Talk:Translink (Queensland)

message: Perhaps a navigation box of the type at TransLink (Vancouver) is needed for the proliferation of articles associated with our TL. SM247 02:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Navigation box

message: Discussions on the infobox templates I've been working for the bus and train stations are found at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Brisbane#CityTrain station templates.  Examples I've been working on will be found there. --Arnzy (whats up?) 10:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ferry wharf one is at Template:Brisbaneferries Wharf, trialled at South Bank 1 & 2 Ferry Wharf page. --Arnzy (whats up?) 10:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All looking good, as does  the platform template. Also, something I came across just now - the templates TransLink (Brisbane) regions and TransLink (South East Queensland) regions both exist (identical). An admin will have to remove the Brisbane one. Jammo (SM247) 00:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could blank the template, and I can place up the  tag.  This pretty much assumes a author request for speedy deletion. --Arnzy (whats up?) 01:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake - I had forgotten I was the page author! Done. Jammo (SM247) 03:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bus Station and Train Station Infoboxes

message: I propose removing  both the TransLink regions and Busways in Brisbane boxes, and just having the bus nav box. Busways in Brisbane is redundant presently as the nav box has them and avoids the need to have undetermined route colours. The region one can be integrated into the nav by having piped links where the name of each region is presently to the right areas (the only annoying one is the Northern Region, and to a lesser extent Southern due to multile council areas and no sub-region like the Sunshine Coast; the former can be linked to Pine Rivers or Caboolture, the latter to Logan). Jammo (SM247) 06:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A similar navigation template to the ones used for the Central Station on the CityTrain network, and the CityCat/CityFerry and Busway stations.? --Arnzy (whats up?) 06:47, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We've got the existing one with all the bus stations and busways on it, but it should be modified because it is a little big at the moment. Perhaps it would look better if it was consistent with the above ones. I based it originally on the Transperth one, but that one works better as it is smaller. Jammo (SM247) 07:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bus navigation

message: How about a page on Nightlink only? I think it deserve its own page.
--Matt ke 04:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is that?  What information do you think should be added?  It seems just about right to me - this is an enclyopedia, not an almanac.  Routes and other details are provided at the operator's web site. Jpp42 10:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nightlink 

message: What is a transfer ticket?
[This version]
Where on the TransLink website does it say that a "Single" is changing to a "Transfer". And is 399 Brisbane Bus Lines only Translink service?
Nicko6 10:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transfer? 

message: What is meant by Cubic in the description of the smart card. Is that a manufacturer?  If so, is that really relevant?  Jpp42 10:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explain 'Cubic' 

message: :Image:TransLink (Brisbane) 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 04:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:TransLink (Brisbane) Logo.png

message: Could someone else help me create a article on the go card as i get toldit is advertising while i was still working on the page  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt037291 (talk • contribs) 08:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GO CARD  

message: all i am  working on Wikipedia:Translink project to help edit sand improve articles's any one who can get the page working on the site would be much appreciated to help get it up and running thanks mattythebatty (talk) 11:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  The main article and the subjects related to it will suffice.  Perhaps categorising them would help.  I will be putting the Wikiproject up for deletion when I get around to it. --Arnzy (talk · contribs) 15:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  wiki project translink 

message: The Improvements section have been removed because the information in it was out of date and the improvements to services should be on TransLink Services or on the service provider's article.
For example improvements to QR Citytrain services should be on QR Citytrain and/or on the lines articles (eg Gold Coast Line). This will allow this article remain about Translink only. (Gezzza (talk) 04:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvements

message: I believe services should be moved back here, since now the route info is in templates the article is no longer large. What do you think? Gezzza (talk) 05:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Also I believe it is time to drop bus routes, since this info is not right to be in a encyclopedia and with TransLink likes to change bus routes and a lack of interest in editing this info (last edit 2007) its going to be hard to keep up with the changes. Gezzza (talk) 05:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point in regards to the Bus Routes.  A lot of editors don't have the time to be online 24/7 to be constantly updating the information those days.  As for the existing services page, Some of the routes are listed in the existing Bus Station pages.  So having to wind down on bus routes is going to be a bit of challenge. Sb617  (Talk) 05:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS tends to apply to other Australian cities (Sydney and Melbourne) in regards to Bus Routes (with some of them having not been updated in long either).  The Perth article tends to have a few active editors that are constantly updating thier info.  We would have to look at winding things down in other cities if it's to be applied here too. Sb617  (Talk) 06:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge (and delete bus routes) Discussion 

message: For a while now I been trying to expand the history on rail, bus and ferry stations but I am having trouble expanding them past a stub rating. So today I am thinking maybe we should merge the stations in one article. For example bus stations into Bus network article. So at least we can get three great articles out of the stub articles we have at the moment. Or maybe I miss something or maybe someone else has a better idea? Gerry (talk) 09:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a past discussion on the WP:AUS project page (somewhere in the archives) regarding Rail Stations in the past (somewhere in the archives which I will have to trawl through).  The general view at the time is that separate station articles would remain as separate articles, in spite of small station articles possibly not going further than stub status.  Medium/Large Suburban and City stations generally do have some history to them, considering most City stations world-wide and many Suburban stations do have a history stretching back to the early 1900s. Sb617  (Talk) 11:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a quick search but I couldn't find discussion but I will try again a bit later. Although I am not sure on the status of other cities, but in Brisbane the largest stations is Roma Street and Central and both are barely past the stub rating. I don't even think there will be enough history at Roma Street and Central to fill a full article. Gerry (talk) 11:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You can generally find enough information to fill out an article on any railway station with sufficient research. Remember that there's a couple of Australian railway journals with regular publications that go back fifty years; you'd be amazed at the amount of material covered there. For the major ones (and indeed some older and not-so-major), even that shouldn't be necessary - the National Library's newspapers site should have plenty enough to flesh out their early history. Rebecca (talk) 09:57, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I know Roma Street station has had a few deaths, train crashes and the like which if you/someone researched could add a bit of ye olde character to the article. Consider having a look at the National Library of Australia - News Paper Archives, I'm sure there will be some interesting snippets in there. Peachey88 (Talk Page ·  Contribs) 10:48, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Look at Burswood railway station, Perth or Warwick railway station, Perth for examples of two random suburban train station articles which are actually reasonably decent. Orderinchaos 11:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also don't forget, It's not the rating/length of article that makes it good or not, It's the content showen within the article. Peachey88 (Talk Page ·  Contribs) 11:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, very good points, and thanks for the link and the hints. Gerry (talk) 12:59, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Get in touch with the QR history unit, they are in the phone book, they will be only too happy to help, although the articles will probably be in print format --Matt (talk) 06:25, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge stations (rail, bus and ferry) into three articles 

message: *Disagree: A stand-alone page is warranted. - Shiftchange (talk) 18:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Go card 

message: Whatever happened to the proposed merge of bus routes in to this article? Because, right now, the busway station pages are looking fairly empty and I'd like to get another opinion before I revert the pages.
Additionally, what is the purpose of the "Infrastructure" section on this article? TravellerQLD (talk) 13:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal/Merge of bus routes? 

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: moved   ~ Amkgp 💬 16:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: TransLink (South East Queensland) →  – TransLink doesn't just operate in South East Queensland; it also operates/contracts out/manages public transport in regional Queensland, as the public transport wing of TMR. Requesting move to avoid misleading readers. ItsPugle (talk) 11:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 28 June 2020 

message: All mentions to Surfside Buslines and Sunbus Sunshine Coast on relevant articles such as train and bus stations, towns/suburbs, etc, should be replaced with the new branding Kinetic. Fork99 (talk) 23:49, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kinetic wikilinks