Talk:Trams in Helsinki/Archive 1

Archive 1

Northernmost tram network?

Am I wrong, or is this the northernmost tram network in the world? If so, I think it would be worth mentioning in the text.. --213.186.238.198 18:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting thought... it should be noted though that the city of Bergen is just a tad more north than hHelsinki (but very slightly, maybe 10km) and the article on Bergen says "The tram system was closed in 1965, although a museum line still operates on Møhlenpris." also the Turku netowrk that once was was also to teh north of Helsinki. So at least it would have to be the operational tram network. Gillis 21:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Gävle, Sundsvall and Kiruna (all Swedish ex-tram towns) are also more north than Helsinki. Since the closure of the Arkhangelsk system 2,5 years ago, the nothernmost tram route is to be found in Trondheim, Norway. Piirka 18:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Spårakoff pub tram

If anyone is active on Finnish Wikipedia (and a native speaker...), I notice that there's currently no article for fi:Spårakoff. Does anyone feel up to creating a stub-article. (Currently there's en:Spårakoff and da:Spårakoff). —Sladen (talk) 14:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Kulosaari tram ferry

Somewhere in the reshuffle, the information about the Kulosaari tram ferry got dropped:

10 Helsinki–Sörnäinen–Kulosaari, tram ferry operation to the island of Kulosaari aboard a steamship 1910–1919.

This operation was (as far as I know) fairly unique/rare and I think it might be good if it can be slipped back in; there's more information out there[1][2] for those able to parse Finnish more efficiently than I can... —Sladen (talk) 02:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

That is the same as the "white line" listed on the 1909—1926 section. Tram lines in Helsinki were not numbered at the time, so the 10 has got to be a mistake, and there was only one line ever into Kulosaari. However, the info about the ferry should probably be added—I'm putting it in now. -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 09:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you for sorting out the clarity. I guess I got confused, as five years after the tram ferry disappeared (and a bridge appeared...), the White line became Line 10. I haven't been another to work out the name of the Steam-ship involved in the operation, this would be good to track down if possible, but I haven't had any success. —Sladen (talk) 14:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem, it's a pleasure to work on this stuff. And yeah, it is confusing with there having been four different White lines, with two (the later B/KB and the later 10) sharing the same colour for a number of years. Which is actually very odd, the "white 10" was essentially a short extension of yellow / 3 and and it would have made a lot more sente to use yellow as it's colour instead...

Additional info (possibly an article too) on the steam ferry used for the trams would be neat to have. I've got some (well, a lot of) connections to Finnish ship enthustiast circles, so I might be able to find out something if I make a few queries. -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 15:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

And then it turns out I didn't need to look so far - Finnish Tramway Society's page on the history of the tramway to Kulosaari mentions the ferry's name - unsurprisingly it was Brändö. -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 18:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Map

Although the self-made tram map is neat, is there really need for it? I'm talking about this map:

There's an official map of far better quality available via the external links. I know that we're not allowed to use that map in the article, but do we need to? --Siipikarja 15:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the map is very nice to have. Updating that map wouldn't be such a hugely difficult job, I've actually been meaning to do it for a while now, but more "important" things seem to always get in the way. But as long as the only available usable map is out-of-date, it might be prudent to remove it. -- Kjet 20:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

---

Right. Good to hear somebody is active in this topic. Since we already have the official map, there's no need to re-invent the wheel. The official map serves well as a topological map, but perhaps not as well as a logical map because of all the background layers (houses, roads, etc.).

File:MTR System Map.png

Therefore, I'm suggesting that if you, or anyone else, are/is willing to create a new map, he/she should use the accompanying subway map of Hong Kong as a guideline. It is clear and simple, yet informative.

• In the background we just two colors: blue and white.
• In the foreground we have the color coded lines with enough contrast to the background. Also, the lines are broadly speaking in their correct geographical positions. But more importantly, they are logically correct and fit in small space. Using this scheme, the blueprint of line 8 in Helsinki tram could look like (using ASCII craphics):

                               |
                               |
                  +------------+
                 /
                /
               /
              +
              |
              |
       -------+      

Well, you get the point. Also it would be even more nice if there were individual "straight line" maps for each tram line as in the following picture:

File:Island Line.png

What comes to the Swedish names, I think they should be left out, since we're dealing with English Wikipedia here. The best format for the graphics is the vector (svg) format. --Siipikarja 13:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm dead certain I already wrote a reply to your above comment earlier tonight, but apparently I didn't. So, abridged version of that: I agree about simplifying the map, it will also be easier to draw that way. I'm not convinced about having a straigth line graphic for each individual line, as far as I can see there would really be no particular use for them, unless someone wishes to create a separate article for each line (which would seem a little superfluous to me). Also agreed about the Swedish names, although it might be nice to create a second version with swedish names that could be used in sv Wiki (and the other Scandinavians if they have an article on this subject). Now I just need to learn to do vector graphics... -- Kjet 20:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Leaving out the Swedish names is in my humble opinion not a good idea as they are indeed official names for the stations and are listed as such on the stations themselves... it's not as if it takes up that much more space. Gillis 16:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

New Maps by Kjet

I have now created new maps based on the style outlines laid out by Siipikarja above. And since I'm crazy, I made six different variants of the map: as it appears now (minus the temporary reroutings of lines 1 and 3), as it will appear next month after the opening of line 9, and as it will appear next year after the reroutings of lines 3B and 3T. And all of those maps have different versions in Finnish and Swedish - not because I'd have anything against Swedish, but the maps got fairly crowded even with names in just one language. Below in a gallery with al lthe different versions:

• 
  Current, in Finnish
• 
  Current, in Swedish
• 
  With line 9, in Finnish
• 
  With line 9, in Swedish
• With rerouted 3B and 3T, in Finnish
  With rerouted 3B and 3T, in Finnish
• With rerouted 3B and 3T, in Swedish
  With rerouted 3B and 3T, in Swedish

All feedback and ideas for improvements are eagerly accepted. Also, if someone who speaks better Swedish than I do has the time to go over the Swedish-language image descriptions and fix all the errors I've undoubtedly made, it would be greatly appreciated. -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 07:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Kjet, excellent work with those maps, your effort is much appreciated. Your version of the map is much better than the previous one, not to mention that it is up to date. And you have also taken the time to create a version including the upcoming rerouting of lines 3B and 3T. I especially like how you have simplified the map and yet managed to include all the essential route information. Good work.

Then few ideas for improvements:

• Wouldn't it be more logical and intuitive to use the same color coding for the lines as what the official map uses: Map of the Helsinki tram network
• I'm not quite sure, but if I remember correctly, Wikipedia recommends Scalable Vector Graphics to be used as the image format for this kind of work. Not that it would be of great significance, but if you have an easy way to save your work as SVG, it might be worth it. Please see Wikipedia:SVG image support for more information.
• Omitting the loops at the terminals of lines 4, 6 and 10 reduces the information value of the map, since the loops have different stops at each direction. Although I have to say that the map looks nicer without the loops.

--Siipikarja ♫ 11:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind feedback. As for the improvement suggestions, I did in fact consider all of those, but decided to do things the way I did for the following reasons (feel free to disagree, obviously):

• In my experience HKL changes the colour coding relatively often. Back when I lived in the area covered by trams I used to follow the the changes to the map fairly religiously, and every time the map was changed, so were the colours. As a result, I decided to use colours derived from the original line colours where possible (7 and 9 had to be made up); hence there is some logic to the colours, but the colour selection isn't outdated the next time HKL changes their maps.
• Unfortunately my graphics program doesn't allow saving files in svg format (nor any other vector format). And even if it could, I'm not sure how much use it would be as I actually created the files using the old-fashioned raster/bitmap way of working.
• The loops were something I was uncertain about myself, but ultimately I decided to omit them as (a) it's only a small number of stops, (b) individual stops aren't displayed in the map anyway and (c) it looks a lot better. As with the stops in general and the real physical form of the routes, the reader can (and should) refer to the official HKL map.

In general making of the maps was such an enjoyable task that I was thinking of making an additional map showing the planned/potential expansions to the network (not the previse lines, obviously, as they're still undecided, just where new tracks are planned to be laid). And maybe even a series of maps to go with the "route history" section... -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 12:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I see your points there. Thanks for the clarification. Looking forward to see those additional maps if you decide to go ahead with them. Keep up the good work. --Siipikarja ♫ 13:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Returning to the colours, it appears the line colours were not changed when the official HKL maps were updated to include line 9. At least I think the old were maintained, I'm not 100% certain as I don't have a copy of the old map anywhere. Now obviously if this is the case then HKL have assigned permanent colours for all lines, and our maps should be changed accordingly. For the time being I'm thinking of noting down the current colours and comparing them with those of the next new map that will be made in the beginning of 2009. If the colours in that match the current one, I'll change the versions I made (unless someone has a version of the old map at hand and can check the colours in that).

For the record, I think the colours in my versions are better. ;D Although that might just be the historian in me. -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 11:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I had some spare time in my hands, and modified both language versions of the map currently in use so that they're more accurate geographically and utilize the current official HKL line colours as at least the french and swedish wiki articles also utilize the line colours in the article body text (changing the colours made them look like crap, but that's another story). I did not edit any of the other maps (at least not yet), most importantly because we don't know what (if any) the new colours of lines 3B and 3T will be—I'm presuming one of them will get a different colour to help telling them apart. Also, in my opinion the colours on the historial maps should not be changed, as (a) the current colours are more-or-less correct for any pre-1953 map and (b) IMO all historical maps should utilize the same colours for the sake of clarity. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 17:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did apparently also edit the 1976 map. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 17:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

3B/3T route change next year

As this had clearly puzzled Sladen (and undoubtedly others), let me clarify the part of rerouting 3B and 3T next year: yes, they two different "threes" will be rerouted next year so that both travel different routes, instead of traveling along the same route but in different directions. The map on the right displays the routes as they will be after the change - essentially 3B and 3T will be two separate lines that share the same end of line stops. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 20:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Crickey, no wonder I was confused. Now I think about it, I think I also see why—currently 3B/3T only overlap in the same directions along the Mannerheiminite "triple track" (which doesn't have any stops on it). When the Mikonkatu cut-off is opened, there will be an overlap section with one stop (the Central Railway station). With no numbering change, 3B trams would always be on the south side of Kaivokatu (regardless of the route to be taken) and 3T trams would always be on the north side of Kaivokatu ...and nobody would know which to catch!

With a renumbering the problem that would occur at the Central Railway is avoided as 3B means that it will turn left and 3T means it will turn right. So the answer is that things will carry on as normal, you'll still be able to do a full circle, but the trams will change number twice in the process. Thanks for clearing that up Kjet! —Sladen (talk) 21:28, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. I didn't even try to put into words myself, but you've got it perfectly. ;) (Originally they were going to reroute 7A and 7B instead, which would have avoided the whole problem, but that would have required moving line 7 to Runeberginkatu and 3 to Mannerheimintie in Töölö which faced so much oppostions that the plan had to be redone). — Kjet (talk · contribs) 21:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

You rewrite of the article text definately makes it clearer. Good work. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 22:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Official line colors

These are the official line colors in hexadecimal extracted from the current (30th of March 2009) HKL tram map. For future use in the article.

• Line number 1 #7ebfe9
• Line numbers 3T/3B #00ab66 (Obsolete since 30th of March 2009)
• Line number 3B #88cb98
• Line number 3T #00ab66
• Line number 4 #ce1041
• Line number 6 #95459a
• Line numbers 7A/7B #fcb131
• Line number 8 #cf7418
• Line number 9 #d60c8c
• Line number 10 #777400

--Siipikarja ♫ 13:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you. I'll update the March 2009 map accordingly when I have the time. (I presume the colours in the current map are close enough to suffice for the time being). — Kjet (talk · contribs) 10:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on the updated map as we speak (it'll probably feature some other improvements). As something I'd like people's opinions on is naming the files. The current versions are named in the "Helsinki tram map YYYY-MM-DD" -format. That seemed like a good idea at the time, but making a new, separate file every time the network changes will in the long run lead to a profliteration of files, most of which will be useless. How would people feel about naming the next map "Helsinki tram map current" (or something along those lines), and then simply updating that file as changes are made instead of creating separate files every time? — Kjet (talk · contribs) 13:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Also (forgot to add), according to an advance map issued by the HKL, the new line colours (& hex codes) for lines 3B and 3T from 30 March 2009 will be:

• Line 3B #88cb98
• Line 3T #00ab66

— Kjet (talk · contribs) 14:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with not creating a new file name after every change. I also suggest adding the Swedish place names on the same map as two different versions aren't then needed. --Migro (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your effort Kjet. I updated the line colors list to reflect the changes so that we have one consistent colors listing. I agree with Kjet on the naming scheme. It is no use to submit a new file each time the routes change or the picture is otherwise updated. After all, each time a new version of the picture is uploaded in Commons, the version is tagged with a time stamp making the inclusion of the dates in the file name itself redundant. However, I would not add the Swedish names to the same map but would keep them separated. The map will get too crowded if the names are included with our both official languages.

From my point of view, the ultimate goal would be to make a map in SVG format and then create versions in different languages as needed. And I'm not only talking about Finnish and Swedish here, but also languages such as English, German and French. In SVG format this would be easy for anyone to do. A simple text editor would be sufficient. Of course most of the locations would still be in Finnish as there are no foreign language equivalents. Including key locations in their native language would add value. Consider for example "Hauptbahnhof" instead of "Rautatientori". Based on this, I would name the files as, for example, Helsinki_tram_map_FI-fi, where FI is an ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code and fi is an ISO 639-1 language code.

An example SVG file to illustrate the ease of creating versions in different languages: Easter_Island_map-en.svg. --Siipikarja ♫ 10:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Are we talking about the same map? I don't think it gets crowded when there are less than 20 names evenly spread out over the whole map, in fact since the background is white the names can much more easily be put under each other than on a conventional map where toponyms sometimes cover map features. And where on the map is it written "Rautatientori"? --Migro (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about "Helsinki tram map 2008-08-10.png" but the above arguments fit any of Kjet's maps. I really don't see why we should write names in our both official languages and not use the option of creating multiple maps. With multiple maps each Wikipedia project can use a map in their own language — provided that Kjet has the motivation to translate the maps to different languages. "Rautatientori" is written nowhere, it was just an example as the maps will probably get more accurate as time passes. --Siipikarja ♫ 18:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

For the record, I'm completely useless when it comes to SVG grahics, so if people want an SVG map, someone else would have to make that. I do agree with Siipikarja that adding names of key locations like Central Railway Station or Senate Square might be useful (in fact I included ushc locations in File:Turku tram map 1956-1972.png, but that benifits from being notably simpler). However, as with bilingual place names, adding key locations (regardless of the language) could make the map more crowded and confusing.

As for bilingual place names, I personally don't have a preference on that. However, as has been pointed out, both forms are official. In fact including Swedish names might be useful particularly for non-Finnish/non-Swedish readers; in my experience foreign visitors to Helsinki often use the Swedish names of various districts as they're easier to pronounce, particularly for speakers of Germanic languages. As a test, I've made a version of the soon-to-be-current map with only Finnish names and bilingual names: fi names vs. fi & sv names. The latter does look more crowded, but does it look that much more crowded? (Also, did they really think about the new colour of 3B properly? It's almost indistinguishable from the colour of line 1). — Kjet (talk · contribs) 12:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Good point with the Swedish names being useful for non-Finnish/non-Swedish readers. Now that you made the example maps, I must say that the bilingual version is really not that crowded. Both versions are very readable. And what comes to SVG graphics, I mentioned SVG as a nice to have feature - there is absolutely nothing wrong with using PNGs. The PNG versions are really good as they are. In my opinion the 3B color is crappy, but what can we do... :| Wonder why they have not used black line color. --Siipikarja ♫ 18:20, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The only official map with the new 3B colour I've seen is one displaying only the threes—they probably didn't even try out how it looks with the rest of the colours. Hopefully they'll change it into something more sensible when they update the full map. And yes, it is odd about black not being used. I remember they still used it in the maps during the 90s. And just for the record, I've got nothing against an SVG map if someone can make one. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 20:08, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent for readability) I presume we're in agreeance then to include both Finnish and Swedish place names in the next version of the map? — Kjet (talk · contribs) 14:44, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The new map is located here: File:Helsinki tram map.png. I decided not to update the article yet as traffic continues according to the old map for a few more hours. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 19:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, the bilingual map is fine by me. --Siipikarja ♫ 07:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Rolling stock

I combined the two tables in the Rolling stock section to one sortable table. This took quite some time and effort to make it work. I tried my best to keep the data legitimate but some inaccuracies may have slipped in. If you have time and motivation, please verify the data.

A few words about the table:

• Before adding new rows or cells be sure to understand the sorting logic: Help:Sorting
• Standards-compliant web browser may render the table differently than Internet Explorer. When modifying the table, double-check that the table renders and sorts correctly in both types of browsers. IE's Javascript engine is slower than the Standards-compliant web browser's JavaScript engines www.codinghorror.com
• Don't use rowspan or colspan, they will break the sorting functionality
• Columns with time and number spans are sorted as strings, not as numbers. Therefore, hidden sort keys need to be used where strings are not of equal width (width being the number of characters). Otherwise, for example, 32 is sorted as bigger than 100.
• The Tram Type column intentionally sorts to logical groups, not alphabetically.
• Don't split the rows with <br />-tags as the table becomes ugly. If the data in an individual cell seems to swell up, then reconsider should the data be in the table in the first place. Consider adding the information to the article body text or alternatively using foot notes. The table cannot and should not hold complete data but merely serve as a summary.
• I wasn't able to find the car height for all of the tram types as FTS lists some heights with and some without the pantograph. It would be more informative to list the height without the pantograph.
• When adding data to the table, please update the Totals row to reflect the changes.
• Round figures to one decimal when adding data and use dot (.) as decimal separator to ensure correct sorting.
• If major changes need to be done, it is a good idea to copy the table to a sandbox under your own Wikipedia homepage, implement the changes and test the functionality there, and then copy-paste the modified table to the article.

--Siipikarja ♫ 10:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The References section

I don't know about you, but I think that the References section of this article is getting ridiculously long — especially compared to the overall length of the article. So based on Wikipedia referencing guidelines, I propose a new approach of referencing. And it goes like this. I have simply divided the single "references" section to "notes" and "references". The references done from the article link to the items in the "notes" section which in turn link to the "references" section.

In my opinion this kind of approach suits the article better than the current approach for the following reasons:

• A majority of the references target to a single website (Finnish Tramway Society). The proposed approach allows us to group references under one subheading. The "references" section is more customizable since it is not generated by the "reflist" template, but is handwritten.
• Using this kind of reference system keeps the article itself cleaner in edit mode since one does not have to embed lengthy cite templates into the article, but can use shorter <ref name="FTS2">[[#noteFTS2|Finnish Tramway Society]]</ref>-type referencing instead.
• The "notes" section can be kept short because the headings only need to display the name of the source and we can use multiple columns to display the names. The combined length of the notes and references sections is most likely to remain quite big, but the layout is more crisp.
• For the reader this approach is cleaner and more readable. It is nice that the article is so well referenced, but in most cases(?) the reader is not really interested to refer the actual source, but only to know what the source is. Hence when when the reader reads an interesting piece of information to which he or she wants to know the source, he or she is first thrown to the "notes" section and only then if the reader wants to read the actual source article is he or she directed to the source of information.

Example: The article says: "HKL introduces a new tram line^[32]".

--> User clicks the ^[32] and he or she is thrown to the "Notes" section saying simply: "Helsingin Kaupungin Liikennelaitos"

--> User clicks the previous "Helsingin Kaupungin Liikennelaitos" link and he or she is thrown to the "References" section having full information of the source.

--> User wants to read the source article, and he or she clicks the external link in the "References" section.

So what do you think? It will require quite much work, is it worth all the trouble? Before you draw any conclusions, hit the Edit this page button in the example page to see the benefits in the source code.

--Siipikarja ♫ 20:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Supported. I have been thinking the same thing about the references (especially as the majority of them are my "fault"). The formatting you've proposed would definately be clearer for the reader and look better. It will require a lot work, but I think it should still be done. I'm currently in the process of reading though several books, based on which I'm hoping to expand the history-section further—this will mean even more references, and if we want to give the article a clearer look and make the conversion process more humane, we should act soon. (Then I'd just need to learn to use the new ref formatting...) -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 06:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on it. --Siipikarja ♫ 13:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. All information sources are now at the end of the article. This should make article editing easier. I decided to use headings "References" and "Bibliography" instead of "Notes" and "References" since we will most likely need a "Notes" section for footnotes in the future. As I thought the combined length of the "References" and "Bibliography" sections is still quite big, so there was little or no gain there. Sadly Microsoft Internet Explorer does not support CSS multicolumn layout, so in IE the "References" are listed in one column. This wastes space, but what can you do... It's not a weakness in the new referencing technique or in Wiki-syntax, but a shortcoming in IE. See Template:Reflist for more information.

Anyhows, I think I'll be able to pull a trick or two to shorten the "Bibliography" section. One thing to do is to group the "Finnish Tramway Society Line X" sources under one group. The same goes for the "HKL Motor trams X" articles. --Siipikarja ♫ 00:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Good work! I pretty much agree with all your choices. Admittedly the current version isn't smaller than the previous one, but it is easier to read. And if you can attractively combine some of the similarly themed FTS pages without losing the informational value, so much the better. -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 06:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Some grouping work done on the FTS line related articles --> 18 separate sources under one group header --> 16 lines of redundant article text reduced. --Siipikarja ♫ 16:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I went and alphabeticed the Miscellaneous-section based on author name, or the page/article name if there was no author name. This improved the readability, although it did upset the note numbering in that section (they still work perfectly, but are in non-numerical order). -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 11:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Good. Don't worry about the numbering, I already messed it up for the FTS part when I grouped the references in my last edit. ;) The continuous numbering was there just to ease my work when I converted the article to use the new referencing technique. If you still have the motivation to play with the references, the same alphabetization could be done for the HS and FTS parts. I think that the readability could be improved even more if all of the sources with author names would be listed first. --Siipikarja ♫ 17:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. XD -- Kjet (talk · contribs) 16:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

• I noticed an article on Helsinki trams in the international version of Helsingin Sanomat: HKL tram acquisition delayed by complaint to Market Court by Croatian tram supplier Koncar. I don't have motivation to write anything to the Wikipedia article right now, so I just paste the link here as reference for future use. --Siipikarja ♫ 09:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

New chord

Just looking at OpenStreetMap[3], this shows a new single-direction chord that I don't remember, leading from Arkadiankatu→Mannerheimintie near to . Does anyone know when this was put in and if it was put in with a specific purpose? —Sladen (talk) 23:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

If you're talking about the short, circa 10m long, one-way track connecting Mannerheimintie and Arkadiankatu, the answer is spring 2008. But this is from Mannerheimintie→Arkadiankatu, not the other way around as you requested. The track was built to let the trams number 3, 4, 7 and 10 coming from Töölö direction to turn right to Arkadiankatu and further back to their own routes on Mannerheimintie via Runeberginkatu during the construction work of the intersection of Kaivokatu and Simonkatu. The construction work of the Kaivokatu-Simonkatu crossroads required a period of one week during which all of the tram lines crossing the junction were rerouted. According to my sources, the first tram to use the Mannerheimintie→Arkadiankatu track was a charter tram on Helsinki-day on 12th of June 2008. A temporary stop named "Kiasma" was located near the park of "Pikkuparlamentti" when the one-way track was in active use. --Siipikarja ♫ 12:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Jätkäsaari

Looking at Openstreetmap again, it appears[4] that two new chords/points have gone in at the corner of Kalevankatu/Mechelininkatu. Did anyone note when this was installed (there probably would have been some diversions of Line 6 at the time). —Sladen (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Checking SRS's news archives, they were installed in late October 2009. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 09:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Spårakoff, museums line, sightseeing line to the lines list and map?

Today yet another new non-standard passenger service tramline opened in Helsinki, when Helsinki Expert's sightseeing line aimed at tourists begun trafficking. This now means Helsinki has three lines aimed mostly at tourists (the Sightseeing line, Museum line and Spårakoff). I started wondering, should these also be added to the list of tram lines that appears in this article and should they also be added to the route map? If they are added to the map, there is a danger of cluttering it. On the other hand as things stand, the article and the map are ignoring a portion of tram traffic in Helsinki almost completely.

One option, regarding maps, would be to keep the current map (displaying the "normal lines") as it is and make a second map displaying the "tourist lines" — Kjet (talk · contribs) 10:58, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Rename rail-joker to Joker(i) line?

"Rail-joker" is a strange translation of Jokerilinja. Is there a good reason not to translate that as "Joker (or Jokeri) line," at the very least to maintain consistency with how the other line names are translated? Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 08:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

HSL seems to use "Jokeri" for the bus service. This report uses "Jokeri rail link". I'd suggest using proper Finnish "Jokeri line" over "Joker line" --hydrox (talk) 08:22, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I went ahead and made the change, and also updated the "Jokeri" re-direct page. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Article length

This article is almost twice as long as the main article about Helsinki. At least the history section should be moved to its own article. JIP | Talk 19:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I definitely agree. I've been thinking of raising up this issue myself for a long time, but have not really found the motivation to do so since splitting the article into two or more articles involves potentially a lot of work, at least with the references. I think that the main issue with this article is that it is now two-fold: on the other hand is has very specific history details, and then again it has the very latest news - some of which are just speculation. These two mixed together do not mix well together. Or perhaps they could mix, but the way that the article is written now, does not form a consistent whole. We've been adding bits and pieces here and there and the plot has become blurred. However, I'm not sure if the history part should be moved to its own article as it forms the core of this article, is quite well written and accompanied with some relevant pictures. The contributors that have written the history section (Kjet & Sladen?) have done very a good job. Perhaps we could move the "Route history" part to a separate article and maybe create another article for the future extensions.

I suggest the following guide line:

• Find a public transport article from Wikipedia that has FP or GA status and use that article layout as skeleton.
• Move relevant stuff from the article body to the introduction.
• Move the Route History part completely and perhaps part of the history part to another article, say The history of Helsinki tram.
• Move the future speculation part to a support article: say The future of Helsinki tram
• Get rid of the excessive red links.

--Siipikarja ♫ 13:53, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Would Helsinki tram history and Helsinki tram expansion be more concise names? —Sladen (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

There seems to be an existing convention for naming these kinds of articles. For example, History of the London Underground and History of the New York City Subway. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Coordinates missing

This article was recently tagged as "missing coordinates". How can we even add any coordinates to this article? It's about trams. Trams move. JIP | Talk 11:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)