![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Ssteedmans sticky POV tag (again) removed because first two links (To Gautrain Corporate site and Bohlweki EIA site) contain ALL the hard documentary evidence related to the project. Please read this (all 2000 plus pages) before venturing an opinion on the POV neutrality of the postings. Also being closer to the project would help.
4 January 2006: RSA taxpayer
An anonymous IP removed the POV tag - as he or she did not bother to explain themselves here, and as I still believe this to be a one-sided article, I am reinstating it.
I’m not well-acquainted with anything about this project apart from the trains it is to use, but this article seems quite heavy on the opposition to it, and rather overconfident in denying public support for it; can anyone more familiar with the situation shed light on the issue? David Arthur 21:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
im sure. nothing about the number of jobs it aims to create, or that property values around station precincts will go up. it must have been written by one of the opposition! someone should add that additional information so people can decide for themselves. We all know politicians love blowing hot air to please their constituencies.
Greensalad
Well, maybe 75% of public debate in the press and 90% of the comments I've heard personally have been negative, however, as you mention, there are some positives - getting third party support for this information is very difficult. Artagra
OK - now we know why there is a perception of lack of neutrality and frequent use of the NPOV tag - heard about the project from a family member in governmnet involved and all that....... and of course there is of course no posibility that a massive public project involves much more than rails, stations and carraiges .... details about these things will not necessarily "balance" the article but yes - ad them - especially the record on price as presented to the public over the last five years. But all is hard to judge though because your family member (and her cronies in provincial governmnet) never engaged in a public debate with taxpayers regarding the project, also probably thinks an EIA is a public consultation process that meets the requirements of section 6(1) of the GTIA..........
5 January 2006 RSA Taxpayer
(Also, can people add comments at the bottom, so the discussion can be followed easily ?) Wizzy… ☎ 07:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Image:Gautrain Underground.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 10:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Correction required: Supplementary documentary evidence is supplied - yes - but merely supplying the information does not automatically render an article neutral. Whilst the sources cited may themselves be neutral, even the most casual reader can see that this article is slanted (given that the Criticism paragraph dominates over 70% of the article). The article needs to be neutralised - more information needs to occupy other aspects of the article (such as details regarding shareholders and development strategies) before it balances out. Simply supplying a link to 2,000 page document does not make the matter more neutral no more than reading a encyclopedia miraculously completes a schoolkid's project. There is a manner of translation involved from cited source to presented text, and this has not been adequately fulfilled in this instance.
Please also take the time to note that the NPOV tag disputes the *article's* neutrality, not the sources or even the nature of the article itself; just the article.
I do not wish to get involved in a flamewar, but, if you wish to remove a NPOV tag, please discuss it first in the talk page! You'll note that there was some talk when the tag was instated, and so far pretty much everyone has gone along with it.
Yours,
Ssteedman 20:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Well done, Wikiwizzy... the sub categorisation of the 'Criticism' section is more readable and splits information up in a meaningful way.
Ssteedman 11:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, NPOV removal is justified
The inclusion of this heading is a bit clumsy, I think.. Can't we use other headings to deal with each issue, ie Cost, Construction, Alternatives, Integration etc..? Gregorydavid 10:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand the fare structure, it looks pretty cheap in the article. But recently it was announced that the fare from OR Tambo to Sandton would cost R100 one way.... Much more than the article seems to suggest. See http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=132&fArticleId=vn20100521042731348C957727 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.217.180 ( talk) 05:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Can there be a map included of all the stations? Think it would add some information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.2.69 ( talk • contribs) 08:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I created a strip map of the route. This should do for now and you can add more information (river and highway crossings) - it's been quite difficult getting all the required info though as there isn't a lot of information available about the exact route where the split occurs (which side of the N3 etc). Mulderpf ( talk) 17:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
OpenStreetMap has started creating a map, mostly guesswork at present. Are any GIS files available? Any help greatly appreciated. Firefishy ( talk) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Is this going to act as a metro or a commuter rail?
Gautrain aims to alleviate severe traffic congestions in the Johannesburg-Tshwane corridor, where the traffic volume has been growing at seven percent a year for more than a decade.
-- NJR_ZA ( talk) 05:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
As this first response doesn't answer the question at all, I shall ask it again: is this system a form of commuter rail or rapid transit (metro)? It appears to be a commuter rail system with pretty frequent service (based on the station spacing, type of rolling stock, and intended ridership), but the isolation from the rest of the rail network (due to the differing gauge) and frequency of service are more metro-like. I tend towards classifying it as the former, but am willing to be convinced otherwise. oknazevad ( talk) 02:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
I recommend moving the route diagram to the infobox in the same way as {{ Infobox rail line}} does. This will necessitate editing {{ Infobox rail company}} as well. G.A.S talk 10:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Would this map be useful for the article? I'm also open to suggestions for how it might be improved. - htonl ( talk) 21:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/jack-s-train-is-his-track-record-1.1110188. G.A.S talk 14:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gautrain construction006.jpg
Andy Dingley ( talk) 02:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Gautrain construction003.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Gautrain construction003.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gautrain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Gautrain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=931497{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=931746{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.gautrain.co.za/contents/Gautrain-Fares_Time-Tables.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gautrain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:59, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Ssteedmans sticky POV tag (again) removed because first two links (To Gautrain Corporate site and Bohlweki EIA site) contain ALL the hard documentary evidence related to the project. Please read this (all 2000 plus pages) before venturing an opinion on the POV neutrality of the postings. Also being closer to the project would help.
4 January 2006: RSA taxpayer
An anonymous IP removed the POV tag - as he or she did not bother to explain themselves here, and as I still believe this to be a one-sided article, I am reinstating it.
I’m not well-acquainted with anything about this project apart from the trains it is to use, but this article seems quite heavy on the opposition to it, and rather overconfident in denying public support for it; can anyone more familiar with the situation shed light on the issue? David Arthur 21:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
im sure. nothing about the number of jobs it aims to create, or that property values around station precincts will go up. it must have been written by one of the opposition! someone should add that additional information so people can decide for themselves. We all know politicians love blowing hot air to please their constituencies.
Greensalad
Well, maybe 75% of public debate in the press and 90% of the comments I've heard personally have been negative, however, as you mention, there are some positives - getting third party support for this information is very difficult. Artagra
OK - now we know why there is a perception of lack of neutrality and frequent use of the NPOV tag - heard about the project from a family member in governmnet involved and all that....... and of course there is of course no posibility that a massive public project involves much more than rails, stations and carraiges .... details about these things will not necessarily "balance" the article but yes - ad them - especially the record on price as presented to the public over the last five years. But all is hard to judge though because your family member (and her cronies in provincial governmnet) never engaged in a public debate with taxpayers regarding the project, also probably thinks an EIA is a public consultation process that meets the requirements of section 6(1) of the GTIA..........
5 January 2006 RSA Taxpayer
(Also, can people add comments at the bottom, so the discussion can be followed easily ?) Wizzy… ☎ 07:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Image:Gautrain Underground.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 10:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Correction required: Supplementary documentary evidence is supplied - yes - but merely supplying the information does not automatically render an article neutral. Whilst the sources cited may themselves be neutral, even the most casual reader can see that this article is slanted (given that the Criticism paragraph dominates over 70% of the article). The article needs to be neutralised - more information needs to occupy other aspects of the article (such as details regarding shareholders and development strategies) before it balances out. Simply supplying a link to 2,000 page document does not make the matter more neutral no more than reading a encyclopedia miraculously completes a schoolkid's project. There is a manner of translation involved from cited source to presented text, and this has not been adequately fulfilled in this instance.
Please also take the time to note that the NPOV tag disputes the *article's* neutrality, not the sources or even the nature of the article itself; just the article.
I do not wish to get involved in a flamewar, but, if you wish to remove a NPOV tag, please discuss it first in the talk page! You'll note that there was some talk when the tag was instated, and so far pretty much everyone has gone along with it.
Yours,
Ssteedman 20:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Well done, Wikiwizzy... the sub categorisation of the 'Criticism' section is more readable and splits information up in a meaningful way.
Ssteedman 11:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, NPOV removal is justified
The inclusion of this heading is a bit clumsy, I think.. Can't we use other headings to deal with each issue, ie Cost, Construction, Alternatives, Integration etc..? Gregorydavid 10:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand the fare structure, it looks pretty cheap in the article. But recently it was announced that the fare from OR Tambo to Sandton would cost R100 one way.... Much more than the article seems to suggest. See http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=132&fArticleId=vn20100521042731348C957727 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.217.180 ( talk) 05:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Can there be a map included of all the stations? Think it would add some information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.2.69 ( talk • contribs) 08:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I created a strip map of the route. This should do for now and you can add more information (river and highway crossings) - it's been quite difficult getting all the required info though as there isn't a lot of information available about the exact route where the split occurs (which side of the N3 etc). Mulderpf ( talk) 17:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
OpenStreetMap has started creating a map, mostly guesswork at present. Are any GIS files available? Any help greatly appreciated. Firefishy ( talk) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Is this going to act as a metro or a commuter rail?
Gautrain aims to alleviate severe traffic congestions in the Johannesburg-Tshwane corridor, where the traffic volume has been growing at seven percent a year for more than a decade.
-- NJR_ZA ( talk) 05:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
As this first response doesn't answer the question at all, I shall ask it again: is this system a form of commuter rail or rapid transit (metro)? It appears to be a commuter rail system with pretty frequent service (based on the station spacing, type of rolling stock, and intended ridership), but the isolation from the rest of the rail network (due to the differing gauge) and frequency of service are more metro-like. I tend towards classifying it as the former, but am willing to be convinced otherwise. oknazevad ( talk) 02:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
I recommend moving the route diagram to the infobox in the same way as {{ Infobox rail line}} does. This will necessitate editing {{ Infobox rail company}} as well. G.A.S talk 10:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Would this map be useful for the article? I'm also open to suggestions for how it might be improved. - htonl ( talk) 21:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/jack-s-train-is-his-track-record-1.1110188. G.A.S talk 14:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gautrain construction006.jpg
Andy Dingley ( talk) 02:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Gautrain construction003.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Gautrain construction003.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gautrain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Gautrain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=931497{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=931746{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.gautrain.co.za/contents/Gautrain-Fares_Time-Tables.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gautrain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:59, 31 December 2017 (UTC)