Talk:Sonoma–Marin Area Rail Transit

message: Wikipedians may publicize their SMART commuting behavior by adding a userbox to their userpage with the following code:
Thewellman (talk) 05:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox 

message: This article appears to be in need of updating, as the election has come and gone and this article hasn't been updated to reflect the voters decision. This is why I am marking it with an update tag.
Metallic95 00:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating 

message: Is the proposed Larkspur station 1/3 or .6 miles from the ferry dock? The articles currently lists both, so I'm changing both to "less than a mile." 71.132.130.143 (talk) 00:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Larkspur to ferry 

message: This article needs objective references. I'll try to improve my entries, too.
"http://www.sonomamarintrain.org" isn't an objective source of information. It's a taxpayer supported district mandated to promote increased housing density and train use.
Heck - they didn't even tell people about the average 2200 housing units for each station as required by MTC.
--76.126.108.203 (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and citations 

message: This article needs objective references. I'll try to improve my entries, too.
"http://www.sonomamarintrain.org" isn't an objective source of information. It's a taxpayer supported district mandated to promote increased housing density and train use.
Heck - they didn't even tell people about the average 2200 housing units for each station as required by MTC.
--76.126.108.203 (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The SMART homepage is primary information and needs to be refuted by other sources. --OctaviusIII (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and citations 

message: I went over the page with what I think was a fine-toothed comb to weed out some biased language while keeping the information intact.  There were a few things that just didn't fit, such as uncited speculation about how to better use the Measure Q revenue.  In addition, I updated the sources to be more completely filled in and switched to mirrored Independent Journal articles where possible, given that the links will expire and the articles will go behind a paywall.
I'd love to get some citations, which I can't find outside of comment threads, on RepealSMART's assertion that it doesn't want to repeal Measure Q but just provide a second referendum on the question. --OctaviusIII (talk) 22:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Edits for Objectivity 

message: The History section now includes substantive sections that should really be elsewhere in the article - for example, track rehabilitation. Instead, it should be a strictly chronological section, briefly touching on things that are covered in more detail elsewhere in the article (particularly things that happened over a period of time, such as track rehabilitation). I'm planning (at some point) to enlarge the article, and when I do that, I'm planning to make the History section into what one would expect to find there - major steps in the life of the system (voter approval, building the first sections, and initial operations; the last of the three subsections would include setting fares and schedules, and hiring [if/where newsworthy], prior to the December 2016 expected starting date). Comments/suggestions are welcome. -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 22:38, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me, one thought to consider is that we should remember to not make it TOO extensive as to put off the more casual reader. Waggie (talk) 08:58, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganizing the History section 

message: Article currently reads "111-year old fixed span Haystack Bridge was replaced with a newer movable bascule bridge." I don't have a suitable source; but if I recall correctly, the old bridge was not fixed -- it was a swing bridge. Oaklandguy (talk) 00:04, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The one by Black Point ? Definitely not fixed, they drove a locomotive into the drnk there once because the bridge tender was off at the local tavern :) 203.160.86.124 (talk) 11:00, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haystack Bridge probably needs correction 

message: The 1st free trial in June was a fiasco.  What SMART planned to do was take passengers to a Fair in Marin, inspect the trains to see how they handled the wait of passengers, and take the passengers back hours later.  The website had the schedule for standard service after launch.  Most would-be passengers were lucky because no train was there when they arrived.  A few with bad timing found themselves trapped in Marin for hours.  They returned after the last city busses, so had to walk home in the dead of night.  Rumor is that heads rolled over that.
In July, SMART gave free trials to the public again.  These went off without any problems, with a train carrying hundreds of passengers back and forth between Sonoma County Airport and San Rafæl and all points between with the correct schedule on the website.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:643:C002:C120:E56E:DE7E:2384:2FFB (talk) 23:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free public trial in June of 2017 and the free public trial of July of 2017 

message: Per the FTA National Transit Database agency profile, SMART is commuter rail rather than hybrid rail. (Note that the NTD does separate out hybrid rail). SMART also does refer to itself as a commuter rail system, and I can't find any relevant sources calling it hybrid rail. I'm comfortable with just having this in the commuter rail list, and not the hybrid rail list. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have only peripheral understanding of rail systems, but looking at the Hybrid rail destination article, it defines how SMART operates quite precisely. Carries freight off-hours, commuters during day, diesel engines. I'm not invested in the matter, but it's a curious distinction.  cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 01:46, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commuter rail vs hybrid rail