Talk:ACTION/Archive 1

Archive 1

I've changed the category for this article from Canberra as part of the effort to tidy up the Canberra/ACT categories]]. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canberra#Category:Canberra Adz 07:18, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

The bus route 170

i did delete bus route 170. The Reason i did delete route 170 because somebody did keep deleteing my new 300 route bus. Which really hate that. this is fun place for me and You people out there to use on the internet.

I just promise if you say sorry to me. i can undo Route 170 and let me have new 300 route bus in this webpage this is Very good deal and please make a deal with me now please people. Chao!!!

New 300 Bus Route

I just adding some information new New 300 Bus Route did start this year 1st of January 2008 http://www.action.act.gov.au/2006NewRoutes/Route_Intertown_300.cfm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 04:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

this is stupid because somebody keep delete my New 300 Bus Route and it really not fair.

i will delete something soon untill somebody saying sorry to me now —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 09:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• There is no new route numbered 300, the 300 has been around since the Beginning of Network 2006 and Runs from Tuggeranong to Belconnen, via Erindale on Weekends. The New bus routes planned to start this year will be edited accordingly when the routes change over early this year. When this happens, the routes will be changed overnight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kommissar todd06 (talk • contribs) 11:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

reverted warning

I've reverted a 'warning to tourists' in this article (16 Jan 2005 version) for a number of reasons, but if others feel that it should stay in the article then i think it should be discussed first. Firstly, I think that a source should be cited for the 'warning'. My experience of the Belconnen and Woden interchanges (albeit limited) would not suggest that they warrant a warning. There are interchanges in other parts of the country and other parts of the world that are more problematic. Also, I'm not sure that a 'warning to tourists' is encyclopedic. If there have been news reports or warnings issued by police that are considered notable, then they should be included in that context and cited, but not included as a 'warning to tourists'. -- Adz|talk 01:54, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough (remove tourist advisory)

I put the warning there after relatives complained about the Woden interchange. There is definitely a problem with crime in the afternoons, particularly at Civic and Woden, but I agree that other interchanges around the world are often far worse.

Retrospectively, I stand by your decision to remove my entry until proper crime figures can be cited.

Environmentally friendly?

Article says "The new buses are comparatively environmentally friendly". How so? Do they run on natural gas? -- Barrylb 04:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• The Scania L94UBs are CNG powered, I don't know about the Irisbuses but I can't see a gas pod in any photos. SM247^{My Talk} 11:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Changes to the Page

User Josh 710 has been making changes to the page which makes no sense, and deleting/editing parts which do not need to be deleted or edited as the make perfect sense. Could this user please stop making changes to the page, especially when they do not make sense, are not spelt correctly, and the grammar is terrible. I have put alot of hard work into this page I do not want to see it ruined. user will be reported to Wiki.

• Please dont report me because

i just want to have fun in this forum

i know i have poor english skill i cant help it

PLEASE DONT BANNED ME —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• im not ruined you action website mate

i just want give you information about new 300 bus routle

so please dont banne me

im am getting angy now

so please dont report me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• SO please dont Banned and reportme

i just want to add information new bus routle

the new route is 300 PLease trust me now —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hello People

i just promise i wont change anything if you say sorry to me now

and let me have new 300 bus routle information please that a deal

cya soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Josh710

I NEED SOME HELP Moderator Kommissar Todd06 is being bad rude to me all day now he keep delete ing my information now

so please help me Moderator —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest user "Josh710" should refrain from editing this article.

You are removing actual FACTS and INFORMATION as some sort of "revenge" for when people remove your incorrect information. If you want to edit this article, please follow proper netiquette, and make sure your information, not to mention spelling and grammar, is correct

EXCUSE ME I GOT POOR ENGLISH SKILL IN HERE AND I CANT DO ANYTHING ABOUT ME

I was born with NO english skill in here.

please people dont tell me how to do anything I want to make a simply easy deal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 10:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Article protected

This article is now protected. Please discuss your edits here, not through edit summaries whilst reverting. When you can come up with an agreement, request the page be unprotected on WP:RFPP. Thanks, Majorly (talk) 11:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

• The last edit by kommissar todd06 is the last factually correct edit of the page as it removes information not required as edited by other user (Including information edited accordingly when first post by user made, just re worded), and re-adds route 170 information removed. The last edit was at 11:16 12 Feb. Kommissar Todd06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kommissar todd06 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE HELP ME moderator Kommissar Todd06 is being very rude to me he keep delete my information.

i am really angry now

CAN YOU SAY SORRY TO ME Kommissar Todd06

PLEASE PLEASE Kommissar Todd06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE SAY SORRY TO ME Kommissar Todd06

im am really really angry with you now —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I can say that getting angry at another user won't help the situation. As you can see, an admin protected the article to stop the edit war. Now what you can do is post the text that you would like to be included in the article on this talk page, and why it should be included, as well. It is necessary to include reliable, third -party sources. Once you post the information and why it should be included, other users can discuss--in a polite manner--why the information should or shouldn't be included. Once a consensus is reached, you can post a request at WP:RFPP, as Majorly said above. Hopefully that helps explain things for you, if not, feel free to post a message at my talk page. Icestorm815 • Talk 19:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

User "Josh710" appears to have removed information regarding Route 170, a commuter express sertvice, as listed on ACTION's website. This information is correct, (See: http://action.act.gv.au) and should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.33.223 (talk) 06:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• Basically as above, the route 170 was removed when it should not have been, and under the Xpresso header, the sentence with route 117 needs to be changed to 170.

The following sentence under Intertown needs to be deleted: And year of (2006) new route start is 300 where these services And replaced with Of which served the four Interchanges and suburbs at either end

The New Route 300 is not actually a new route, and has been around since before 2006, the only change to it is that it travels via Erindale on the Weekends. This was the main problem point, as information was added by Josh710 and edited to be gramatically correct by myself, just removed the Examples. A link was also added by Josh710, however I moved that to the top under services with 'Detailed Timetable information and be found at [URL]' so it was more prominent on the page, and covered all routes including 300. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kommissar todd06 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The following sentence in the "Commuter Express" section is incorrect and should be removed. There is no route 180.

"The exception to this is the 180, which is classed as an Xpresso Route and is the only such route not numbered in the 700's." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.33.223 (talk) 06:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Ticket prices

Does there really need to be a detailed list of ticket prices on a Wiki page? IMO a link to the operator's website listing the fares would be more appropriate. Somebody in the WWW (talk) 05:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

If there are no objections to removing it then I will do so later. Somebody in the WWW (talk) 09:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I see no point in removing that section aslong as it is kept simple, or basically the way it is. As ACTION has a simplistic fare structure, then there is no real harm to it being there. --Kommissar todd06 (talk) 06:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory, or to be specific, the "sales catalogs" header. Somebody in the WWW (talk) 09:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I would say listing what ticket types are available, where they are sold, etc is okay. Listing how much they cost is not. Wongm (talk) 09:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with Wongm - perhaps a simple listing of what fare products are available is most appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.33.223 (talk) 08:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

And now it is done! Wongm (talk) 08:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Edits on 24 April 2008

I've made changes to the page. I have not changed the structure of the information, just made some edits to improve the style and accuracy of what is presented and also added more links.

-- Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.163.137.163 (talk) 08:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

There are a two matters which need more work / confirmation. I do not know the model name of the Hino mini buses used for SNT, and there is no information about them on any fleet list that I've seen (so I can't say how many there are).

Also, I do not have an exact date for the completion of the City Interchange remodel. I have put down 2000 based on what is shown on bus maps, but it could have been done in 1999.

-- Martin 58.163.136.154 (talk) 23:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

New Bus Routes/Timetables

There are plenty of new routes as of 2 June 2008 and many changes including services of all 300 series routes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.63.59 (talk) 08:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Page updated to reflect the changed services -- Martin 58.163.137.245 (talk) 09:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Fixing up my mistake

Hello People I need someone to From Canberra who willing my to fix my mistake. Just Revert with No Comment. If you do that People I promise i wont edit on the Action Bus Information any future that a deal.

im Haveing very bad day on the Computer Today Good Bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 05:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Route lists

Would it be worth splitting the lists of routes into a separate List of Canberra bus routes article like for equivalent Australian cities, or drop-down boxes like the Busways article? Or is it even needed - most routes are not mentioned and only some intertown services and some peak routes which run a single digit number of services. I don't see those as contributing much to the article - a proper explanation would tell more. Somebody in the WWW (talk) 09:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea, particularly since somebody has added much more extensive route information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.33.223 (talk) 04:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

As the "somebody" who put in all the recent information on Canberra's ACTION bus routes, I would like to note that the listing is comprehensive. It covers all regular bus routes and makes references to relevant intertown and peak routes under the relevant general bus routes.

I do believe that it is a useful set of information for inclusion in Wikipedia. On this point, I find it bemusing that we can have pages of information on Wikipedia covering the actual buses themselves, going into glorious detail about different bus body and chasis configurations, the age of the buses and at which depot they are located (see some of the Wikipedia pages covering London or New York bus services as examples of this), and yet the provision of timetable based information that actually is of use to people wishing to use a bus service is regarded as not "contributing much to the article"!

I have no problems with the idea of the list being put into a separate article as suggested by Somebody in the WWW, but I would think it would be a pity if it was considered that the information that I have added is of no interest to Wikipedia readers, particularly those who may be considering using ACTION bus services now or in the future.

I would be more than happy for a further discussion on this issue and would appreciate other Wikipedia members views on my thoughts about the value of the information I have included. --Chaleyer61 (talk) 05:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Oops!! I just realised that the comment by Somebody in the WWW was back in July 2008 and was not a recent comment on my changes. Nevertheless, I would appreciate any views on the changes that I've made on whether people think my changes do add value to the ACTION bus services article and to Wikipedia. --Chaleyer61 (talk) 06:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The addition of route info is fantastic, but perhaps best suited to being in a separate article so that the main ACTION article is not too 'cluttered'. On the subject of individual bus information, there is a dedicated Wiki for this located at http://actbus.net/wiki - a work in progress but it does list things such as bus bodies, fleet numbers, depot allocation etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.33.223 (talk) 06:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I had a look at the web site you mentioned. Looks like somebody is having a lot of fun with that site. It's good to see people letting their imagination go and putting together a comprehensive bus service for Canberra. If only we had the money!  :) --Chaleyer61 (talk) 07:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I should mention I'm the owner of the wiki and the site it is a part of (www.actbus.net) - more than happy for people to source info for the wikipedia article from our site, perhaps for the history section which has an expansion request tag on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.33.223 (talk) 08:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The addition of all the route details makes the article too long. Most entries for bus services within Australia do not include this level of detail (at least not on the main page). I would prefer a separate page for Canberra bus routes which includes the other route bus services within Canberra (by which I am referring to the Deanes group). That was a hint : Chaleyer61 can you create this page since I don't have an account.

Meanwhile I have modified the structure of the Route service information and added a new Category of Bus transport in Canberra to which the bus route list, Deanes and Transborder can be added. -- Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.163.136.26 (talk) 07:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Martin, Ryan(?) Thank you for your comments and suggestions. I will work now on setting up a new Wikipedia article called Canberra bus routes. --Chaleyer61 (talk) 08:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)