous editions as I cannot be sure of its accuracy)

nic