Jump to content

Talk:Bus operators in Sydney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Bus operators in Sydney. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:33, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Bus operators in Sydney. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:24, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to reinstate Sydney Metropolitan Bus Service Contracts

[edit]

It has been proposed that the redirect Sydney Metropolitan Bus Service Contracts be reinstated as a stand-alone article.

Support, should be a stand-alone article. The redirect appears to be one of those instigated by an editor who restructured many Sydney bus articles leaving a horrible mess. The target article is a high level overview with large sections of uncited text. See no benefit in merging this compact, reasonably well cited article. Ponyo98 (talk) 02:39, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Currently present in this article and as a standalone article. It should be deleted from this article and remain as a standalone one. The comments about the mess made by a certain editor are supported - also see Talk:Suburban bus routes in Sydney where I am proposing to clean up a lot of his mess.Fleet Lists (talk) 03:18, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Turingway Gareth This problem started in March 2016 when the editor who started all the problems merged three articles into other articles without consultation. They were all reversed except that the region article was not removed from the Bus Operator page so it sat there duplicated until January 2018 when someone noticed the duplication and corrected it by changing the page itself back to a redirect which was the wrong way of doing it. It appears that the editor who did the original reversal, the one who moved it back yesterday, the one who moved it today and myself all favour the standalone approach. It is strongly recommended that it be removed from the Bus Operators page.Fleet Lists (talk) 04:45, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's good this is now being discussed. The time to revert without discussion was in January or maybe February. The merged article is established as the current silent consensus. As such, it should remain merged until this discussion has concluded. I disapprove of the attempts to reverse the "burden of consensus" so that the status quo is somehow required to prove its right to remain. And the reverts came without edit summaries explaining why a stand-alone article is considered a good thing.
As to the actual content, I find the table rather confused. It deals with the start of competitive tendering but also drifts into the modern day with TSA taking over region 6. It includes operators that weren't subject to the competitive tender process. I think the table should be split to cover the current contracts/operators and the older stuff should be reconstituted in some way. And I don't see much value in the "boundaries" column. Regardless of where this content ends up, I think we need to sort it out as it will only get more messy in the future. Gareth (talk) 17:25, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have addressed two issues. Firstly removed the boundaries column which I agree served no purpose.Secondly showed a + against contracts which were not tendered which should solve that problem. Otherwise I have no difficulty with the contents and as such this version of the table should be moved to the standalone article and not the one in there restored.Fleet Lists (talk) 23:05, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was the editor that changed it into the redirect in January 2018 because there was a duplication with almost identical content, so it would make sense to make it a redirect. But as the editor that largely contributed to the Sydney Metropolitan Bus Service Contracts page throughout the whole of 2014, my original intention was to keep it a standalone page similar to the Outer Sydney one (in which I created to mirror Sydney). Given that Transit Systems Sydney have successfully taken over Region 6, there is now a lot to be expanded about region contracting and now it makes sense to separate it as a standalone page as before. The bus operators section in Bus operators in Sydney can have a "main" tag directing to Sydney Metropolitan Bus Service Contracts for more details about contract details and past operators of the regions.Marcnut1996 (talk) 10:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The inclusion of this map would be useful. Agree the table is a bit confusing, maybe a simpler table with more of the detail in prose would be better. Would be of value to add somethingon each of the regions with a broad description of the areas each serves and the contracting history, e.g.
Region 1 services operate in the Blacktown, Hawkesbury and Penrith local government areas serving the Blacktown, Penrith, Windsor and Richmond areas. Originally encompassing the existing services of Busways, Hawkesbury Valley Buses and Westbus, since 6 October 2013 all services have been operated by Busways after a competitive tendering process. Ponyo98 (talk) 05:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have today cleaned up 10 of the region map references in the table to archived versions so that they work and also added in the heading a reference to an archived version of the map suggested by the previous editor. Hence the table in this article is now much more up to date that the one in the standalone article and this table should be used when the suggested move takes place hopefully in the near future. I also support short paragraphs about each region replacing parts of the table as suggested. Such information was present until recently in a waffled format in the article on Local Bus Services where it was totally out of place. Including the information in the standalone article would finalise the clean up of these various articles which I have been doing over the past few weeks.Fleet Lists (talk) 04:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be clear consensus to split, so I've done it. Gareth (talk) 05:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Turingway Gareth Ponyo98 Marcnut1996 I have started a draft of this where I have done away with the table but describe in prose what has happened to each region since 2005 in User:Fleet Lists/sandbox I have done the first 11 regions with four to go and also still need to move quite a few references into it. But I would like to see some comments on this before I go much further. Please feel free to edit it if you feel it can be improved. Fleet Lists (talk) 08:06, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bus_operators_in_Sydney&oldid=1200472525"