Talk:Expo Line (SkyTrain)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Need For Disambiguation Page

I changed this to a disambiguation page because I was trying to add the various other uses of Expo Line that need disambiguation:

 Expo Line (SkyTrain)
 Expo Line (Los Angeles Metro)
 Line 13, Shanghai Metro which is also known as the "Expo Line"

(I didn't even have a chance to add the last one before User:Walter_Görlitz attacked my change.)

If I did this incorrectly, I apologize to everybody. But I certainly don't think I created a "mess", as User:Walter_Görlitz called it.

Jcovarru (talk) 01:16, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

With that few articles to disambiguate, all that would've been needed was a hatnote on the Vancouver page. Although I guess whether it is the primary topic could be debatable. --TorriTorri^{(Talk to me!)} 01:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted the move for now, pending a full discussion. --Ckatz^chat_spy 01:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

It was a mess in that this disambiguation page seems to be standing in the way of moving the old page back. What would you call it? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Allow me to elaborate. Eleven (11) portal pages point to this article. Six (5) Templates point here. 115 articles point here. So you moved the article and the others still pointed to the original page, which you turned into a disambiguation page.

Also, one usually discusses this sort of thing rather than doing it. Please see Help:Moving a page. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

So sorry guys, I redid the move and already started fixing links before I realized what was going on and this move - revert had happened. Rather than using religious references to Wikipedia edits, I used a Wikipedia directive - which is simply: "Be Bold." Even though the Vancouver Expo line wiki has been around longer, I could easily argue that the Los Angeles version has actually been in existence longer and/or that there is simply more media coverage of the Los Angeles Expo, line making it more suitable for the main "Expo Line" page with hat note to the Vancouver version.

However, because this could easily turn into a pissing contest and because there are conceivably more (non transit) uses for the term "Expo Line" (as evidenced by searching that term), I opted to move the Vancouver version to the name Expo Line (TransLink) following the existing convention for other TranLink systems with conflicting names.

Los Angeles Expo is exponentially gaining coverage in online reference and is searched for more often than Vancouver. Doing this now, while a pain in the ass, is easier than doing it later and provides a better, clearer user experience for the reader who when searching would probably have no idea there were two systems with the same name. It also levels the field, eliminating any need for a pissing/importance contest.

Rather than go back and re-do the work, what's the best way to move forward? Sorry again for the mix-up. Lexlex (talk) 22:08, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Now you have to fix all the linked articles that incorrectly point to the disambiguation page. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'll take my medicine. Lexlex (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, I have finished anything of import/templates and the bots seem to be taking care of the rest. Please let me know if I missed anything, but I think we're done! Lexlex (talk) 04:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Verifying ridership numbers

There are new ridership numbers in the info boxes for most stations now. Thank you to the anonymous contributor. The facts are not currently cited, but instructions to verify have been offered by the contributor. Discussion is here: Verification/calculation procedure for transit ridership numbers. I hope these facts can remain, but we have to come up with a way to cite them so future readers can verify the facts. Note that the instructions are not easy (I have been unable to verify), but I don't know if this really matters. Another editor noted that the figures may be from a Primary Source and, thus, not as good as if the information was reported by a reliable Secondary Source. Anyways, the discussion is probably best centralized over here, rather than here or in individual station article talk pages. --Ds13 (talk) 21:45, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Possible extension to Langley along Fraser Highway

I read somewhere on the TransLink website regarding the possible extension of the line to Langley. Should we include that into the article? Cganuelas (talk) 21:40, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

That is covered under "Future extensions". Ideally, given the age of the documents used to source the info and the fact they've been supplanted by more recent official plans (like the current 10-Year plan), I would possibly change the name of that section to something like "Former extension plans" or "Past extension plans", because, despite it being in the broader "History" section, it makes it seem like such an extension is likely or "in the cards"/"on the drawing board" when, in reality, the 10-Year plan specifies the LRT proposal and there's nothing formal being planned regarding SkyTrain to Langley. That may change, of course, but right now there's nothing reliable and concrete (people's wishful thinking notwithstanding) to point towards such an extension ever being built. Joeyconnick (talk) 03:04, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Can we put a "Possible future extension east" with that pictogram thing I keep trying and failing to add as a placeholder until something is confirmed? Cganuelas (talk) 05:17, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Map?

a map please? 70.26.9.51 (talk) 14:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:SkyTrain (Vancouver)#reverting mass changes to SkyTrain stations, May 2018

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:SkyTrain (Vancouver)#reverting mass changes to SkyTrain stations, May 2018. Joeyconnick (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC) —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Verification of commencement date of the Expo Line

People were first given the opportunity to ride the Skytrain from the Expo Site to Canada Place back in 1986 during the World's Fair. The line wasn't made active for several years afterwards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newb787 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)