Talk:South Yorkshire Supertram

message: I am curious about the kind of rolling stock the system uses.  --  Geo Swan 15:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I put up the fact that it's Duewag, but I'm pretty sure the subsequent edit labelling it as the Siemens-Duewag U2 is incorrect; the U2 is a high-floor vehicle used in Calgary, while Sheffield's are low-floor. Having the same manufacturer doesn't make it the same vehicle. David Arthur 13:17, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  rolling stock? 

message: I think that five photos of supertram is more than enough for this article. I suggest that any editors wanting to contribute more supertram photos consider adding them to the Sheffield gallery at the commons rather than to this article.   JeremyA 23:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A gallery can be created at Wikimedia Commons for the article to display these photos, its better to have more photos than a short of photos. :D Agreed, this article has more than enough photos. --Terence Ong 04:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enough photos? 

message: The Supertram is currently being given a new colour scheme, I think it's mostly blue (instead of white) with some red and orange. Theres one or two running at present and the whole fleet is going to be done. There is also changes to the interior with improved wheelchair space and perch seating. I agree theres enough photos but do we need to get some with the new livery. Anybody any thoughts ? Mick Knapton 15:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it would be good if the photos on this page covered all of the standard liveries that have been used so far (3 I think?). However, I also continue to think that the photo to text ratio is pretty high, so my preference would be that any new photos replace existing photos—always a difficult thing to do without upsetting people. Of what we have now, :Image:Supertram Castle Square.jpg and :Image:Supertram Cathedral 02-07-04.JPG are my favourites, and I think that :Image:Supertram Sheffield Station 05-07-04.JPG is useful because it is the only one that shows off-street running. In :Image:Sheffield Supertram.jpg there is a lot of junk (lamp posts etc.) between the photographer and the tram, and :Image:Supertramhalf.jpg doesn't show much that the other photos don't already illustrate—so it is my opinion that these two photos could be moved out of the article (maybe they could go in other articles) and replaced with photos showing the new (or older) livery. That's just my opinion though... feel free to disagree.   JeremyA 05:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Livery 

message: "The new livery is similar to the Stagecoach Bus livery, but the doors are painted yellow so that it will fit in the Disablity Discrimination Act." Do Stagecoach busses also have colour contrasted doors? Have the cab controls of the Supertram ever been modified?Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian)User talk:Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian)
:I can’t speak for all variants of the Stagecoach livery, particularly new ones, but having contrasting doors is a railway thing, required by law; if a bus has them, it’s only for aesthetic reasons (which, given that the railway operators had to be forced to adopt them, seems unlikely). David Arthur 12:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refurbishment 

message: OK guys, what is going on here?  The table at the bottom of the page list all the tram stops, and I'd say we have several categories of links:
*Missing, where there is no link (eg Cricket Inn Road, Arbourthorne Road) 
*Links to a page about the tram stop (eg Netherthorpe Road, Infirmary Road) 
*Links to information about the area served, including;
**Suburbs (eg Attercliffe)
**Electoral Wards (eg Hillsborough)
**Parks(!) (eg Hillsborough Park)
**Facilities (eg Crystal Peaks, Meadowhall, Valley Centertainment)
**Station (eg Meadowhall Interchange, Sheffield Station)
**Places of Interest (eg City Hall, Cathedral
*Redirects (eg Carbrook)
*Mixed-systems, where each 'part' of the tram stop name links to any one of the above (eg Sheffield Station / Sheffield Hallam University, Meadowhall South / Tinsley)
*Misleading Information (eg Park Grange, Birley Lane]])
and finally:
*Utter Bullshit (eg West Street, Elm Tree)
Guys, we have to sort this out!
So, if there are no objections in the next few days, I'm going to start creating a page for every tram stop using the title tramstopname_tramstop.  This will have the Supertram template (below), and convention:
*Yellow: Start - Meadowhall -> end - Hillsborough
*Blue: Start - Halfway -> end - Malin Bridge
*Purple: Start Herdings Park -> end - Meadowhall
I realise this will look silly between city centre and Meadowhall, with Centertainment preceeding  Arena/Don Valley on Yellow but following it on Blue, but I cannot think of any other way to do this.
Here is the tram template table: 
Any objections/comments/critisism/advice, please post!  L.J.Skinnersomething to say? 01:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Sheffield Project had talked about the Sheffield Supertram articles and we had concluded that there was little interest in creating articles for tram stops as they are featureless platforms. To get rid of red links it would be far more advantageous to link stop places to places rather than tram stop article. what's a tram stop article to have? two platforms, shelter, a tram stops there every 10 minutes. The is little individualism to a tram stop that only a station can possess and relegates tram stops to a place in a table rather than an individual existence. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a stop could talk about frequecy of services, distance from main stops, distance from local landmarks and then link to other features of the area.  eg Hillsborough.  L.J.Skinnersomething to say? 11:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Additionally, the template you've created is a duplicate and already exists for tram systems in general. It is rather useless as it only features the preceding stops and in the case of stations offers no overview of where the article lies. See my coments above, the question's already been asked. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The template is the one in existence - I was showing i as an example to illustrate my plan for the convention of following/preceeding stop.  L.J.Skinnersomething to say? 11:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with Captain Scarlet here. Most of the tram stops are little more than bus stops with a raised platform. Much of the information that could be put in articles on the stops could easily be included in an expanded table within the main supertram article.  —JeremyA 14:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do honestly think it's worth doing, and I would be willing to do it!  Nottingham_Express_Transit have a page for each stop, and they are literally just stubs, but I think I could expand ours to show what amenities are local to each stop (please see my example of the Hillsborough stub).  This would create a great link between all the areas of the city, the Sheffield sub-pages, the districts of Sheffield template and woul improve user's navigation around the city's articles.  Please see my initial post, and I'm sure you'll agree, we currently have a real bloody mess! L.J.Skinnersomething to say? 14:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What you wish to feature in these articles goes against Wikipédia conventions and rules. 1/ Wikipedia is not an indescriminate colection of information and 2/ Wikipedia is not a directory. What the Sheffield Project concluded in this matter was that creating such a vast collection of articles would be both pointless and contradict Wikipedia rules. An article should not be initiated if it is to remain a stub. Something worth writing about will be written about, what doesn't, such as a vast number of identical tram stops should be contained on Sheffield Supertram in the stops listing/network. Featuring local amenities would mean breaking the Wikipedia is not a tourist guide rule. I commend you keeness but it is not that that I refute. Including each and every tram stop article in each and every place article of Sheffield also contradicts rules and transforms this encyclopedia into a travel guide, if this is your field of interest, Wikitravel should be where your information should be included, not Wikipedia. I'm afraid if such information would be featured, it would have to be edited out as any other content that contradicts established rules. Lists are accepted, although frowned upon, directories are not. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 16:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, fair enough - I take you point.  Would it be reasonable though for every area with a nearby tram stop (eg Meadowhall, Hillsborough Park, Sheffield_Midland_station etc) to have the tram template at the bottom?  As we currently have on Fitzalan Square?  L.J.Skinnersomething to say? 23:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No it would not, for the reasons stated above. If Supertram has an influence, a history influencing the place, then yes. Placing the next/previous stop template on area articles would be the same as doing it in individual tram stop articles: wikipedia is not a timetable. Creating a substanceless ressource of tram stops and interchanges goes againstthe rules stated above. What Wikipedia is about is what is mostlèy already present in the Sheffrield Supertram article; dates, fact, data, properties; wether a tram stops there or not is of travel guide relevance. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 00:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Supertram Stops

message: The special tram signals are the same signals as in use for every tram system across the UK; they have a section of their own in the highway code. We should probably split this information off into a separate article, if it is even needed at all. --VinceBowdren 16:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was unsure as to wether the signalling was Supertram specific or not. I'm sure it'd find itself useful on the Tram article or a subsection/article on Tramway (+practice) in the UK. This signalling is not used on all tram systems, Blackpool, as far as my trip this Summer I can remember doesn't use it. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Blackpool doesnt use it, as it is more of a 'preserved' tramway, but still run as a mainstream mode of transport, and as such, uses signals of the eariler tramways, not the modern ones. Also, the new WikiProject UK Trams is now up and running, and as thus the signalling shall feature in a new article, and this one will be recieving a cleanup! Thanks, Bluegoblin7 19:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Having been and travelled on the Blackpool tramway I cnq assure you it does use this signalling, at least partially. Maybe you'd consider moving Wikiproject:Bluegoblin7 to its own page? Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 22:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signals - not Sheffield-specific 

message: The Stagecoach Group article states: "Stagecoach owns the Sheffield Supertram, and has done since it's launch in 1994". Surely this is incorrect—AFAIK, the network was built and initially operated by SYPTE, who then sold a franchise to operate the system to Stagecoach in 1997. Anyone have any good references on this?  —Jeremy (talk) 16:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition thetrams.co.uk gives a history that is closer to my recollection: "Supertram was initially run by South Yorkshire Supertram Limited (SYSL), a company formed and owned by SYPTE. At the end of 1997 SYSL was sold to Stagecoach, a major bus and rail operator, for £1.15 million. With SYSL Stagecoach gained the concession to operate and maintain the tramway until 2024. SYPTE retains ownership of the track and infrastructure." —Jeremy (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope I didn't put this in. I thought Stagecoach had purchased Supertram for a symbolic pound around the year you quote. It seems you've done a very nice job at updating the information and adding references as a result of the finding the error. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stagecoach 

message: :Image:Stagecoachsupertramlogo.gif 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 19:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a rationale, but can someone with more experience please check it over and remove the disputed tag once it has been checked. Thanks. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Stagecoachsupertramlogo.gif

message: Comment. I'm pretty strongly of the opinion that this page should be moved back to Sheffield Supertram on WP:COMMONNAME grounds. For example, this 2014 reference from the Department for Transport which explicitly refers to this system as "Sheffield Supertram". FWIW. --IJBall (talk) 23:41, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Follow-up

message: Would it be possible for anyone to wright about the forthcoming (All going well) Tram-Train extensions which will be going to Rotherham first then in the near future utilizing the Penistone line. I would but I'd end up making a mess.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/UK39s-first-tramtrain-route-to.5650456.jp
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/New-tram-train-service.5646661.jp
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Tramtrains-plan-backed.4187813.jp
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.214.208 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 17 September 2009 86.171.214.208 (UTC)
:Can I please point something out? According to the Sheffield Star at the end of last month, it may NOT be Supertram who operate the tram train extention!!!!!!
Also, another thing - the tram-train was thought to be too economically unviable to operate the full length of the Penistone Line so would be officially terminating at Rotherham Parkgate? I was also under the impression that no-one knew who is building the new tram trains, but... Tpxpress (talk) 07:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tram-Train Extentions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Supertram (Sheffield). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927180608/http://www.southyorks.org.uk/pta/ltp/pdf/SY%20LTP%20Annual%20Report%20Map%20of%20Major%20Schemes.pdf to http://www.southyorks.org.uk/pta/ltp/pdf/SY%20LTP%20Annual%20Report%20Map%20of%20Major%20Schemes.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Now that the tram-train services from Cathedral to Rotherham Parkgate have opened for operations, the image currently in the "Overview" section of this article needs to be updated to reflect this change. Could someone please let me know if this is possible (I know the similar one in the Manchester Metrolink article has been changed many times) or when it will be done, many thanks? Broman178 (talk) 09:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: DavidArthur - as you produced the original SVG file, any chance you could look at updating it please? O Still Small Voice of Clam (formerly Optimist on the run) 11:02, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Since DavidArthur hasn't been editing on Wikipedia since July 2018 and I don't know when or if he will be editing again, I might consider removing the image soon if there is no change to it from now because an old image with outdated information can mislead anybody no matter how good it looks and it could encourage a newer image (or updated version of this image if its possible) to be added there later. Broman178 (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed that map now so either a new map or updated version of the map I removed (if an update is possible without its producer) will have to be added. Broman178 (talk) 19:28, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the updated map - I've just noticed that it's missing the stop at Hackenthorpe. Do we know if there's an alternative map which actually contains all 50 stops on it, or whether it's acceptable as it is currently? TC60054 (talk) 23:07, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image in "Overview" Section 

message: A portion of the existing route, the yellow section IIRC, was originally developed for the Minitram system. This isn't mentioned in the article, but I'm not sure where to insert it, likely a separate section. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing history of Minitram 

message: Please could someone add the frequencies of each colour line? Crookesmoor (talk) 08:06, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frequencies 

message: Hi,
There's some stuff in the future developments section that has already been build and is operational now. It would make sense to move this to "history" but I'm not sure the best way to go about that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.214.15.31 (talk) 12:36, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  future developments 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:17, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I've just reverted a good-faith WP:BOLD move to South Yorkshire Supertram per it's legal name, however virtually no-one calls Supertram 'South Yorkshire Supertram' so I believe WP:COMMONNAME still applies. See recent sources such as  and .
Understanding the reason for wanting the move (it no longer serves exclusively Sheffield), I wonder if Stagecoach Supertram could be a compromise as the official 'public-facing' name Stagecoach use, with both geographical terms redirecting there? Second choice for me personally would be keeping the title as-is. Mike1901 (talk) 15:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The best way to deal with this is va WP:RM. Mjroots (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

text: Having read your points I am inclined to agree that Stagecoach Supertram would be a better destination than South Yorkshire Supertram. At the time I was thinking how Stagecoach is only a brand name for the network and talk is that they may (or, of course, may not) lose the concession in 2024, but I suppose we cross that bridge when we come to it if it does happen rather than thinking ahead. Buttons0603 (talk) 16:39, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename page to acknowledge coverage outside of Sheffield? 

message: Hackenthorpe is missing from the diagram. Could someone add it?
Also, there is a spelling error ("Holinsend" instead of "Hollinsend"). by Mariobros12345 (T • C) 21:13, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add Hackenthorpe to the diagram, fix spelling error 

message: The Accidents and incidents section is quite large and will only expand further. I was going to suggest limiting incidents included in this article to collisions, derailments and deaths, but that list would also be quite large and would also expand over the years. What do other users think about just listing derailments and tram-tram and tram-road vehicle collisions under the above section heading with a link to a separate article?
A more radical approach might be to create a Sheffield Supertram history page which could also incorporate information now in the the History section, the Proposed developments section, historic information about the tram-stop defunct ticket machines, service changes during the Coronavirus outbreak and a new sections about historic liveries,  ownership/control of the system, and (eventually) historic rolling stock? 2A00:23C2:8B08:E501:704E:BADD:45B:BCDF (talk) 12:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accidents and incidents and history