Talk:Viva Rapid Transit

message: I have to ask the question once again;
Why has this page been tagged?
How does this NOT "shape up" to Wikipedia's Style Guide??
There will undoubtably be some changes made in the following week, as changes happen to the subject matter this weekend.
So, what will constitute this message to be deleted??
(or do I just remove the tag myself?)
Bacl-presby 23:14, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagged

message: First, I would like to thank David Arthur for making the beautiful route map.
There are definitely room for upgrades to make the page look more organized and clean.
Can somebody please take a nicer picture of the Finch Terminal.
Some more pics of the buses and stations would be nice (better take them while they are new before the winter).
All photographs with a consistent width and height place on the right would look nice.
I also suggest that we start a Viva York page at the Wikicommons and dump all our Viva photographs there.
See example: MTR
Can someone please confirm the fact regarding 4286847 Canada Incorporated?
Operations:
If nobody can find out and confirm the President and Chair of VIVA then we should probably clear that area, rather than leaving it N/A. The Connex part can stay. More details about the organization and operation of VIVA can be added there.
Fares:
Maybe we can put the ticket prices in a table or something. A photograph or two would be nice. Someone can add a few sentences or so if they know anything about the GTA Smart Fare Card that they are planning on over the next several years.
See also:
The non-existent transit system should be taken away (Aurora, Markham, Newmarket, RH & Vaughan Transit), they are distracting. Let the York Region Transit page take care of them.
If people agree to these changes, then we can start upgrading our Viva York page. Please add to the suggestions if you have any. Thanks 
I can do some of the changes when I find the time later. User:AmosNider 2005 Oct 24
:User:Phil-hong 2005 Oct 30: I don't even think Viva has a President! They don't usually publicise about things like this, and since we can't seem to know who the management structure is I'm just knocking that part out.
::User:cncxbox 2006 May 07: I can confirm that VIVA's operator is 4286847 Canada Incorporated. I don't know why the company's name is a string of numbers.
:::When someone registers a compay, they must pay to have a corproate name search done in order to avoid using a name that is already in use. This charge can be avoided by registering the company under a number instead of a name. So it is officially 4286847 Canada Incorporated, but operates as "Viva". This is not uncommon in the corporate world. Ground Zero | t 12:37, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested changes and upgrade

message: Should there be separate articles for individual Viva staions, or should they be grouped into one omnibus article called "Viva stations" (or something else)?
:At this time, I don't think there should be separate articles for each individual Viva stations. Even for Bernard station, it's just a back wall of a shopping plaza! Just take some photographs and organize it into galleries inside the Wikimedia Commons under Viva and write a few notes about it. --AmosNider 12:25, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello!  A similar challenge has arisen with the various stations in the TTC subway/RT network.  Perhaps a starting point would be to expand on appropriate stations within each of the YRT line articles, like a paragraph for each (if warranted)?  I don't think there's currently a need for articles for each YRT station, but maybe later.  E Pluribus Anthony 14:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Viva station articles

message: They are both owned by York Region.
YRT is 100% Maintained by Public Funds. VIVA was bulit and is maintained by a public-private consortium, York Rapid Transit Corporation.
here is a link to a Zoning Notice from the Town of Markham which cites "York Rapid Transit Corporation", not "York Region".
http://www.markham.ca/markham/resources/pm_050322_yrt.pdf
the operation of VIVA is contracted out to Connex Transportation. YRT is run by Miller Transit, Laidlaw, and Can-Ar Coach.
York Region does maintain full control over fares and services, and they have decided to combine fares with YRT.
So as they act as one single service, they are two seperate systems.
YRT's website is http://www.yrt.ca and YRTP's website is http://www.vivayork.com
:Thanks.  Then, should it not be "maintained by York Rapid Transit Corporation, within which YRT operates" ... something or another?  And still, the relationship with YRT is non in the lead of the article: it is very odd that there is no mention of YRT there now. E Pluribus Anthony 14:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  YRT and VIVA relationship

message: added some time and peak hour details
source: http://www.vivayork.com/
Aznium 17:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Aznium|Aznium]] 

message: I was under the impression that bus rapid transit systems operated on exclusive rights of way, as in Ottawa or Pittsburgh. Until Viva develops separate transitways, is it really anything more than a few express bus lines? -- Mwalcoff 03:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's all it is at the moment, but it's in early phases of an overall transit strategy.  They have publicized plans for dedicated transitway/lanes along Yonge St. and parts of Highway 7.  PKT 12:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but until then, should the article title be Viva (bus rapid transit) or Viva (bus system)? -- Mwalcoff 01:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really BRT? 

message: The article now says that the Purple route has been extended eastwards, but the map on yrt.ca still shows those stops as ‘future’. Can someone provide confirmation that service has indeed begun? David Arthur (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi David - this link makes it look pretty official.  PKT (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  In addition, Viva Purple buses eastbound now display 'Markham-Stouffville Hospital'. I have updated the various articles that are affected by the extension opening. - Enzo Aquarius (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that Markham Stouffville Hospital is the correct name for the hospital. It does not have a dash and neither does the Vivastation. Don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia - check their web site . Should someone move Markham-Stouffville Hospital to Markham Stouffville Hospital which already exists as a redirect page? The redirect page has many more links than the main page. I don't know the proceedure for this. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The procedure is to use the 'Move' tab (at the top of every page, between 'History' and 'Watch'). I have taken care of this.  PKT (talk) 15:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Markham-Stouffville Hospital 

message: I have restored a record for each of the "missing" Vivastations, gathered together on one page. Navigation was broken in the infoboxes and the Template:VIVA Stations. Because I have retained the same naming convention you can repair any broken links you find by simply prefixing the old name with Other Vivastations#. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Other Vivastations]]

message: There is no need to maintain the same information about YRT Vivastations and Terminals in several places. For example the article for Richmond Hill Centre (YRT) has all the information in one place (and more), that is also broken into three tables at Viva Blue, Viva Purple and Viva Pink which are all redundant. And then there's the orphaned List of York Region Transit/VIVA stations which repeats the same tables for all 5 lines. Why? The Template:VIVA Stations does a vey good job of listing the routes and if an existing or proposed station does not justify the creation of its own page an entry can now be added to Other Vivastations. I advocate eliminating all those tables, using the appended template to navigate, only retaining the brief history of each line, and the immediately deletion of the so called list. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: And another thing

message: :Image:Vivayork.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 03:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Vivayork.png

message: The third paragraph of the article uses "phase" to describe the initial rollout of the system, and describes the current phase as being phase 4.  Later, the article talks about "phase" to describe the initial implementation, the movement of buses to dedicated ROWs, and the replacement of buses with LRT.  These two uses of "phase" contradict each other.  One needs to be renamed, but I'm not sure which.  Is there an official definition of "phase" in the context of Viva?  216.220.43.110 (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phase confusion 

message: Since YRT and VIVA fares are identical by means of same fares, rules and ticket agents, maybe we should consider creating a new article that links the two sections.  York Region Transit \ VIVA (fares)?  There is quite a lot of repetition among the two YRT and VIVA fare articles.  --Eddiet19 (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't open a new article - I think it would be quickly deleted. A better alternative is to have the YRT article contain all of the subject matter about fares, and the VIVA article could cross-link to the section with York Region Transit#Fares.  But your point is well taken;  they are in fact on one fare structure and trying to maintain that information in both places is awkward. PKT 16:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

text: We can create a template. I did this before: I created Template:Application_Tuning_on_the_Coolthreads_Platform that gets linked into UltraSPARC T1 and UltraSPARC T2. -- Raysonho (talk) 06:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  YRT / VIVA Fares combine 

message: The station articles of Viva don't indicate that they are bus stops. Would someone please correct all the station articles to indicate that they are bus stops? - ÆÅM «(fætsøn!) 09:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify all Viva station articles 

message: As many of us have seen Hum1969's sock account 911plantisimo edit Viva Purple in his POV, it may possibly mean that other Viva articles are also being edited in the same manner. Please help me in doing some major clean ups on the pages to remove any unsourced information, speculation, and information directly copied from the CPTDB wiki page. For more proof, think back to the "Viva Red" page that Hum1969 created about a Viva route on McCowan Road. His user page currently states that he wishes for a Viva route on McCowan, because " MCCOWAN ROAD IN MARKHAM IS F***ING THE NUMBER ONE BUISIEST ROADS OF ALL TIME IN YORK REGION..." Alexhead8835 (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hum1969's work