Template talk:Infobox Public transit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Operations date
I have to say i do like this new template, and i find it a major improvment over the the other two templates in visual aspects as well as its poential. One thing though, i do think their should be a variable and a section for the begining of operations of a system, mayber under commenced operations or began operations? --Boothy443 | trácht ar 08:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
began_operationadded! Though I'm still not sure whether I like where I put it. --Millbrooky 05:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Avoid use of metro or subway
Excellent template, well done! A note for anyone including this template though, to use "rapid transit" as the transit_type argument (where applicable), as metro is a redirect, subway is a dab page, and both are geographically limited in scope. --CComMack 01:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hedding change
A user change the font sizr of the hedding to a larger size, i think this is a bad idea, it looks garrishly oversized, and personaly i think it detratcs from the infobox. I recomend a change back to the previous version, and if this is an issue with is not displaying correctly in certain browsers, then an alternative markup be used. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 06:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Remove employees field
I suggest removing the employees field. As a template about public transit systems, a field for employees doesn't seem appropiate. Information about the number of people employed in a public transit system would probably be more appropriate in an article about the operator of a public transit system. --Millbrooky 22:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree. Any complete article should include this information. It may not be relevant on articles about the operator. We don't always know what they want. -- Selmo (talk) 03:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Routes & terminals
I couldn't help but notice that this infobox seems geared towards rail systems, with it's use of Lines and Stations. My local public transit system doesn't use any rail, it's all buses and ferries, and they refer to stations as Terminals, and lines as Routes. Would it be possible to add Terminals and Routes to the box, in addition to Lines and Stations, and let the user decide which is more appropriate for the article in question? --hfx_chris 18:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Please please add a "Path" type for long distance paths. In the UK the stops would be major towns and youth hostels. In Japan there are Edo Five Routes which could use this sort of template to give them cohesion.Cosnahang 13:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gee Thanks
Can't believe they deleted the infobox monorail. Actually yes I can believe it. Seems like something Wikipedia would do. Something that's useful and informative, and it gets deleted. HeadMouse 21:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)HeadMouse
[edit] Add farebox ratio
Because it's interesting to know how successful a public transportation system is. --Traal 15:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Transit type and operator parameters
I have removed the wikilink from Transit type to public transport. It is not needed, since the transit type value should always be a wikilink (i.e. Rapid transit) which points to a page explaining the word. I also removed the (s) at the end (purely for estetic reasons).
The operator parameter is no longer required. That parameter is not more important than any other non-required parameter. -- Kildor 11:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] need ability to add both an image and a logo
I would like to have the option to use both a logo and a second image pertaining to the sytem. Right now on Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority I have to put the header image just below the infobox and it looks somewhat awkward. Can you make this template like Template:Infobox Bus transit which has a place for both a logo and an image in the infobox? Biomedeng (talk) 03:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- I was bold and added a second image parameter. Check out the results at Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. I am not sure if the line between the logo and the image is good or should be removed. Biomedeng (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

