Talk:Toronto subway rolling stock

Rolling stock tables

I'm thinking of dividing the Rolling stock table into two: current and retired rolling stock. That would allow us to add pictures without leaving blanks (I don't think Wikipedia has pictures for all of the H-series or G-series). Pictures are very important in the table because I don't think the average reader would recognize the trains by name alone.Reaperexpress (talk) 00:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Against: Two tables requires more updating as vehicles come and go. A gallery would be better, as it also allows for captions. Useddenim (talk) 13:22, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Against: Agree with previous poster 2 tables would not only create more work and visual clutter, a Gallery would be much better, would allow for captions and would create less visual clutter in the table itself. eja2k 15:06, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Why does the G-4 come before the G-3 in the table?Reaperexpress (talk) 02:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Because they're in numerical order. The G-4s were also experimental, so they were numbered in after the other experimental cars (rather than using up another number block). Useddenim (talk) 04:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Clean up proposal

This article is a bit of a mess. I have a few suggestions that I would like to gather input on regarding some cleanup and formatting changes.

1. Move all pictures from the table of vehicles to an expanded gallery below the table

• this would help with formatting and clean up some visual clutter in the table and would remove duplicate pictures which are currently in both the table and the gallery

2. Remove the long and rather trivial list of every Toronto Rocket unit and when it has entered service

• This whole exercise seems to be un-encyclopedic and is of little relevance to the article

3. Cut down the section on the Toronto Rocket

• There is already an article about the Train which is linked in this article, duplicating every detail in two articles introduces redundancy and takes away from the focus of this article

4. Introduce a brief sections on the G, M, H and T-1 series fleet with appropriate hat note/redirection to the parent articles

• If the article is a fleet overview having a section on only the most recent train model smacks of recentism

5. Support all changes with properly cited references

• There is a whole lot of unreferenced information in this article

Please discus how you think we should proceed below. eja2k 22:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I recommend that the minutiae about the Toronto Rocket should be moved to the Toronto Rocket article and leave only an overview of the Toronto Rocket in this article. Otherwise, I agree with eja2k's suggestions. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 22:40, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks sufficiently cleaned up. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 00:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Clean up commencing

I have started the clean up I still don't really like the exhastive listing of when each train enters service it doesn't seem to be relevant to the article and I've been hard pressed to find any other example of such a detailed list on any similar articles. That said untill a final consensuses can be made regarding this Unreferenced data i will leave it here so that it does not become entirely lost. eja2k 19:29, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Numbers! Entered service 5381-5386 June - 2012 5391-5396 Prototype Train , on TTC property 5401-5406 October- 2011 5411-5416 July- 2011C 5421-5426 August- 2011 5431-5436 September -2011 5441-5446 October- 2011 5451-5456 mid-October 2011 5461-5466 late-October 2011 5471-5476 mid-November 2011 5481-5486 December 2011 5491-5496 mid-December 2011 5501-5506 late- December 2011 5511-5516 late -January 2012 5521-5526 early- March 2012 5531-5536 late- March 2012 5541-5546 mid-April 2012 5551-5556 late April 2012 5561-5566 mid-May 2012 5571-5576 5581-5586 5591-5596 5601-5606 5611-5616 5621-5626 5631-5636 5641-5646 5651-5656 5661-5666 5671-5676 5681-5686 5691-5696 5701-5706 5711-5716 5721-5726 5731-5736 5741-5746 5751-5756 5761-5766 5771-5776 5781-5786 5791-5796 5801-5806 5811-5816 5821-5826 5831-5836 5841-5846 5851-5856 5861-5866 5871-5876 5881-5886 5891-5896 5901-5906 5911-5916 5921-5926 5931-5936 5941-5946 5951-5956 5961-5966 5971-5976 5981-5986 5991-5996 6001-6006 6011-6016 6021-6026 6031-6036 6041-6046 6051-6056 6061-6066 6071-6076

^C 5411-5416 taken out for a few days in late August 2011 to clean up graffiti

• This looks like original research at best. It would be better for the article if this list were removed. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 20:59, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• I agree. None of this trivia is sourced. I normally just igonore this because of the overwhelming feel of OR. There probably is a legitimate source - but it's being kept a secret because it may be another wiki. This needs more than cleaned - it needs to be sandpapered down and polished up. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
  • They have been removed. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

References

Disappointingly, this article is missing key information

Disappointingly, this article is missing key information -- like the vehicle's:

• dimension,
• speed,
• passenger capacity,
• and number of doors.

I am old enough to remember that the old red vehicles had just three doors per side, and were normally operated in trainsets of eight vehicles, while all newer vehicles have had four doors per side, and were normally operated in trainsets of six vehicles. (Six new vehicles were essentially the same length as eight old vehicles.) Geo Swan (talk) 15:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Work cars section needs to be updated

The work cars section of this article is outdated and kind of disorganised. In order to make it easier to follow, I think it'd be best if the table were split into active and inactive vehicles. There's also a lot of definitely outdated/incorrect info that I'd like to fix, (e.g. old retired vehicles still listed as active, which Hawkers were retired and which were renumbered, whatever's going on with RT-11 and its two list entries?) but there are very few sources on work cars and they all seem to be out of date as well. Deltaultra (talk) 02:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Please note any updates require reputable 3rd party sources. —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm new. My point still stands, though; this article hosts false info. There is definitely not a 115-year-old train still in operation.

I've scrounged up this PDF from a TTC board meeting in May which includes a list of all currently active work cars on its fourth page. Is that good enough? I know it's a primary source, but this is a list of trains. If an up-to-date third party source existed, it would say the same thing. Deltaultra (talk) 03:23, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

It's certainly better than nothing. Really this article shouldn't have details on individual trains and their status because we are WP:NOTAGUIDE nor are we a specialist website devoted to rail transport. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:05, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe the whole section could be collapsed into the different utilities work cars are used for? Like, one list entry for all four of the active tunnel washers, for example. It'd still leave quite a few individual trains with their own entries, but the section would be more in line with the rest of the page. Deltaultra (talk) 02:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)