Template talk:TTC lines and stations
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the TTC lines and stations template. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Surface stops: different indication?
editI see that the Eglinton surface stops are now listed. I don't have an objection to this per se, but I feel some way of differentiating them from full, grade-separated stations may be in order. An extra symbol? reduced point size? something else? Radagast (talk) 22:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- This is a Navbox, and details are in the articles. It is already getting overstuffed. Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Washrooms and Accessibility
editDo we really need these symbols? Streetcar and subway connections are acceptable to me, but all the accessibility and washroom symbols really clutter the navbox IMO. --Natural RX 22:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed wheelchair symbols where the entire line is accessible. Let's discuss the others. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:41, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- I've looked around, and I have failed to find other navboxes for rapid transit systems with accessibility/washroom symbols in them. These are small details that can be found in the article infobox or body. WP:NAV also states "Navigation templates are not arbitrarily decorative", and that "There should be justification for a template to deviate from standard colors and styles". I'm failing to see a reason that accessibility and washroom symbols have such justification. --Natural RX 22:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oh I agree! We have had no other feedback, so be bold and take out the garbage :) Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- So...in light of the insane overloading Secondarywaltz reverted, would we want to consider removing all symbols adjacent to station names. All of these symbols and their links are on the left side anyway. Yeah, it's nice to denote connections but this is a navbox, not a route template. --Natural RX 17:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
- I think showing TTC subway line interchanges is valid and generally shown in subway/metro navboxes. The previous stuffing was out of line, and so that would leave streetcar connections as questionable. Each station article shows which specific streetcar routes connect there, rather than this generic link. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
- Took a look at subway/metro navboxes in the US, to see how they laid it out, turns out none of them have inline transfer symbols beside stations, or they don't list stations at all. See {{Washington Metro}}, {{New York City Subway}}, {{MTA Maryland}}, {{Bay Area Rapid Transit}}, {{Chicago L}}. In fact, I just realized they are just like {{Toronto Transit Commission}} and these systems don't have a separate navbox for lines and stations. --Natural RX 13:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
- I think showing TTC subway line interchanges is valid and generally shown in subway/metro navboxes. The previous stuffing was out of line, and so that would leave streetcar connections as questionable. Each station article shows which specific streetcar routes connect there, rather than this generic link. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
- So...in light of the insane overloading Secondarywaltz reverted, would we want to consider removing all symbols adjacent to station names. All of these symbols and their links are on the left side anyway. Yeah, it's nice to denote connections but this is a navbox, not a route template. --Natural RX 17:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
- Oh I agree! We have had no other feedback, so be bold and take out the garbage :) Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- I've looked around, and I have failed to find other navboxes for rapid transit systems with accessibility/washroom symbols in them. These are small details that can be found in the article infobox or body. WP:NAV also states "Navigation templates are not arbitrarily decorative", and that "There should be justification for a template to deviate from standard colors and styles". I'm failing to see a reason that accessibility and washroom symbols have such justification. --Natural RX 22:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Ontario Line and Line 5 extension to Renforth
editNow that construction on both the Ontario Line and the Line 5 extension to Renforth station have started - should that now be added to the template? That's when we've historically added station in the past. The station locations (but not names) are all finalized now. Nfitz (talk) 23:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
- No objections, so I'll start working on this. Nfitz (talk) 23:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- For now id recommend only making the pages(edit:+put them on the template but not link them), as non of them seem to exist. Though they are under construction, the pages should be at a decent standard before doing that. (That might be your plan anyway). Id be happy to help with them. Humulator (talk) 01:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've already made the edits - after waiting 5 months for comment. I might start some of the Ontario line stations - it took a long time to get most of the first phase of Eglinton line stop/station articles after it was added to the template; I don't see a need to rush the remaining few. Nfitz (talk) 02:42, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Links to all stops red link or not(Includes possible alternative page names):
- Westmore stop Martin Grove stop Martin grove stop Albion stop Stevenson stop Mount olive stop Mount Olive stop Rowntree mills stop Rowntree Mills stop Pearldale stop Duncanwoods stop Milvan Rumike stop Milvan rumike stop Emery stop Signet arrow stop Signet Arrow stop Norfinch oakdale stop Norfinch Oakdale stop Jane and Finch stop Driftwood stop Torbermory stop Sentinel stop Humulator (talk) 17:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
- Just a note that stops (not stations) do not warrant their own separate articles (the Line 5 ones were created in error and we've never cleaned them up) as locations with minimal infrastructure that aren't notable in and of themselves. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
- In light of this - I've been bold and linked all the stops that do not warrant their own separate articles - to the stops section of the relevant article (Finch West, Eglinton etc). That way, we don't get people starting these articles unnecessarily! Turini2 (talk) 14:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- Just a note that stops (not stations) do not warrant their own separate articles (the Line 5 ones were created in error and we've never cleaned them up) as locations with minimal infrastructure that aren't notable in and of themselves. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
What does the stl|TTC|(station name) mean? In the source editer
editI can't seem to find what these link to. Can someone help me understand. Humulator (talk) 03:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)