This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Thanks for your correction!
Short answer for the post-1907 rapid transit era is the BRT lines operated as leaseholds. There was no issue of trackage rights (unless we're talking about oddities like the Brighton to Manhattan Beach). Who was the technical operator of lines until the BMT organized in 1923 usually came into play only in legal matters; it's not as through a Brooklyn Union Elevated crew got off at Ninth Avenue and a Nassau Electric crew got on a West End elevated train there.
Leaseholds also count when the sh*t hits the fan, as when the BCRR reclaimed its surface lines in 1919. Sometimes it was like separating the individual strands in a bowl of spaghetti, but others times it was more akin to trying to figure out which wheat sheaves a particular strand of spaghetti came from.
So the leaseholds did matter, but not in a day-to-day operating sense.
FYI, the Sea Beach Ry. Canarsie Railroad and BUERR were merged into the NYCRR in 1912. -- Cecropia 23:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey what's up, i noticed something strange about what you said that pahighways.com is a personal site. Well take a good look for your self at the bottom of the page where it cites information from Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, AAA, and other cites. You were wrong about the website it is a reliable reference why do you think every pa route article uses it. But respond at my talk page becuase if what i've found out is true, then is PA 65 a good article? -- JohnnyAlbert10 Time to talk · My Help 21:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
PS:I'm not really using this information that your telling me for PA 65 since it made my head hurt. I'm using it for PA 145. Check out how it looks and i'm still working with references on the history. -- JohnnyAlbert10 Time to talk · My Help 21:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Please say what you have to say about PA 145, i hope it's good comments becuase i worked extremly hard on this article 5x harder than PA 65. If you say something negative, I'll go crazy and say to myself wikipedia is harder than college. Check out how it looks on Thursday. -- JohnnyAlbert10 1:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of SEPTA Route 125. I just came across it while looking through a new user's contributions, and not being really in on the public transportation side of things on Wikipedia, I wasn't sure what the correct course of action was. I agree wholeheartedly with the redirect. -- NORTH talk 19:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean that the article is unreferenced? Its route line is indicated and referenced here. The published timetable serves as a reference "here" (PDF). (209 KiB). Its service history, as well as others, are referenced here. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
There should be a comma or "and" between A C. They are two seperate services, not one. Pacific Coast Highway { talk • contribs} 22:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
First of all, I would like to let you know that CanadaGirl and I are the same person, this is simply a role account for things such as fixes in the category namespace (edits that don't hold much quality in an edit count).
I originally added that link to my ToDo list when this revision was the current one. My intent was to split out the two meanings (which has been done already by someone else), and expand the transit related half. I have been meaning to clean up my ToDo list for some time (more than just that entry), but I've been busy with my category work. CG janitor 15:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey NE2, since you do Ga reviews and your a roads person could you please review Pennsylvania Route 145 and pass or fail it to become a good article, thank you. -- JohnnyAlbert10 Time to talk · My Help 0:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Per discussion in the AFDs for List of unused highways, one of the items that needed improving upon are sources. Seeing as how the page is getting flooded with various unreferenced items, do you think a culling of unreferenced materials (or commenting out) would work? Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 14:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
i noticed you removed a lot of info, claiming it to be copied from another page. i disagree with you and want an explanation for the removement. is it considered copyright info? you can talk to this on the NYCS discussion page. The Legendary Ranger 18:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Can you think of way we can get that information and reword it so it won't look copyrighted? the information is very vital for the article. The Legendary Ranger 18:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
NE2, I've noticed you've made a lot of drastic edits to many articles and templates that a lot of people worked on. Instead you go ahead and make the change anyway. I've already had this discussion with you. When you make a proposal, or make a drastic edit to the namespace articles and templates, you need to get some sort of approval from the rest of the community, like us at WT:NYCPT. Allow up to at least a day to try to see what other people have to say about your ideas. And as you may see at Template:NYCS and Template:Infobox NYCS, I've reverted most of your edits back to their original versions, so everything is back to the way it is, except that your own credibility has been damaged.
I hope that you take this notice seriously, as we have already had this discussion before, there should be no real reason that we should have it again. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 02:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
NYCS|Q
}} (10 characters) than [[Q (New York City Subway service)|Q
]] (44 characters).
NE2, it is about time that you learn on how we work on Wikipedia. Your consensus-breaching and talk page habits will no longer be accepted. I have opened up an RFC for you, hoping that you will learn on how we work on Wikipedia. I ask that you look into the RFC for the remainder of the week. I hope you will learn about working with others with comments left on the page. Thank you. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 13:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Astoria Boulevard–Hoyt Avenue (BMT Astoria Line), I predict that you will get a rebuke by Imdanumber1, becuase he strongly pushed for article title names based on The Map. The subway map and [1] does say "Astoria Boulevard." Similar warning if you plan to do 39th Avenue–Beebe Avenue (BMT Astoria Line) as an example. Just a word of warning. Tinlinkin 07:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
The International Symbol of Access (ISA) should be used in the {{ access icon}} template in place of a free symbol because it is an international standard and is allowed to be used according to its standards by the International Organization for Standardization. A free symbol should NOT be used because any alternations of the ISA may cause offense to handicapped or disabled persons, according to someone who works with such individuals. The ISA is copyrighted, however, the copyright is to protect its design for style, shape, and proportion – NOT to hinder its use. Its purpose is to be used "to identify, mark or show the way to buildings and facilities that are accessible to and usable by all those persons whose mobility is restricted." [2] Therefore, the usage to mark a transit facility as accessible its permitted within its guidelines. Many places, for example, Ontario, require the usage of the ISA to denote accessibility:
– Crashintome4196 16:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I fixed it. Regards, -- Darkest Hour 17:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I have added a "{{
prod}}" template to the article
Oiled road, suggesting that it be deleted according to the
proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.
172.144.104.18 17:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Wow. You didn't have to, but since you took upon the hard task of reorganizing List of New York City Subway stations yourself, I congratulate you. You certainly made it easier and manageable when you created {{ NYCS row}}. You also figured out the biggest implementation issue in my view: correct alphanumeric sorting of station names and consistent station naming (by street name). I would only suggest two things:
Other than that, great job! Tinlinkin 12:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that—I'm doing a search and replace and trying to make sure that I don't accidentally change any of the trolleybus links. Guess I missed that one; thanks for the catch. -- Spangineer ws (háblame) 06:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
A discussion concerning how we should use International Symbol of Access on Wikipedia is taking place at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Use of international wheelchair symbol. You are welcome to participate. — Remember the dot ( talk) 17:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your request at the Newspaper/maganize request page. If you haven't received this yet, I can send you a pdf of the article by email in the next hour or so. -- Polaron | Talk 23:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
He shows up in this Yahoo search:
Snidely Whiplash. The one you see on the Wiki article is a more modern image of him but one that compliments all the incarnations to include human movies. Ronbo76 17:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The summary says it is from 1911. Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but how could not be published before 1923? John Reaves (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Has consensus been reached to not revert the template back to bold? -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 13:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Could you please move this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation? Although it is currently a two-way discussion, it is a discussion that can have a great consequence on the WikiProject. Tinlinkin 14:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
To NE2 from Sebwite:
For the past several months, I, with the help from a few others, have been working on a page dedicated to each bus line in the Baltimore area, something I have just recently completed. I do very much like your idea of having a page like you created called List of Maryland Transit Administration bus routes. In fact, I planned one day to create something like that myself. At the same time, I do believe there should be individual pages like the ones I made.
Please keep it up in finishing up the page you started. It is very helpful. And if you know something more, please add it there. But at the same time, please do not delete the pages I created. Instead, please link them to one another. The purpose of the pages I made is to provide a description of what each line currently is, what areas of town and major landmarks it serves for which it would draw its ridership (such as schools, hospitals, malls, or tourist attractions), a step-by-step history detailing to dates and descriptions of each change (which shows how the line was shaped), and any other interesting information about the routes, such as their impacts on the communties they serve or controversies surrounding changes they have undergone.
The idea of having a page devoted to each individual bus line in a transit system is not a new one here. I have seen in with the systems of other large cities, and I do believe it makes sense in a Metropolitan area with a population of 1 million one more.
Sebwite 14:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
As you mentioned, changes to lines should be major ones and not just small ones to serve new shopping centers. The project in which I have written about every bus line has been on-going. I am not trying to build Rome in one day. For some bus lines, I have been able to find quite a lot of publicly available information. For others, I have only been able to find minimal amounts, including some that have been around for a quite a long time, such as the No. 51 Line. Some of the lines date back to the 1890s as streetcars, and others have only been around less than a decade. Therefore, the amount that can be written about each line will vary. Whenever I can find information that I previously have been unable to find, I plan to add it.
And there are times that indeed, a routing change to serve a new shopping center does matter a lot. For example, the No. 17 Line was modified in 2001 to serve Arundel Mills. Its level of service was greatly increased at that time, with the addition of Sunday service and other off-peak service beyond BWI Airport. This was more than just a small deviation added.
Sebwite 16:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
But why not, when {{ NYCS}} has made this template obsolete? I really do not see the subarticle being moved anytime soon. If that's the case, then at least reinstate the bullets between the letters/numbers and the inline spaces. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
which is an inlined space. Example:
, then •, then hit the space bar. --
Imdanumber1 (
talk •
contribs) 22:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Thanks for jumping in to help at PNC. I have no objection to your edit. However, could you add a comment at the talk page in support of your position, so that it can be considered in the fine tuning that will inevitably take place. -- Kevin Murray 17:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Point me to the place where the discussion supported the split. Otherwise, I'll revert it. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 20:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
Volume 1, Issue 5 | 5- 8 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
I will be proposing all of them to RFD. It'll allow you to debate the issue, and you can't just remove an RFD. 70.51.8.244 05:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Looking at the articles currently tagged with {{ WPRT}}, although the overwhelming majority of them are rail related subjects, there are notable exceptions. I added the nonrail parameter because articles like double-decker bus are not within the scope of TWP, but they are within WPRT. Articles in Category:Buses are the primary reason for this need, but there are likely other rapid transit related articles as well that are beyond the scope of TWP. This solution seemed simplest to keep them tagged for WPRT but not listed in the TWP assessment categories. Slambo (Speak) 10:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Give me a good reason why there should not be a space. I have added them back until you can tell me. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Please stop reverting the document page. Take a look at what happened to the 1 and the 9. Plus, they were together before 2005, now they aren't. Why should we have to rely on redirects as you keep on doing. Don't worry about the future. Worry about now. And now you are being really hardheaded, which is why a lot of people have a hard time dealing with you. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 14:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Besides, I never wanted to subst:
NYCS 1 back in the day. However,
Cydebot did, and it caused a lot of mayhem. And on redirects, don't just intentionally create redirects, like you did with a whole ton of service articles. It really causes a lot of confusion if the articles are to be moved. That is why we have templates. --
Imdanumber1 (
talk •
contribs) 15:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
...and leave me alone. You have caused a lot of trouble for me for the past month and you are making things worse, and as much as I have tried to mediate with you, it doesn't help. You are completely hard-headed and never listen to anyone. So I won't listen to you. Just please back off until you can learn to work with others instead of being a total heartless unreasonable frustrating character. Until you start building up credibility by playing nice in the sandbox, then people will start taking your opinions and concerns more seriously. You aren't really helping others by trying to have things your way here. We don't work like that. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
What is reliable source for what type of subway car a line uses? I don't think you should remove it yet. Just add citation needed next to it. We should discuss this on the Wikipedia: WikiProject New York City Subway first. The Legendary Ranger 18:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the pd:india. I tried to remove after I added it, without avail. I guess we will have to let the image die. It is something that is available to any citizen of India as part of freedom of information act. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rajat Bhargav ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC).
I was not aware that Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_York_City_Public_Transportation#New_York_City_Subway applied to PATH stations as well, which is why I made the change. I had no intention of changing the titles of the NYCS station articles. Every reference to the 9th Street (PATH station) outside of Wikipedia (including the official PANYNJ website) spelled it "9th" instead of "Ninth." If there are any standards for PATH that I should know about, please let me know. – Crashintome4196 15:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. -- Kevin Murray 23:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Um... why? What's wrong with it? I just made it not 20 minutes ago.-- FPAtl (holla, holla, holla) 06:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you unbolded the line templates. For some reason, I think that because the line templates are only used in infoboxes and tables, I think that there's an exception to that, or that's still against MOS? What does the MOS page say about this? -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 21:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Per this, I have userfied the template. It is located at User:NE2/Template:Baltimore Bus Route. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 05:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't really like the idea of putting text after the service and icon. What we should do is put the text denoting the icon on the image description page at Commons. Sorry I can't be clearer, I'm editing with a Nintendo Wii, which sucks at typing, so I won't be taking a full part in the discussion until later tonight or tomorrow. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 21:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Would you please explain why you deleted a valid citation that the groundbreaking took place. The groundbreaking took place ... that is a documented historical fact, and noteworthy because it means that NYC may finally see a 2nd Ave subway after decades of planning and false starts. Your comment that the line will not be used until the line opens south of 72nd Street is valid, and is a worthwhile addition to the groundbreaking statement. Would you please reconsider your removal of the groundbreaking statement. See Wikipedia:Citing sources. Truthanado 23:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Why is repaving unimportant? I'm somewhat inclined to agree with you, but not strongly enough to where I personally would blank the text. It was cited (albeit poorly as Route 82 is apt to do), and should probably be allowed to stay. -- NORTH talk 01:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes... why was the text I added removed... you could have at least trimmed it down to a single paragraph or something... but not totally remove it... I put it on there because it is important imformation regarding the interstate route. More then half of it's surface is crumbling apart and rough to ride on, these repavings will make nearly the entire route a smooth driving surface... resurfacing is important... especially when it encompasses such vast distances on I-287 and I-295 as the NJDOT is planning... more then half of both interstates will be completely redone in the coming years... That large amount of work deserves to be included...(if it were only a mile or two... then i would see your point...) I think it is important for some people to know if they wanted to... plus like North said... I citied where I got the information from... so please kindly return it... thank you Route 82 13:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of it. -- NORTH talk 19:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, This page is for testing a bug that only seems to happen in mainspace., whose purpose was to illustrate a bug report, doesn't seem to show the bug anymore. Shouldn't it be deleted now ? — Xavier, 21:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | |||||||||||
Volume 1, Issue 6 | 21 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
What were you trying to do with your sandbox subpage? I think you mean {{User:Imdanumber1/Sandbox|A}} (which links to the service article, A), not [[User:Imdanumber1/Sandbox|A]] (which links back to my subpage, A). Is that right? Templates and links are very different from each other as links just links (respectively) to the file, while templates transclude whatever it contains {{ NYCS-bull-small}} creates by filling in the parameter). -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 23:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Since I added references as requested, I'd like to ask that you remove the WP:REF tag which you inserted into the Rossville, Staten Island article last night. I would remove it myself, but I don't know if I would be in violation of Wikipedia's policies if I did so. Thanks. Citizen Dick 11:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, we can do that. I'll try to get to it tonight (I've got a few other tasks that need to get done today, but this is now on the list). Slambo (Speak) 20:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Doh! I'll take a thorough look at it tomorrow evening (I've got an operating session to attend at a friend's house tonight). Slambo (Speak) 20:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I reverted your replacement of Image:Beale's Cut 1872.jpg with Image:Beale's cut 1937.jpg. While it may seem like an 1872 photo is public domain, that is not necessarily true. If it was not published, it is only in the public domain if the photographer died before 1937. Since we don't know the photographer, we cannot know its copyright status. (See [3].) It probably cannot be used under fair use either, since we need to give credit to claim fair use. -- NE2 23:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I very much like the idea of a bus Wiki project. This way, users in every large city will be encouraged to write about individual bus lines in the hometowns. I have lived in Baltimore most of my life, and though I have been on buses in other cities, I am only familiar with the details of the system in Baltimore.
I have obtained much of my information from old and current bus schedules (unfortunately, I do not have many dating back to before 1990, around the time I had started to frequently ride buses; these also cannot be placed on the web easily as references), news articles (mostly from the Baltimore Sun), Baltimore streetcar books, which can be found at the local library and at Barnes and Noble, the Baltimore Transit Archives website (which is not perfectly sufficient), and from a recent visit to the Baltimore Streetcar Museum, which supplied me with a 1929 map of the streetcars and other assistance. I have not found MTA to be very helpful in this regard.
During the early 90s, when I was a big bus rider, I was always curious about the history of the buses, and how the routes were shaped, but little if any information was available. I was able to obtain some back by asking other riders, though much of it was conflicting, and it was not perfectly reliable. My motivation for writing pages like these now is to provide others in the future with what I was unable to find back then.
Generally, the information I try to include is the current description, history, the future plans for the route, the impact it has on the communities it serves, and political issues surrounding the route. I also try to include a photo whenever possible, in order to make the article look more professional. My photos, though, are opportunity-based. Rather than traveling to the site of a particular bus and looking out for one, I take them when I happen to see them when I am in the area for some other reason. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sebwite ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
-- BWCNY 17:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I am just recommending that separating the article might be the best thing to do because of conflicting route types of local and express in the list. -- BWCNY 18:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
First of all, Route 144 does not carry on the New Jersey Transit bus numbering system. This route was formerly owned by Red and Tans bus company which they used their own number system. It was inherited by independently owned bus operation. Second, it is classify as a express route. Just use the reference that you sent me and plot the stops with a map. If you think it is a local route then why the company charges a premium fare on a luxury coach bus. -- BWCNY 02:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Well then just put a original research tag on the bottom of the page in which you suggested it. -- BWCNY 02:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, well, well, I cannot edit on that page because of the 3RR and so do you as I can see on that history page. Anyhow that route 144 WILL go to that page but will listed in different form and the sources are reliable. I found some sources to justify your claim. Right now, I'm doing my job to editing different pages that are not related to the bus article. -- BWCNY 03:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, then since you put the route 144 on to different article, might as well add some reasonings to the intro? BWCNY 03:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Sources that route 144 is an express route:
-- BWCNY 04:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone had already explained that and had changed the image accordingly beforehand. It did not need to be changed. JRG 04:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I've joined the group. Gherkin30 12:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
What do the "100 ft." next to each of the streets mean? It's kinda confusing to have them there. Wl219 07:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
A separate issue: I noticed you removed logos from the nav boxes on highway bridge articles like Basilone Bridge. I think you're mistaken about the fair use point. Leaving only the Rt. 95 icon fails to convey the fact that the bridge is part of the NJ Turnpike. Turnpike and 95 are a concurrency, and should be so indicated. Besides, Turnpike is the more common usage since it's unambiguous as to the fact that it's a toll road, whereas 95 could mean either freeway or toll. Wl219 07:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that the assessment should be removed from talk pages. The assessment should eventually be WP:BUS not WP:LT. I have reverted Unisouth's edit as it was messing the talk pages up. Simply south 15:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Thanks for your correction!
Short answer for the post-1907 rapid transit era is the BRT lines operated as leaseholds. There was no issue of trackage rights (unless we're talking about oddities like the Brighton to Manhattan Beach). Who was the technical operator of lines until the BMT organized in 1923 usually came into play only in legal matters; it's not as through a Brooklyn Union Elevated crew got off at Ninth Avenue and a Nassau Electric crew got on a West End elevated train there.
Leaseholds also count when the sh*t hits the fan, as when the BCRR reclaimed its surface lines in 1919. Sometimes it was like separating the individual strands in a bowl of spaghetti, but others times it was more akin to trying to figure out which wheat sheaves a particular strand of spaghetti came from.
So the leaseholds did matter, but not in a day-to-day operating sense.
FYI, the Sea Beach Ry. Canarsie Railroad and BUERR were merged into the NYCRR in 1912. -- Cecropia 23:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey what's up, i noticed something strange about what you said that pahighways.com is a personal site. Well take a good look for your self at the bottom of the page where it cites information from Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, AAA, and other cites. You were wrong about the website it is a reliable reference why do you think every pa route article uses it. But respond at my talk page becuase if what i've found out is true, then is PA 65 a good article? -- JohnnyAlbert10 Time to talk · My Help 21:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
PS:I'm not really using this information that your telling me for PA 65 since it made my head hurt. I'm using it for PA 145. Check out how it looks and i'm still working with references on the history. -- JohnnyAlbert10 Time to talk · My Help 21:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Please say what you have to say about PA 145, i hope it's good comments becuase i worked extremly hard on this article 5x harder than PA 65. If you say something negative, I'll go crazy and say to myself wikipedia is harder than college. Check out how it looks on Thursday. -- JohnnyAlbert10 1:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of SEPTA Route 125. I just came across it while looking through a new user's contributions, and not being really in on the public transportation side of things on Wikipedia, I wasn't sure what the correct course of action was. I agree wholeheartedly with the redirect. -- NORTH talk 19:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean that the article is unreferenced? Its route line is indicated and referenced here. The published timetable serves as a reference "here" (PDF). (209 KiB). Its service history, as well as others, are referenced here. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
There should be a comma or "and" between A C. They are two seperate services, not one. Pacific Coast Highway { talk • contribs} 22:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
First of all, I would like to let you know that CanadaGirl and I are the same person, this is simply a role account for things such as fixes in the category namespace (edits that don't hold much quality in an edit count).
I originally added that link to my ToDo list when this revision was the current one. My intent was to split out the two meanings (which has been done already by someone else), and expand the transit related half. I have been meaning to clean up my ToDo list for some time (more than just that entry), but I've been busy with my category work. CG janitor 15:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey NE2, since you do Ga reviews and your a roads person could you please review Pennsylvania Route 145 and pass or fail it to become a good article, thank you. -- JohnnyAlbert10 Time to talk · My Help 0:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Per discussion in the AFDs for List of unused highways, one of the items that needed improving upon are sources. Seeing as how the page is getting flooded with various unreferenced items, do you think a culling of unreferenced materials (or commenting out) would work? Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 14:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
i noticed you removed a lot of info, claiming it to be copied from another page. i disagree with you and want an explanation for the removement. is it considered copyright info? you can talk to this on the NYCS discussion page. The Legendary Ranger 18:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Can you think of way we can get that information and reword it so it won't look copyrighted? the information is very vital for the article. The Legendary Ranger 18:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
NE2, I've noticed you've made a lot of drastic edits to many articles and templates that a lot of people worked on. Instead you go ahead and make the change anyway. I've already had this discussion with you. When you make a proposal, or make a drastic edit to the namespace articles and templates, you need to get some sort of approval from the rest of the community, like us at WT:NYCPT. Allow up to at least a day to try to see what other people have to say about your ideas. And as you may see at Template:NYCS and Template:Infobox NYCS, I've reverted most of your edits back to their original versions, so everything is back to the way it is, except that your own credibility has been damaged.
I hope that you take this notice seriously, as we have already had this discussion before, there should be no real reason that we should have it again. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 02:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
NYCS|Q
}} (10 characters) than [[Q (New York City Subway service)|Q
]] (44 characters).
NE2, it is about time that you learn on how we work on Wikipedia. Your consensus-breaching and talk page habits will no longer be accepted. I have opened up an RFC for you, hoping that you will learn on how we work on Wikipedia. I ask that you look into the RFC for the remainder of the week. I hope you will learn about working with others with comments left on the page. Thank you. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 13:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
Volume 1, Issue 4 | 24 March 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
Regarding Astoria Boulevard–Hoyt Avenue (BMT Astoria Line), I predict that you will get a rebuke by Imdanumber1, becuase he strongly pushed for article title names based on The Map. The subway map and [1] does say "Astoria Boulevard." Similar warning if you plan to do 39th Avenue–Beebe Avenue (BMT Astoria Line) as an example. Just a word of warning. Tinlinkin 07:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
The International Symbol of Access (ISA) should be used in the {{ access icon}} template in place of a free symbol because it is an international standard and is allowed to be used according to its standards by the International Organization for Standardization. A free symbol should NOT be used because any alternations of the ISA may cause offense to handicapped or disabled persons, according to someone who works with such individuals. The ISA is copyrighted, however, the copyright is to protect its design for style, shape, and proportion – NOT to hinder its use. Its purpose is to be used "to identify, mark or show the way to buildings and facilities that are accessible to and usable by all those persons whose mobility is restricted." [2] Therefore, the usage to mark a transit facility as accessible its permitted within its guidelines. Many places, for example, Ontario, require the usage of the ISA to denote accessibility:
– Crashintome4196 16:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I fixed it. Regards, -- Darkest Hour 17:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I have added a "{{
prod}}" template to the article
Oiled road, suggesting that it be deleted according to the
proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.
172.144.104.18 17:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Wow. You didn't have to, but since you took upon the hard task of reorganizing List of New York City Subway stations yourself, I congratulate you. You certainly made it easier and manageable when you created {{ NYCS row}}. You also figured out the biggest implementation issue in my view: correct alphanumeric sorting of station names and consistent station naming (by street name). I would only suggest two things:
Other than that, great job! Tinlinkin 12:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that—I'm doing a search and replace and trying to make sure that I don't accidentally change any of the trolleybus links. Guess I missed that one; thanks for the catch. -- Spangineer ws (háblame) 06:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
A discussion concerning how we should use International Symbol of Access on Wikipedia is taking place at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Use of international wheelchair symbol. You are welcome to participate. — Remember the dot ( talk) 17:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your request at the Newspaper/maganize request page. If you haven't received this yet, I can send you a pdf of the article by email in the next hour or so. -- Polaron | Talk 23:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
He shows up in this Yahoo search:
Snidely Whiplash. The one you see on the Wiki article is a more modern image of him but one that compliments all the incarnations to include human movies. Ronbo76 17:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
The summary says it is from 1911. Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but how could not be published before 1923? John Reaves (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Has consensus been reached to not revert the template back to bold? -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 13:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Could you please move this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation? Although it is currently a two-way discussion, it is a discussion that can have a great consequence on the WikiProject. Tinlinkin 14:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
To NE2 from Sebwite:
For the past several months, I, with the help from a few others, have been working on a page dedicated to each bus line in the Baltimore area, something I have just recently completed. I do very much like your idea of having a page like you created called List of Maryland Transit Administration bus routes. In fact, I planned one day to create something like that myself. At the same time, I do believe there should be individual pages like the ones I made.
Please keep it up in finishing up the page you started. It is very helpful. And if you know something more, please add it there. But at the same time, please do not delete the pages I created. Instead, please link them to one another. The purpose of the pages I made is to provide a description of what each line currently is, what areas of town and major landmarks it serves for which it would draw its ridership (such as schools, hospitals, malls, or tourist attractions), a step-by-step history detailing to dates and descriptions of each change (which shows how the line was shaped), and any other interesting information about the routes, such as their impacts on the communties they serve or controversies surrounding changes they have undergone.
The idea of having a page devoted to each individual bus line in a transit system is not a new one here. I have seen in with the systems of other large cities, and I do believe it makes sense in a Metropolitan area with a population of 1 million one more.
Sebwite 14:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
As you mentioned, changes to lines should be major ones and not just small ones to serve new shopping centers. The project in which I have written about every bus line has been on-going. I am not trying to build Rome in one day. For some bus lines, I have been able to find quite a lot of publicly available information. For others, I have only been able to find minimal amounts, including some that have been around for a quite a long time, such as the No. 51 Line. Some of the lines date back to the 1890s as streetcars, and others have only been around less than a decade. Therefore, the amount that can be written about each line will vary. Whenever I can find information that I previously have been unable to find, I plan to add it.
And there are times that indeed, a routing change to serve a new shopping center does matter a lot. For example, the No. 17 Line was modified in 2001 to serve Arundel Mills. Its level of service was greatly increased at that time, with the addition of Sunday service and other off-peak service beyond BWI Airport. This was more than just a small deviation added.
Sebwite 16:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
But why not, when {{ NYCS}} has made this template obsolete? I really do not see the subarticle being moved anytime soon. If that's the case, then at least reinstate the bullets between the letters/numbers and the inline spaces. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
which is an inlined space. Example:
, then •, then hit the space bar. --
Imdanumber1 (
talk •
contribs) 22:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Thanks for jumping in to help at PNC. I have no objection to your edit. However, could you add a comment at the talk page in support of your position, so that it can be considered in the fine tuning that will inevitably take place. -- Kevin Murray 17:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Point me to the place where the discussion supported the split. Otherwise, I'll revert it. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 20:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||
Volume 1, Issue 5 | 5- 8 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
I will be proposing all of them to RFD. It'll allow you to debate the issue, and you can't just remove an RFD. 70.51.8.244 05:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Looking at the articles currently tagged with {{ WPRT}}, although the overwhelming majority of them are rail related subjects, there are notable exceptions. I added the nonrail parameter because articles like double-decker bus are not within the scope of TWP, but they are within WPRT. Articles in Category:Buses are the primary reason for this need, but there are likely other rapid transit related articles as well that are beyond the scope of TWP. This solution seemed simplest to keep them tagged for WPRT but not listed in the TWP assessment categories. Slambo (Speak) 10:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Give me a good reason why there should not be a space. I have added them back until you can tell me. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Please stop reverting the document page. Take a look at what happened to the 1 and the 9. Plus, they were together before 2005, now they aren't. Why should we have to rely on redirects as you keep on doing. Don't worry about the future. Worry about now. And now you are being really hardheaded, which is why a lot of people have a hard time dealing with you. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 14:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Besides, I never wanted to subst:
NYCS 1 back in the day. However,
Cydebot did, and it caused a lot of mayhem. And on redirects, don't just intentionally create redirects, like you did with a whole ton of service articles. It really causes a lot of confusion if the articles are to be moved. That is why we have templates. --
Imdanumber1 (
talk •
contribs) 15:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
...and leave me alone. You have caused a lot of trouble for me for the past month and you are making things worse, and as much as I have tried to mediate with you, it doesn't help. You are completely hard-headed and never listen to anyone. So I won't listen to you. Just please back off until you can learn to work with others instead of being a total heartless unreasonable frustrating character. Until you start building up credibility by playing nice in the sandbox, then people will start taking your opinions and concerns more seriously. You aren't really helping others by trying to have things your way here. We don't work like that. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
What is reliable source for what type of subway car a line uses? I don't think you should remove it yet. Just add citation needed next to it. We should discuss this on the Wikipedia: WikiProject New York City Subway first. The Legendary Ranger 18:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the pd:india. I tried to remove after I added it, without avail. I guess we will have to let the image die. It is something that is available to any citizen of India as part of freedom of information act. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rajat Bhargav ( talk • contribs) 22:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC).
I was not aware that Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_York_City_Public_Transportation#New_York_City_Subway applied to PATH stations as well, which is why I made the change. I had no intention of changing the titles of the NYCS station articles. Every reference to the 9th Street (PATH station) outside of Wikipedia (including the official PANYNJ website) spelled it "9th" instead of "Ninth." If there are any standards for PATH that I should know about, please let me know. – Crashintome4196 15:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. -- Kevin Murray 23:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Um... why? What's wrong with it? I just made it not 20 minutes ago.-- FPAtl (holla, holla, holla) 06:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you unbolded the line templates. For some reason, I think that because the line templates are only used in infoboxes and tables, I think that there's an exception to that, or that's still against MOS? What does the MOS page say about this? -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 21:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Per this, I have userfied the template. It is located at User:NE2/Template:Baltimore Bus Route. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 05:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't really like the idea of putting text after the service and icon. What we should do is put the text denoting the icon on the image description page at Commons. Sorry I can't be clearer, I'm editing with a Nintendo Wii, which sucks at typing, so I won't be taking a full part in the discussion until later tonight or tomorrow. -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 21:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Would you please explain why you deleted a valid citation that the groundbreaking took place. The groundbreaking took place ... that is a documented historical fact, and noteworthy because it means that NYC may finally see a 2nd Ave subway after decades of planning and false starts. Your comment that the line will not be used until the line opens south of 72nd Street is valid, and is a worthwhile addition to the groundbreaking statement. Would you please reconsider your removal of the groundbreaking statement. See Wikipedia:Citing sources. Truthanado 23:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Why is repaving unimportant? I'm somewhat inclined to agree with you, but not strongly enough to where I personally would blank the text. It was cited (albeit poorly as Route 82 is apt to do), and should probably be allowed to stay. -- NORTH talk 01:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes... why was the text I added removed... you could have at least trimmed it down to a single paragraph or something... but not totally remove it... I put it on there because it is important imformation regarding the interstate route. More then half of it's surface is crumbling apart and rough to ride on, these repavings will make nearly the entire route a smooth driving surface... resurfacing is important... especially when it encompasses such vast distances on I-287 and I-295 as the NJDOT is planning... more then half of both interstates will be completely redone in the coming years... That large amount of work deserves to be included...(if it were only a mile or two... then i would see your point...) I think it is important for some people to know if they wanted to... plus like North said... I citied where I got the information from... so please kindly return it... thank you Route 82 13:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of it. -- NORTH talk 19:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, This page is for testing a bug that only seems to happen in mainspace., whose purpose was to illustrate a bug report, doesn't seem to show the bug anymore. Shouldn't it be deleted now ? — Xavier, 21:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | |||||||||||
Volume 1, Issue 6 | 21 April 2007 | About the Newsletter | |||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
What were you trying to do with your sandbox subpage? I think you mean {{User:Imdanumber1/Sandbox|A}} (which links to the service article, A), not [[User:Imdanumber1/Sandbox|A]] (which links back to my subpage, A). Is that right? Templates and links are very different from each other as links just links (respectively) to the file, while templates transclude whatever it contains {{ NYCS-bull-small}} creates by filling in the parameter). -- Imdanumber1 ( talk • contribs) 23:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Since I added references as requested, I'd like to ask that you remove the WP:REF tag which you inserted into the Rossville, Staten Island article last night. I would remove it myself, but I don't know if I would be in violation of Wikipedia's policies if I did so. Thanks. Citizen Dick 11:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, we can do that. I'll try to get to it tonight (I've got a few other tasks that need to get done today, but this is now on the list). Slambo (Speak) 20:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Doh! I'll take a thorough look at it tomorrow evening (I've got an operating session to attend at a friend's house tonight). Slambo (Speak) 20:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I reverted your replacement of Image:Beale's Cut 1872.jpg with Image:Beale's cut 1937.jpg. While it may seem like an 1872 photo is public domain, that is not necessarily true. If it was not published, it is only in the public domain if the photographer died before 1937. Since we don't know the photographer, we cannot know its copyright status. (See [3].) It probably cannot be used under fair use either, since we need to give credit to claim fair use. -- NE2 23:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I very much like the idea of a bus Wiki project. This way, users in every large city will be encouraged to write about individual bus lines in the hometowns. I have lived in Baltimore most of my life, and though I have been on buses in other cities, I am only familiar with the details of the system in Baltimore.
I have obtained much of my information from old and current bus schedules (unfortunately, I do not have many dating back to before 1990, around the time I had started to frequently ride buses; these also cannot be placed on the web easily as references), news articles (mostly from the Baltimore Sun), Baltimore streetcar books, which can be found at the local library and at Barnes and Noble, the Baltimore Transit Archives website (which is not perfectly sufficient), and from a recent visit to the Baltimore Streetcar Museum, which supplied me with a 1929 map of the streetcars and other assistance. I have not found MTA to be very helpful in this regard.
During the early 90s, when I was a big bus rider, I was always curious about the history of the buses, and how the routes were shaped, but little if any information was available. I was able to obtain some back by asking other riders, though much of it was conflicting, and it was not perfectly reliable. My motivation for writing pages like these now is to provide others in the future with what I was unable to find back then.
Generally, the information I try to include is the current description, history, the future plans for the route, the impact it has on the communities it serves, and political issues surrounding the route. I also try to include a photo whenever possible, in order to make the article look more professional. My photos, though, are opportunity-based. Rather than traveling to the site of a particular bus and looking out for one, I take them when I happen to see them when I am in the area for some other reason. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sebwite ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC).
-- BWCNY 17:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I am just recommending that separating the article might be the best thing to do because of conflicting route types of local and express in the list. -- BWCNY 18:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
First of all, Route 144 does not carry on the New Jersey Transit bus numbering system. This route was formerly owned by Red and Tans bus company which they used their own number system. It was inherited by independently owned bus operation. Second, it is classify as a express route. Just use the reference that you sent me and plot the stops with a map. If you think it is a local route then why the company charges a premium fare on a luxury coach bus. -- BWCNY 02:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Well then just put a original research tag on the bottom of the page in which you suggested it. -- BWCNY 02:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, well, well, I cannot edit on that page because of the 3RR and so do you as I can see on that history page. Anyhow that route 144 WILL go to that page but will listed in different form and the sources are reliable. I found some sources to justify your claim. Right now, I'm doing my job to editing different pages that are not related to the bus article. -- BWCNY 03:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, then since you put the route 144 on to different article, might as well add some reasonings to the intro? BWCNY 03:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Sources that route 144 is an express route:
-- BWCNY 04:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone had already explained that and had changed the image accordingly beforehand. It did not need to be changed. JRG 04:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I've joined the group. Gherkin30 12:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
What do the "100 ft." next to each of the streets mean? It's kinda confusing to have them there. Wl219 07:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
A separate issue: I noticed you removed logos from the nav boxes on highway bridge articles like Basilone Bridge. I think you're mistaken about the fair use point. Leaving only the Rt. 95 icon fails to convey the fact that the bridge is part of the NJ Turnpike. Turnpike and 95 are a concurrency, and should be so indicated. Besides, Turnpike is the more common usage since it's unambiguous as to the fact that it's a toll road, whereas 95 could mean either freeway or toll. Wl219 07:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that the assessment should be removed from talk pages. The assessment should eventually be WP:BUS not WP:LT. I have reverted Unisouth's edit as it was messing the talk pages up. Simply south 15:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)