Talk:Unitrans

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

University of California Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics 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.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This page is within the scope of the UC Davis task force. New members are always welcome!

Unitrans RT1235 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT4735 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT3572 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT3123 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT1523 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT2819 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT3889 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Unitrans RT742 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 August 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Unitrans. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Information of the New Enviro 500

Now the new double-decks are running, I am sad to find no information of them up here. Anyone wants to provide an update? I only have a picture to post here.

--Ctzcheng (talk) 09:02, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"unsourced" tag

The "History" section was recently tagged with unsourced. A large part of this section is drawn from primary sources on the unitrans.ucdavis.edu site, and posted here on behalf of the original author (with his permission). http://web.archive.org/web/20000301210427/unitrans.ucdavis.edu/aboutus.html

How best to cite this section? -- PxT 17:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that I decided to wait to see what you had to say about this rather than me trying to dig up a bunch of sources. Anyway, I'm not sure if you're asking about the format that you should use for the citation or something different, but if it is a question of format I've done it this way for other articles:

Ohio Museum of Transportation - Flxible Transit Coach Production Lists, omot.org, archived on 2005-08-28 on archive.org, retrieved on 2007-02-04

I seem to remember stumbling upon something in or linked from WP:CITE when I found this format, as opposed to just coming up with it myself.

Spicoli 18:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess my question was how best to cite a reference that encompasses an entire section. I've added a seaparate "References" section and noted the link with an explanation. Hopefully that is sufficient. Anyone please feel free to edit if not. PxT 15:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

London Buses in a LHD environment.

The buses Pictured have the passenger door on the left hand side at the back, did this not cause major problems in SF were the door would be out in the road, also I didn't see any mention of conducters, the busses in the first picture are all two man buses so the article should at least mention the conducters.(Morcus (talk) 01:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Pages for every bus??

(Since I cannot think of a better place to propose this question, I'm putting it here.) Why do we need a Wikipedia page for every single UNITRANS bus? I cannot imagine anyone outside the city of Davis caring about such a thing. There's always Davis Wiki for that sort of thing. Is there any reason why everyone of those pages ought to not be deleted? RobertM525 (talk) 02:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll admit that I'm a bit of an inclusionist (if that's even a word), but I'm of the mindset "why not? It's not hurting anything". Granted, there is the Davis Wiki, but it is far less known, and there are a lot of Unitrans alumni (such as myself) who don't live in Davis anymore. Spicoli (talk) 03:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think these buses meet the notability criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. RobertM525 (talk) 10:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion seems to have gone dormant but I'm going to attempt to restore it. The buses themselves don't seem notable per WP:GNG. If we did this for every bus company there would be far too many articles to cope with. However, the information in these articles is good and should be kept in some form. So how about merging them into grouped articles such as Unitrans AEC Regents or something similar? Alzarian16 (talk) 12:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unitrans as SF Bay Area Public Transit?

It seems incorrect to include UniTrans in Sna Francisco Bay Area Public Transportation. Yolo county is not part of the bay area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.101.7.196 (talk) 05:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was there a reason for the London buses ?

I have seen London buses is a few places a long way from London and sometimes as an advertising thing or what I'd call a speciality; and mostly as singletons, not always running. It's an agreeable thing, but I wonder was there a reason for this collection being looked after over there ? Was there any personal connection or some other interesting reason ? Midnight Hour (talk) 08:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full fleet development

Can you tell me the full fleet development? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clrichey (talk • contribs) 06:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]