Talk:Halifax Transit

message: I noticed somebody has added some fleet information. Nice work :)
I took the liberty of expanding on that, and divided it up into the current fleet and the past, or retired fleet. I've also added the years in which the buses were purchased, and their fleet numbers. I've only gone back as far as 1969, so I didn't get into the GM Old Looks that Dartmouth was running, or the Brills and Birneys Halifax was running prior to that. 
I wasn't quite sure how far back to take it, as Metro Transit didn't exist prior to 1981, yet the buses that were run by Dartmouth Transit and Halifax Transit did become Metro Transit buses once the companies were merged. I was thinking about adding information to the article about which fleet numbers came from which transit company, Dartmouth or Halifax.. but I figured most people wouldn't be as interested in it as I am.. but for the record, everything numbered in the 100's was DTS (Dartmouth) and everything in the 400's and 800's prior to 1981 was HTC (Halifax).
--hfx_chris 01:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think city council may have ordered 25 or so buses a month or two ago, but I'm not sure. Anyone know, so it can be added to the bus count? Ouuplas 06:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep; HRM placed an order for 25 New Flyer D40LFs; I'll add it to the article somewhere --hfx_chris 15:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fleet Information 

message: I think this whole article is getting a little bloated, and the MetroLink section is particularly large. I want to split it off and create a seperate MetroLink article. Metro Transit and HRM sometimes refer to it as a seperate entity anyway. There's a lot more information I want to add to the MetroLink section on this page, but can't because it would make this article way too long.
What do you think?
--hfx_chris 05:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me.  I saw your article-in-progress in your sandbox, and it's looking quite good.  As long as there's enough citations, then it won't get deleted, fingers crossed... Green451 21:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, we'll see how that goes. --hfx_chris 03:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Split MetroLink section

message: :Image:Metro Transit Logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 08:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Metro Transit Logo.png

message: The Go Time section of this page seems to be out of date.  I know it still states that the new system is currently being implemented, when in fact I am pretty sure it is up and running already.  I am pretty sure that the sensors it talks about on the busses have been replaced by a new, more accurate system, but I don't know enough about the new system to edit this section myself.  Perhaps someone with more expertise on the subject could review this section.
Pnightingale (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GoTime section out of date? 

message: The addition of the Mortarboard image  is not irrelevant for the defunct routes section. The route was indeed a university route. I added a legend to the bottom of the list similar to the legend for the list directly above it. If you have any arguements otherwise please show some respect and use words and not a template to communicate your reasoning. --Ryan.brownell (talk) 04:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defunct Routes 

message: I've done a fair bit of editing to reflect recent changes to the entry and would like to get another editor to check it out and remove the tag if he/she deems it worthy. Regards, Aloha27 (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Outdated Tag

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Halifax Transit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110603230803/http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/ferries.html to http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/ferries.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:21, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The previous "Future Transit System" section, which I removed earlier in December, was uncited and appeared to be a hoax. Similar content was then repeatedly added to Halifax–Dartmouth Ferry Service.
A couple days ago, User:Debdeb18 re-added the section to this page, but with different content – this time showing the proposed route list in the 2016 Moving Forward Together Plan (MFTP). There are two problems here: for one, the MFTP has largely been implemented, hence this is not a "future transit system". Secondly, the MFTP as implemented differs somewhat from the route list proposed in 2016, so the information is outdated. Ben MacLeod (talk) 03:30, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated addition of a "Future Transit System" section 

message: 134.41.185.206 (talk) 17:04, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --  LuK3  (Talk) 17:05, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2020 

message: MetroLink has been discontinued, and most of the information on that page is out of date. The info from that page could be added to the history section of this page as a former service. Especially with the proposed BRT system, the MetroLink article adds confusion, since it describes MetroLink as BRT. 24.138.45.65 (talk) 02:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. It should be merged and lots of the details cut down. Camarchibald (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

text: Agreed (while recognizing a possible conflict for weighing in on a HRM page). Metrolink was ended by HRM when Moving Forward Together Plan was approved. It's all just express buses now. WayeMason (talk) 10:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

text: Klbrain (talk) 18:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose merging the separate MetroLink article with this main article