Talk:Buenos Aires Underground

message: This article is full of bad English, presumably because of over-literal translations from Spanish. ("Primeval" is the funniest one. Makes me wonder if there are dinosaurs in the underground?) I will try to correct some of these. APW (talk) 08:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Out of curiosity, how did you get from "obsolete" to "overcrowded" in this edit? There several reasons why a metro system could be considered obsolete, and the original text didn't specify the reason (although, of course, it should have). Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 08:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad English

message: I'm sure more than one station opened otherwise there would be little point, but how many opened on the first day?--Kitchen Knife (talk) 23:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The first station of this network opened

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Oppose - Based on the name Subte it could be called "Subway" but never "Metro". There are lots of undergrounds/subways in the world, not just metros. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/buenos/
*:Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 10:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: The stations under comstruction from lines A, B and H were opened in 2013 and there are current extensions of line H and also line F underway. The map should be updated accordingly because currently it's at least 2 years out of date.
181.169.10.217 (talk) 21:10, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Map Update

message: the line B no longer use third rail, it change to rigid catenary(?) (catenaria rigida in spanish)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.18.48.15 (talk) 20:01, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It still uses both. The CAF 5000 and Eidan trains use third rail, only the CAF 6000 cars use catenaria rigida (overhead lines). Until the majority of trains use overhead lines, it doesn't make much sense to change it. I've clarified this in Line B (Buenos Aires Underground) and Buenos Aires Underground rolling stock, so the information isn't being omitted. When more CAF 6000 cars are finally put into service, I'll make the change. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 04:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Update

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Buenos Aires Underground. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.enelsubte.com/informes/la-linea-los-espanoles-78-anos-uniendo-destinos-865
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:17, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Buenos Aires Underground. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tranvia.org.ar/tranvias/ciudaddebsas.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Merge - The page dedicated Line I (Buenos Aires Underground) is quite short and I do not see any possibility of extending it. I think it is enough to talk about the "Line I" on this page, because the line, in the current state, is only a proposal without any defined plan. --Wind of freedom (talk) 16:28, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Much like the unfounded proposal you made for Line G, you will find that there's plenty of room to expand the article. Again, there was a defined plan (many over the years, actually) and again, simply because something is a project is not grounds for article deletion. If you're going to keep making these proposals, then cite actual WP policies and don't base your reasons on unfounded OR. If you want to help with the project as a whole, consider actually looking for sources and expanding them instead of drawing ill-informed conclusions about the lack thereof simply because the article doesn't cite many currently. SegataSanshiro1 (talk) 20:01, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear , instead of deciding how others should behave, just say your opinion without judging. The page in question, is currently a completely nonsense: in the main page "Buenos Aires Underground" there are more information than in the specific one. Consequently, a merger of the pages is, at the present status, the best thing to do. If there was an enlargement of the page, the opinion could change, but the page it's been like this for years and the project in question (the Line I) has been canceled in favor of a BRT. It is also obvious that not all projects should have a specific page on Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Notability), otherwise it would be an encyclopedia dedicated to unrealized projects. --Wind of freedom (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

text: Closing, given lack of support for a merge, and the support for a keep or expand. Klbrain (talk) 17:11, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Participants were unconvinced that the proposed title is the WP:COMMONNAME in English sources. (non-admin closure)  ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Buenos Aires Underground →  – Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:UE --- Tbf69 P • T 14:00, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Relisting comment: Relisting; cannot move as an uncontested technical request as it has been procedurally contested BilledMammal (talk) 05:27, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 25 February 2023