Talk:Union Station Bus Terminal

message: Note platform numbers are from 21 to 27, not 41 to 47.
99.230.131.122 (talk) 01:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

message: :That was last year. New train platforms are now in the twenties. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Union Station Bus Terminal. 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 this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110720184617/http://www.lea.ca/services/pdf/2035-fst.pdf to http://www.lea.ca/services/pdf/2035-fst.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090124083506/http://gotransit.com:80/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table16.pdf to http://www.gotransit.com/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table16.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080916005708/http://www.gotransit.com:80/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table21.pdf to http://www.gotransit.com/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table21.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081203041548/http://www.gotransit.com:80/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table61.pdf to http://www.gotransit.com/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table61.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081203041605/http://www.gotransit.com:80/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table65.pdf to http://www.gotransit.com/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table65.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090126232027/http://gotransit.com:80/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table71.pdf to http://www.gotransit.com/publicroot/en/PDF/Timetables/CurrentBoard/Table71.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ===Split proposal===
 new Union Station Bus Terminal. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree - the new bus terminal is a completely different facility and location. Tompw (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Agree, completely separate structures on opposite sides of the rail corridor. Radagast (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose split. I don't think there's enough content or notability for a separate article about the soon-to-be former bus station, at least for now. Yes it's a separate facility but it's a one-for-one replacement and is located less than 200 metres away. I'd prefer if we tried to make it work as a single article and then revisit this discussion after December 5. BLAIXX 23:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be effectively two articles on one page, each with an infobox for the new and old terminal. To me, that seems cumbersome compared to leaving the old terminal in its own article. The new terminal is substantially different from the old in features other than location. (See draft.) It's more than moving a bus loop to the other side of the tracks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 15:23, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Each with an infobox? I don't think that needs to be the case. Looking at the current article there are four sections: Top, Bus routes, Connections, and Future relocation. Only about two-thirds of the Top section applies exclusively to the old terminal. With that level of overlap, it just makes sense to have everything in one article rather than duplicating over two. BLAIXX 16:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: The bus routes section has description that pertains only to the old terminal, such as fixed platform assignments and restrictions on double-decker buses. In the Connections section, there could be variations between the old and new articles; the new terminal is not near the streetcar and bus connections mentioned. I suppose we could drop these details for the old terminal on December 5 although it would be nice to retain the mention about double-decker buses and fixed platform assignment. With your suggestion, I assume the old terminal's text (i.e. any facts to be retained) would be simplified and all be consolidated into one section ("Previous terminal"). But it seems, there will be a major modification to do on December 5, which my split suggestion simplifies by allowing advance setup. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose split It's still the Union Station bus terminal, with the same bus services as before. Rejigging the article around so that there's a "history" section with info about the old terminal and the new one seems the best idea to me, given the limited info on the terminal at present. With regards to connections - the bus terminal is still part of Union Station. e.g. The South entrance to Union Station is still "connected" to the TTC or UP Express, regardless of the long walk through the station complex. Turini2 (talk) 21:11, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Agree that sounds good to me - happy to have a look at it when it's drafted Turini2 (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Agree this is more or less how I pictured it. And like I said, this still leaves the door open for a split in the future. BLAIXX 14:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Have to Agree given the poor consensus on the first proposal and the well-laid-out plan for this one. Radagast (talk) 14:56, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Comment Any chance you could do a first pass example in a sandbox page? Would be easier to see how things flow. Tompw (talk) 16:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

text: support Thanks for taking the time to the mock-up - it's a big help. I'm liking what I'm seeing. Any minor niggles can be fixed in the normal editing process after the change. Tompw (talk) 17:13, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

text: Shuffle completed. Tophats included for clarity: old vs. new terminal. Happy editing! TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  New bus terminal 

message: new Union Station Bus Terminal. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree - the new bus terminal is a completely different facility and location. Tompw (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Agree, completely separate structures on opposite sides of the rail corridor. Radagast (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose split. I don't think there's enough content or notability for a separate article about the soon-to-be former bus station, at least for now. Yes it's a separate facility but it's a one-for-one replacement and is located less than 200 metres away. I'd prefer if we tried to make it work as a single article and then revisit this discussion after December 5. BLAIXX 23:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be effectively two articles on one page, each with an infobox for the new and old terminal. To me, that seems cumbersome compared to leaving the old terminal in its own article. The new terminal is substantially different from the old in features other than location. (See draft.) It's more than moving a bus loop to the other side of the tracks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 15:23, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Each with an infobox? I don't think that needs to be the case. Looking at the current article there are four sections: Top, Bus routes, Connections, and Future relocation. Only about two-thirds of the Top section applies exclusively to the old terminal. With that level of overlap, it just makes sense to have everything in one article rather than duplicating over two. BLAIXX 16:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: The bus routes section has description that pertains only to the old terminal, such as fixed platform assignments and restrictions on double-decker buses. In the Connections section, there could be variations between the old and new articles; the new terminal is not near the streetcar and bus connections mentioned. I suppose we could drop these details for the old terminal on December 5 although it would be nice to retain the mention about double-decker buses and fixed platform assignment. With your suggestion, I assume the old terminal's text (i.e. any facts to be retained) would be simplified and all be consolidated into one section ("Previous terminal"). But it seems, there will be a major modification to do on December 5, which my split suggestion simplifies by allowing advance setup. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose split It's still the Union Station bus terminal, with the same bus services as before. Rejigging the article around so that there's a "history" section with info about the old terminal and the new one seems the best idea to me, given the limited info on the terminal at present. With regards to connections - the bus terminal is still part of Union Station. e.g. The South entrance to Union Station is still "connected" to the TTC or UP Express, regardless of the long walk through the station complex. Turini2 (talk) 21:11, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Split proposal

message: A first draft for the new terminal is available: User:TheTrolleyPole/Union Station Bus Terminal. I still need to copy useful text and REFs from the old article. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:55, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Draft

message: : Agree - the new bus terminal is a completely different facility and location. Tompw (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, completely separate structures on opposite sides of the rail corridor. Radagast (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose split. I don't think there's enough content or notability for a separate article about the soon-to-be former bus station, at least for now. Yes it's a separate facility but it's a one-for-one replacement and is located less than 200 metres away. I'd prefer if we tried to make it work as a single article and then revisit this discussion after December 5. BLAIXX 23:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be effectively two articles on one page, each with an infobox for the new and old terminal. To me, that seems cumbersome compared to leaving the old terminal in its own article. The new terminal is substantially different from the old in features other than location. (See draft.) It's more than moving a bus loop to the other side of the tracks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 15:23, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Each with an infobox? I don't think that needs to be the case. Looking at the current article there are four sections: Top, Bus routes, Connections, and Future relocation. Only about two-thirds of the Top section applies exclusively to the old terminal. With that level of overlap, it just makes sense to have everything in one article rather than duplicating over two. BLAIXX 16:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: The bus routes section has description that pertains only to the old terminal, such as fixed platform assignments and restrictions on double-decker buses. In the Connections section, there could be variations between the old and new articles; the new terminal is not near the streetcar and bus connections mentioned. I suppose we could drop these details for the old terminal on December 5 although it would be nice to retain the mention about double-decker buses and fixed platform assignment. With your suggestion, I assume the old terminal's text (i.e. any facts to be retained) would be simplified and all be consolidated into one section ("Previous terminal"). But it seems, there will be a major modification to do on December 5, which my split suggestion simplifies by allowing advance setup. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose split It's still the Union Station bus terminal, with the same bus services as before. Rejigging the article around so that there's a "history" section with info about the old terminal and the new one seems the best idea to me, given the limited info on the terminal at present. With regards to connections - the bus terminal is still part of Union Station. e.g. The South entrance to Union Station is still "connected" to the TTC or UP Express, regardless of the long walk through the station complex. Turini2 (talk) 21:11, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: new alternative proposal. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 01:53, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that sounds good to me - happy to have a look at it when it's drafted Turini2 (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Agree this is more or less how I pictured it. And like I said, this still leaves the door open for a split in the future. BLAIXX 14:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Have to Agree given the poor consensus on the first proposal and the well-laid-out plan for this one. Radagast (talk) 14:56, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Comment Any chance you could do a first pass example in a sandbox page? Would be easier to see how things flow. Tompw (talk) 16:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Alternative shuffle proposal

message: Mockup of Union Station Bus Terminal article with shuffle TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: support Thanks for taking the time to the mock-up - it's a big help. I'm liking what I'm seeing. Any minor niggles can be fixed in the normal editing process after the change. Tompw (talk) 17:13, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

text: Shuffle completed. Tophats included for clarity: old vs. new terminal. Happy editing! TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Mockup draft for the shuffle

message: As of July 12, 2021, the Rider Express website still says that the Toronto pickup location is at 55 Front Street West. It appears that the date that Rider moves to USBT is unknown as of July 12. The Rider entry also appears to be unsourced. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:14, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, I've removed the Rider Express entry. 162 etc. (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rider Express