Talk:Toronto subway
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Toronto subway article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
Toronto subway was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Wonky daily ridership numbers
Something is way off with the daily ridership numbers. Last year they were a little less than 1 million per day average. Now it's listed as 1.5 million per day! There is no way it increased by 50% in one year.... Mattximus (talk) 23:39, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Line 5 LRV Capacity
There is some ambiguity over the maximum capacity of the Flexity Freedom LRVs used on Line 5. The Metrolinx infographic says each 5-module LRV has a capacity of 163 [1], while the Bombardier document says 251 [2]. GKarastergios (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Toronto streetcar system#Track gauge
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Toronto streetcar system#Track gauge. Joeyconnick (talk) 18:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Is the Ontario Line "under construction"?
In March, various levels of government held a ground breaking ceremony and "declared" that the line was under construction. While some news agencies mirrored the government's claim, others such as Global News and CTV News (used as the citation for this article) only reported on the event itself. On other Toronto transit projects such as Line 6 Finch West, it was not until major construction began (i.e. not including minor works such as utility relocation) that the infobox was updated to state u/c. Given that the big contracts for the Ontario Line have not even been awarded yet, it could be a while before major construction beings. BLAIXX 15:06, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- If the major contracts haven't been awarded, it sounds premature to list it as "under construction" to me. Making a bigger deal about something actually minor sounds pretty much par for the course for the current provincial government. —Joeyconnick (talk) 16:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- It is "ceremonially" under construction, but not actually under construction. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 16:51, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- iirc, Line 5 Eglinton had "ground breaking" ceremonies in 2011 and 2016! Agreed with others that the line isn't under construction yet. Turini2 (talk) 21:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- No doubt about that. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- iirc, Line 5 Eglinton had "ground breaking" ceremonies in 2011 and 2016! Agreed with others that the line isn't under construction yet. Turini2 (talk) 21:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- It is "ceremonially" under construction, but not actually under construction. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 16:51, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm going to have to be the lone dissenter here, it is officially under construction [3] from the official page of the company responsible for its construction. Many of us may have different definitions of what it means to be under construction, but that would be WP:OR. I think we must simply report what the official site says. Mattximus (talk) 01:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Calling Metrolinx a 'company' is an odd description, it's a government agency that answers directly to politicians (who are pushing a narrative that work is under way, for their own ends). As no major work has been tendered to a private firm as yet, I have to side with the previous commenters. Radagast (talk) 02:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- I think your intentions are good but "simply reporting what the official website says" is absolutely NOT what we should do on Wikipedia! It is Wikipedia policy that articles should primarily be based on secondary sources. This is because the primary/official source may be biased. To elaborate on what Radagast said, Metrolinx is an agency of the Government of Ontario which is only two months away from a general election so we need to be cautious of what they claim versus what other reliable sources are reporting. BLAIXX 14:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- To clarify what Blaixx said, the Eglinton West Subway was "officially" (i.e., ceremonially) under construction in 1994, but was filled in the next year under a new premiership. Therefore, we should use reliable secondary sources. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 16:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- That too but all I meant was that the people making the claim may be doing so for their own benefit (i.e. the government seeking re-election in June may be embellishing the progress of their major infrastructure project). BLAIXX 15:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- To clarify what Blaixx said, the Eglinton West Subway was "officially" (i.e., ceremonially) under construction in 1994, but was filled in the next year under a new premiership. Therefore, we should use reliable secondary sources. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 16:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- IF the purpose of wikipedia is not to use primary sources but secondary, then try these: [4], [5], [6], and many more. Just because you or I think it isn't under construction, if I have at least a half dozen secondary sources (including CBC, CTV, etc...) and they all say it has begun, it's WP:OR is it not? Mattximus (talk) 20:27, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Neither the tunnelling contract, the stations designs contract, the rolling stock contract, the signalling contract or any other major engineering contract has been awarded. Ergo, it's not yet under construction - remember there's a general election two months away, and Metrolinx is in the business of making the Government look good. Turini2 (talk) 20:37, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- The CBC and CTV articles you linked do not say that the line is under construction, they say that the government says that the line is under construction. There is a difference. BLAIXX 21:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have read both articles and both said what Blaixx said. There is a difference between what the provincial government says and what the journalists say, especially given what journalistic standards reliable sources abide by. At least the CBC and CTV are being honest in this case, unlike certain clickbait sources (such as BlogTO). Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 01:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Is a black version of the system map permitted?
I made a system map with a black background because I feel it looks better than the white version, but would a black version violate copyright because it's so close to the official TTC version? Transportfan70 (talk) 05:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that a black version of your map would be fine copyright wise - however, I feel that a black background version is significantly less readable and useful for readers than a white background map. Therefore I think the status quo is best. Turini2 (talk) 10:00, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Here's the black version I made with Line 5 open (would be uploaded to article after opening): See if you think it's appropriate when enlarged:
- Transportfan70 (talk) 04:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- yeah it looks fine copyright wise, but I think a white version is much nicer and more readable than that - given accessibility considerations, we should probably stick with the white. Turini2 (talk) 19:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- I like the black background but I cannot see UP clearly on it. Also what does the skinny part of line 5 represent? It's not "above ground" because it is not made skinny elsewhere above ground. Mattximus (talk) 15:09, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- The skinny part is the street-running segment and the thick part is where it has full grade separation from car and pedestrian traffic. BLAIXX 15:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- I thought of the UP looked too dark and lightened it. I can lighten it more. Transportfan70 (talk) 17:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- The UP logo needs more lightening. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- Just reuploadedTransportfan70 (talk) 01:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- The UP logo needs more lightening. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- Former good article nominees
- Old requests for peer review
- B-Class rail transport articles
- High-importance rail transport articles
- B-Class Rapid transit articles
- Unknown-importance Rapid transit articles
- WikiProject Rapid transit articles
- All WikiProject Trains pages
- B-Class Canada-related articles
- Mid-importance Canada-related articles
- B-Class Ontario articles
- Mid-importance Ontario articles
- B-Class Toronto articles
- Top-importance Toronto articles
- All WikiProject Canada pages
- Wikipedia articles that use Canadian English