Talk:Public transport bus service

Buses Top‑importance

	Buses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Buses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of buses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusesWikipedia:WikiProject BusesTemplate:WikiProject Busesbus transport articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Transport

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Addition?

Please add the safety info based on the following, if one have time

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=414679423BD782852FAA4BDFA160A368?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkhtml&contentId=872437

http://www.atypon-link.com/ALEX/doi/abs/10.2148/benv.34.1.88

http://www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/pdf/JPT11-2Pulugurtha.pdf --222.64.29.178 (talk) 03:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Express bus service

Lacks notability for its own page. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 02:56, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Transit bus

Oppose While notability is indeed a bit of an issue, I'm thinking that the format of the combined article is a bigger problem. How will it present itself going forward? (it takes more than content to improve notability) --SteveCof00 (talk) 10:56, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some new additions and fixups

Hi everyone, just letting you all know my most recent edits, I have spruced up the article by removing unnecessary images and clearing up thumbnails to easily read galleries. I've also added some bits. Please let me know upon reply of this message on whether you like it before reverting it, as I love feedback if possible. --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 06:46, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

,इवुउउ#उ?व्य्य

बुस 103.167.233.75 (talk) 16:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to "Transit bus service"

"Public transport" is pretentious and clumsy. In my own experience, and ccording to my Google Ngrams, "Transit" is much more common. "Public transport" is more common in British English than American English, but even there "Transit" is more common. The article itself uses "Transit" in places.

Unless somebody objects, I'm going to rename and edit accordingly. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 23:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to changing the entire article to American English, but I completely disagree that the term "public transport" is "pretentious", it's commonly used in Commonwealth countries. I would never use "public transit" to refer to public train/bus/ferry/similar services as an Australian English speaker, "public transport" is the common term for this. Fork99 (talk) 23:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, "pretentious" is a subjective evaluation, but so is "I would never use." Let's fall back to the Google NGrams data. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 00:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just did an Ngram search myself for "public transport" and "public transit", and "public transport" wins out by far. See [1]. Perhaps you did "public transport" vs "transit"? I think that would provide inaccurate results because "transit" could refer to things outside of this topic, like "transiting flights" or "I'm transiting through X country to get to Y country". Fork99 (talk) 00:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you're right. Never mind. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 00:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, if you add "mass transit" to the comparison, nowadays it falls below the graph for the other two terms, but had a spike in the 1980s. Fork99 (talk) 01:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, this smells of debates from many years ago - the diversity of terminology in transport (very specifically rail was a major component) was sorted close to fifteen years ago with the american continent having terminology that is variant from british, and again from europe, and then as Fork99 points out australia/new zealand have variants. I do think respect for the variants is very important, and just because a logarithm defined money oriented aggregator of sorts combines things, is not a reason to come to a decision to change. JarrahTree 00:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, jumping into an argument that's already been decided is pretty obnoxious. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 00:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]