Talk:Share taxi

message: Matatus are called mathrees because the swahili word for three is tatu. By simply replacing the Swahili "tatu" for the English "three", typical of sheng, the word changes from matatu to mathree.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.57.174 (talk • contribs) 06:17, 19 January 2006
:When I visited Kenya (a while back, 1998) we were told, I think by the receptionist at the Bamburi Beach Hotel, that matatus were named for "matata" which means "worries" (matata in Swahili-English dictionary) as in the popular phrase hakuna matata. Pbhj (talk) 01:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion from [[Talk:Matatu]] 

message: Steverwanda did a great job creating a much needed general article from the many small articles that had been started on regional versions of share taxis.  In order to keep the  edit attribution clear, I have merged the histories from sherut, bush taxi and matatu here, for anyone who is looking at the history and thinks that they're seeing the biggest revert war ever.  ;)  Cheers, BanyanTree 15:07, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: BanyanTree -- I'm not sure a history merge was the right approach here (although it'd be a great hassle to fix now), as it confuses the history quite a bit (as you say, it looks like a giant revert war), and it's very hard to tell what some edits actually achieved to the previous article. It's better to simply note where things came from in the edit summaries and perhaps on the talk page. — Matt Crypto 16:40, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Matt, It hadn't even occurred to me that it would be disputed; I would definitely have brought it up here for discussion if I had.  A talk page attribution would have been the only way to do it, as there was no edit summary attribution and the page history basically consisted of Steverwanda and Ezeu so the authorship of much of the content was not visible in the history.  Maybe I just haven't read the relevant policy pages or am  suffering from copyright paranoia, but is a note on a talk enough to make the article GFDL compliant? - BanyanTree 17:23, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I hope I didn't come across as too critical -- I don't think it matters a huge amount, and I think the merge was a good idea. Still, I do think it's better in general to keep seperate edit "streams" separate, otherwise the histories get somewhat incoherent. I believe that making sure that a user can find the history and authors of all the content is sufficient for GFDL, so, if the histories hadn't been merged, we could have simply included pointers to the merged articles, and a user could examine the complete histories of the seperate merged-in pages. — Matt Crypto 19:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: It looks good. I'd thought something like this was in order for a while (ever since I learned about matatu while working on bush taxi). While I understand Matt's concern over the histories, it's not too difficult to distinguish when contributors were working on different articles; the edits usually come in flurries. It is difficult to figure out which article that editor was working on, though, unless you click through. But I'm glad to see the articles in one place. It'd be nice to see some more sources added for the matatu info and anything else that was merged in here. — BrianSmithson 16:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi there... I'm glad the changes I made seem to be acceptable. Sorry if I acted a bit unilaterally - I would have discussed things more, but there didn't seem to be much discussion on most of the various pages, so I assumed nobody was very interested! I initially intended to merge the African ones only, which I know from experience are almost identical and hence don't really warrant separate pages. For those elsewhere in the world I kept the separate article if it seemed to be substantial and merged stub articles (such as the Israeli one) into a subsection of this article. If any of the general facts at the top of the page don't apply to non-African buses then someone should edit appropriately... — Steverwanda 09:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History merge

message: Congratulations! You are off to a great start here, and this is indeed an important topic which has its full place in WP. For the time being the weaker links that need attention are:
:•	Latin America (a lot going on there)
:•	Asia
:•	The public policy interface – including links to sustainable transportation and the new mobility agenda.
As anyone who has ever used them, shared taxis are a great way to get around and more often than not tend to pop up in an environment  where the planners and policy makers have failed to meet people’s legitimate demands.  Is there a lot that’s wrong with these systems at their worst. You bet! But in virtually every case, there is something that can be done about it. And should be!
In an attempt to further strengthen this fine start, I am inviting colleagues from the New Mobility Agenda ‘idea factory’ at http://www.newmobility.org and the Sustran list at sustran-discuss@egroups.com which offers terrific coverage of transport in Asia to pitch in and help us complete this world inventory.  As to how it fits in with public policy, we have recently set up an open forum at http://www.xtransit.org/ the members of which are also being invited to pitch in here as well. 
ericbritton 11:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: International coverage

message: Any opinions on this? I think it's a mixture a the moment, though a lot of the main blurb was written by Brian Smithson in the Bush taxi article so uses US English. The article covers the Jitney, a US vehicle, but also refers extensively to matatus, dala-dalas etc. which operate in former British colonies and hence use British English so it could go either way. Steverwanda 10:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did I write it in AmE? It should have been in BrE, as that's the type of English preferred in most of Africa. I have no problem with changing over where needed. — BrianSmithson 13:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just the double l in travelling. Steverwanda 15:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reckon it should'nt be an issue, English or American, as long as we spell right. I was thinking about the artilce cornmeal, that we should do to it as we have done to this one – but if BrE vs. AmE is an issue, then we'll have a problem. By the way, see Talk:Maize#Why isn't this called CORN?.--Ezeu 01:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  US or British English? 

message: I think this needs some change as it stands - the first paragraph in the 'along the route' subsection contains information about the pricing structure, luggage regulations and departure times, which aren't to do with what happens along the route. My idea was to try and separate information about what actually happens when the vehicle is loading and setting off from more general stuff such as its ownership and pricing. Would it be feasible to have two sections broadly along those lines?
Also, there is obviously a difference in systems between 'ticketing' buses and the sort we have here in Rwanda, where you just get on the bus without purchasing a ticket (even at the taxi park) and pay the conductor when you get off. Probably need to generalise the entry in 'Operation' and add more specific information in the Features in individual countries section. — Steverwanda 16:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with separating all pricing into one section is that people often pay at the gare (those who board at the original location) while others pay en route. That's why we've got two pricing sections at the moment, and I personally think it is more logical that way. As for individual countries being different, that is of course correct. But I don't know if further Balkanisation is a good idea. Why not simply add a note that "In many countries this, but in other countries that"? That said, the "Operation" section is written with bush taxis specifically in mind. I have no idea how relevant the info is for other areas. — BrianSmithson 16:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, that sounds good. However, the stuff about payment in the first paragraph of 'Along the route' doesn't refer to what happens along the route. Maybe general info about pricing (the government, road conditions etc plus a note of the two systems) should be in one section, then a small part in 'Along the route' about passengers who actually do pay along the route? — Steverwanda 16:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see what you mean. What about just dropping the "Along the route" heading down a paragraph? Then the pricing at the gare stuff is still in the section that talks about gares, er, whatever they're called outside Cameroon. The only remaining note about pricing goes with people boarding en route and their potential arguments with the conductor (usually called the "small boy" in Cameroon). — BrianSmithson 17:50, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Operation section 

message: The country/state/region issue should soon qualify for Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars ever, so keep it up. --Ezeu 19:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:LAME 

message: Re: " Please stop pushing your pro-separatist or pro-independence POV. "  - It's nonsense. Calling anywhere country is far from being separatists or independence advocators. Country ≠ sovereign state. Please justify the accusation, or else please stop. — Instantnood 20:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Remarks by user:Alanmak

message: The following sounds really suspicious, and as it was unsourced information from an anonymous contributor, I've removed it for now:
:Matatus are popular with the younger crowd, and are linked with youth and rebellion. The more popular ones play current hit music through loud expensive speakers, have trendily dressed touts and drivers, and the vehicles themselves are "pimped up" with elabate paint jobs, spinning rims, fancy head and taillights etc.
Can anyone comment one way or the other on this information's validity? — BrianSmithson 13:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed info on matatus 

message: In Estonia, shared taxis also exist (mainly in the capital, Tallinn, for urban transport) and they are locally (in Estonian) called "liinitakso" (official name) or "marsruuttakso" (old name but still widely used) or "marsa" (slang name). Unfortunately I do not have the skills nor the time to edit this page correctly to add Estonian information. It'd be nice if anyone who is more skilled than I am in editing Wikipedia could do that. Thanks, or sorry for probably posting in the wrong place.
:Done.--GagHalfrunt 20:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a remark 

message: "Share taxis are an important form of mobility (and job creation) in many parts of the world but are by and large poorly understood and not well integrated into the overall transportation projects of cities and regions."
What is meant by "are poorly understood"? That's not written properly, I suppose. Does it mean that they are poorly understood by scientists? users? authorities? First world citizens? I think they're a completely understandable service, especially where many people don't have a car, or money to buy fuel easily.. Also, the countries which rely on this service do have regulations (why is it said that it is harder to regulate this kind of service compared to a taxi? In most countries these vehicles are clearly marked, grouped by route / area of coverage, and must follow a special kind of regulation, even if they're private). Moreover, I don't understand why is it stated that share taxis must be old and polluting.. On the contrary, since they are used for a job, they must comply with extra specifications to the transit authorities, compared to any citizen's car (even if a country didn't have a specific law for private transport, which is unlikely, it must regulate that any service provided by a legally recognized company or individual be safe to clients).
I don't know if it would be better or worse for the environment if every one of the 3 passengers plus driver on a share taxi drove a separate car (let's say it's not carrying the full load of 4 passengers, but also if it constantly carries two or less, then probably the taxi will be appointed to a different zone over time). Perhaps, since the share taxi spends part of its time driving with no passengers, there's no difference for everyone to travel in a different car. But I don't think that share taxi networks have to be especially 'old and polluting' when compared to other options. It may sound like I am defending this way of transport (I don't actually like having to share space with anyone), but I'm just trying to say that the article either exaggerates it's views or actually doesn't explain itself correctly. Share taxis have (depending on the region) some advantages too, and just being shared doesn't turn a taxi older, but it does make it cheaper.
note: please pardon me if I made any mistakes in writing or perhaps seem to be speaking too 'aggresively'.. My english is far from perfect, and because of that, I struggle a bit with words trying to express myself 200.7.17.207 09:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing 

message: Last year I added details of the Petit Taxi and Grand Taxi in Morocco to this page. Both of these were removed by someone saying that these were normally private. I have now checked my facts with a Moroccan and on the web for more evidence to backup my claim. Can I ask someone with a longer track record to add this information to the page.
Here are some references:
"The other option is to take a Grand Taxi. The entire taxi cost Dirham 480 to hire from Marrakech to Quarzazate. If you are willing to squeeze into the back of the taxi with three others, while having 2 sit in the front seat, it will cost 80 Dirham each. The taxi will only leave once it is full."
http://www.cameltrekking.com/erg-chebbi-directions.html
"Around places like Merzouga and Rissani you don't always have to wait for a grand taxi to fill up with 6 people. Many times I would buy only 2 or 3 seats of the journey and the driver would agree to take me"
http://www.lonelyplanet.com/letters/afr/mor_pc.htm
"To get to M'hamid, the last town before the desert begins, you have to get a shared taxi ("grand taxi) from Zagora, which costs 25 dirham per passenger.
It may take quite some time for a shared taxi to fill up with 6 passengers. If you're in a hurry, pay 150 dirham for all seats, and maybe an extra 50 to pursuade the driver to leave immediately."
http://www.triotours.com/faq/ma/to-zagora.htm
"You can also flag down a taxi anywhere along the road. If there's any space, the driver will stop and take you in. When it's full, the driver will wave at you apologizingly."
http://www.triotours.com/faq/ma/travel-around-taxi.htm
"It's common for a petit taxi to pick up another passenger along the road when there is a free seat. The driver will stop to check where the new passenger is going. He'll only take him or her in if their destination is on your route or involves only a small detour. The new passenger will pay part of the fare, of course."
http://www.triotours.com/faq/ma/travel-around-taxi.htm
Note that I have included text from other websites, but only to validate the claim (and only on this discussion page). When this issue has been resolved this note can be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PeterIto (talk • contribs) 21:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grand Taxis and Petit Taxis in Morocco 

message: Document seems to be locked, on chart on right in Puerto Rico please add "Carros Públicos" thanks – Moebiusuibeom 19:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carros Públicos 

message: I couldn't get the dolmuş - minibus differentiation. It's said in the article that dolmuşes are more comfortable, expensive and rare, opposed to the cheaper and abundant "minibus"es. This sounds like the writer confused dolmuşes with ordinary taxicabs, or at least with the so-called taksi-dolmuş (a regular 5-7 seater passenger car working with the same "departs when full" principle), which had its day in the 70s and 80s but is almost inexistent today (Bursa is the only example i know having taksi-dolmuşes) 88.232.177.54 16:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dolmuş (Turkey)

message: "The first U.S. jitneys ran in Los Angeles, California in 1914. By 1915, there were 62,000 nationwide. Local regulations, demanded by streetcar companies, killed the jitney in most places. By the end of 1916, only 6,000 jitneys remained"
So this article is telling me that there was the first jitney in 1914, 62,000 BY 1915, and 6,000 at the end of 1916. I don't think this is even remotely true. Christopher Reuter 20:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is what the reference says. I have googled, and several other articles corroborate the reference used here. There is mention of what is called the "Jitney Episode", the "Jitney Phenomenon" or the "jitney craze that swept the nation" in 1914-1915, which apparently saw Jitney services spring up in nearly every major US city. The figure 62,000 is mentioned in a couple of places, and that indeed the number of jitneys grew to that number within two years. There are also several mentions that the "episode"  enseminated in Los Angeles. , , , , .  --Ezeu 23:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jitney's in the US

message: I'm not sure what that is doing in the list.  Although you can ride on a School Bus in the boonies (not sure if that was legal even there and then, but no one made a fuss) and some places have special regulations for seniors and people with disabilities, I don't think it's appropriate to list it in this context.  As far as I know most places have regulations that school bus operators may NOT take anyone but schoolkids.  Otherwise I think there would be a huge mess with insurance.  Tourists looking for a shared ride are certainly not well advised to  go asking for a School Bus.  If there are other interpretations s.o. should write a paragraph on it, otherwise I'd vote for taking it out of the list.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.51.15.15 (talk) 04:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  School Bus in the US 

message: Texxi is the brand name for shared taxi service offer by a UK company. The service is neat, but is not well known within the UK and is certainly not ubiqitous and feels out of place. Possibly a general section on the use of IT to support Share Taxi may be appropriate within the article. I will modify the entry in a few weeks unless people argue for retaining it here and add a section about Information Technology modern role.User:PeterIto 03:49 29th Oct 2007 (UTC)
I have now generalised the Texxi article and just linked to them at the end PeterIto (talk) 23:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Should Texxi be included?

message: WP: Neologism reads:
:Neologisms are words and terms that have recently been coined, generally do not appear in any dictionary, but may be used widely or within certain communities. Protologisms are neologisms that have not yet caught on widely. (In fact, note that the word "protologisms" is itself a neologism and its use should be avoided.)
:Using neologisms within articles: The use of neologisms should be avoided in Wikipedia articles because they are not well understood, are not clearly definable, and will have different meanings to different people. Determining which meaning is the true meaning is not only impossible, it is original research as well—we don't do that here at Wikipedia. Articles that use neologisms should be edited to ensure they conform with the core Wikipedia policies: no original research and verifiability. (See Reliable sources for neologisms below for more on supporting the use of neologisms.)
I think you have to prove that share taxi is the most commonly used phrase for this mode of transport - it's NOT just the one wikipedia editors have agreed to use (way back when) for some arbitrary reason, which would be WP:original research.
I also have a problem with the possibility that other longer articles have been merged into here, as someone wants "public light bus" to be.  Were Jitney, Jeepney and other longer articles deleted into this smaller article? 
This mode of transport is gaining more and more attention - and is being opposed by special interests. So let's make sure we are using the BEST wikipolicies in putting an article together on this topic. Carol Moore 15:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Share Taxi" looks like a neologism - usable for article title?

message: :Oppose because each mode which is widely used does deserve a longer article. Carol Moore 15:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose as there is no reason for it not to have its own article as well to give more details. I have, however, added a link to Public Light Bus from Share-Taxi because the Red Bus clearly meets the 'Share Taxi' organisational structure.PeterIto (talk) 16:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose HK public light bus really should not have been linked here.  Regular taxis are also shared. Benjwong (talk) 05:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging Public Light Bus

message: Is this article about Public Light Buses in Hong Kong, or Public Light Buses in general?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.246.38.181 (talk) 08:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: The article on Barbados offers ZRs as a share taxi... --Smilo Don (talk) 08:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  add ZR from Barbados?   

message: Along the route: "Usually the vehicle continues along its route even if it is not always full, although prevarication and long delays are common".
I believe that the word needed here is 'procrastination' () not 'prevarication' () Pendant (talk) 10:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Good catch. Simpler edit is to delete IMO. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 18:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prevarication? 

message: On the chart at the top it mentions "Combi" but I have most often heard them referred to as "Trufi" (pronounce true-fee) Combi describes the general van type vehicle. 
(logged in and removed my IP... sorry.) 
Titanium geek (talk) 12:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bolvia 

message: Many of the vehicles for hire described in the "Traditional systems around the world" section may be better placed on their own pages, as they appear to simply be informal means of public transportation and so not conforming to the share taxi definition. These sections include: bush taxi, Share taxi#Daladala (Tanzania), etc.
All informal means of public transportation aren't share taxis: a share taxi is a vehicle for hire with a specific and unique mode of operation. It is informal, leaves when full instead of using a timetable, plys a route, may stop anywhere along that route and/or have a fixed terminus, and usually isn't operated by a government agency. 
Fleetham (talk) 15:36, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split section

message: I don't appreciate Mr. Coppers removing many refs. Let's NOT do this. You may have a LEGIT. COMPLAINT, but let's solve this though TALKING, not REMOVING ALL THE REFS. Fleetham (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This edit was submitted with the comment 'replaced removed references'. This change was actually very considerable. Could the contributor please provide a more complete description of the changes and the motivation for them? PeterEastern (talk) 19:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

text: I note that Fleetham has left the above comment. Can I suggest a better comment would be 'see talk page for reasons'. I have changed the section title to be more neutral. PeterEastern (talk) 19:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits 10 March 2011 'replaced removed references' 

message: This is an incomplete (I will come back and work more on it later) chart of share taxi modes of operation throughout the world. Maybe this will help us to come to a definition for share taxi. I have omitted the fact that all of the below allow multiple passengers to share the ride. Fleetham (talk) 15:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is in direct violation of Wikipedia policies, see WP:NOT#OR. As for a definition, a share taxi would seem to be something which generally makes several stops, travels along a predictable (commonly fixed) route, carries several passengers who are not travelling together, and doesn't follow a timetable. These conditions are not always fulfilled, but it is far outside of Wikipedia's scope to invent a precise definition for the somewhat nebulous concept of 'Share taxi'. This is just a red herring, instead we should be fixing the article.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Mode of operation chart

message: Mexico is not in South America, so I changed that to Latin America. Guatemalan colectivos are virtually identical to Mexican ones, so I added 
Guatemala to that section. A rutelero is a driver of a taxi, not the taxi itself http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/ruletero. Also, this word is very uncommon. I have ridden hundreds of colectivos in Guatemala and have never once heard this word.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Werseuch (talk • contribs) 00:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That Guatemala ruletero entry was correct and has a source. It's quite possible that both, the bus and the driver are called the same.TMCk (talk) 13:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This article in Spanish from Guatemala clearly speaks of the vehicles when reffering to "ruleteros". See introduction of article. Furthermore I found an online private add about somebody looking to buy vans and specivically rules out "ruleteros" unless they're low milage. That clearly showes that the term is being used for the vehicles. I saw some mentioned in other articles that also used the term for the collectives and as I mentioned sometimes before I think there is a good possabillity that in popular culture they also refer to the drivers as "ruleteros" but I couldn't find a source that is clear about this. since we have to go with sourced content I'll reinstate the edit as was and add the above new Spanish source as ref. TMCk (talk) 18:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guatemalan colectivos 

message: I notice that an edit by POL098 on 9 April 2011 was reverted by Fleetham without any reason given. I note that neither the original text nor suggested change had a reference. Can I suggest that where such text is reverted then as a minimum a reference is at found to support the original text and a justification is give in the submission comment field. I notice that the POL098 has since made a good number of changes and new references. He also appears to be a well-seasoned contributor to Wikipedia across a wide range of subjects. As such, I recommend that we give the contributor space to develop on the article without further reversions. I would recommend that we given 24-48 hours before any of the three regular recent contributors respond. I would also recommend that we discuss any proposed changes on this talk page first.  PeterEastern (talk) 13:41, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Pol098's edit shows no misspellings and the only problem I can see is an extra comma. I'd say this is just more evidence of Fleetham's troubling editing style and feelings of ownership. For more evidence that this is not a fluke but a persistent habit of Fleetham's, feel free to visit the Lanix history page and its associated talkpage.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 15:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversion 9 April 2011 

message: In PRChina, share taxis like the ones in Hong Kong are numerous. They are called "breadloaf" or "miandi" taxis in both places. My Wikicode is not so strong that I can not safely do it, so do it if you want.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by QASIMARA (talk • contribs) 17:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested ADD 23 September 2011  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Share taxi. 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/20060924233644/http://www.stm.info/English/info/a-taxi-aldo.htm to http://www.stm.info/English/info/a-taxi-aldo.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060622214532/http://stl.laval.qc.ca:80/pa1/taxis/i/T06r.jpg to http://www.stl.laval.qc.ca/pa1/taxis/i/T06r.jpg
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 22:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: These two articles, which deal both with the history of jitneys (the vehicle) and the etymology of the word jitney, should be cited.  
Gold, David L. 2018-2019. “Pursuing the origin of the American English informalism gitney ~ jitney: On the alleged Louisiana French word *jetnée and the fallacy of omne ignotum pro magnifico in etymological research.” Leuvense Bijdragen: Leuven Contributions in Linguistics and Philology. Vol. 102-103. Pp. 383-417.
Gold, David L. 2021. “American English jitney '[any] American coin of low denomination' < gittany ~ jittany 'idem' < Louisiana French *jetonnet *'idem' = French jeton + diminutive suffix -et (A Study in English and French Etymology and Numismatics).” In: Literature is Comparative : Toute littérature est littérature comparée. Etudes de littérature et de linguistique offertes à Roy Rosenstein par ses collègues, ses disciples et ses amis. Textes recueillis par Danielle Buschinger, Martine Marzloff, Patricia Gillies et Marie-Geneviève Grossel. Amiens. Presses du Centre d'Etudes Médiévales de Picardie. Collection Médiévales no. 70. Pp. 232-243.S. Valkemirer (talk) 16:45, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two publications worthy of citation 

message: For what it's worth, the Duolingo Ukrainian language course translates маршрутка (marshrutka) as "share taxi."  (Wiktionary calls it a route/routed taxi, among other things.) I don't know whether Duolingo got the term from Wikipedia, or if "share taxi" is actually said by English speakers in Ukraine. Peter Chastain [¡hablá!] 05:10, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ukraine 

message: The current one is from a depreciated source and only partially relevant to the topic at hand (in their own words Of course, a documentary about Fords is a documentary about the roadblocks and ultimately the occupation). Can the second source be fully used for the claims made by 99? FortunateSons (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for a better footnote 99