Talk:Bus rapid transit

message: Shorten the quote please.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.253.186.62 (talk) 15:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference #8

message: Hi all, just a quick note to say thanks for starting the BRT page, could someone please add a link from this page to our website? 
It's a portal to the Australian Bus Industry, and contains some really useful BRT resources and links. The links to Monash Institute of Public Transport, Professor Graham Currie's work in BRT v LRT, and numerous conference presentations would add depth to this page. 
Cheers!  
Emily 125.168.104.190 (talk) 23:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Emily.  I've added a follow-up about how to usefully add content to Wikipedia (rather than just website links) at the User_talk:Ozebus#Adding content page. Hope it's useful! —Sladen (talk) 23:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ozebus

message: It seens that the lists of the current systems should be separate. This currently reads as 1/3 article and 2/3 lists. I think it is about time each of those lists in different countries or continents should be separate pages. So where it says multiple is right. Really this article should only have exampls where appropriate, not all the systems in the world. Simply south (talk) 20:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing as nobody has objected after over two weeks i am going to try to split this <BIG>but i could really do with some help splitting this</big>. Simply south (talk) 20:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: re: The use of buses underground in Essen my information comes from various sources, including my own visits and German Wikipedia.
When I addeed a link to my own website I received a 'spam' warning - I hope that the editors of this page will accept that link as being 'on topic' for this page!
Citytransport.info (talk) 07:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: While I understand and agree with your sentiments in relation to the Essen Bus tunnels, I am concerned that this information is being lost to the Wikipedia as it is not replicated elsewhere.  In fact, with the development of Hybrid buses and Dual-mode buses, buses are tunnels is likely to become more viable and hence an important advance in Bus Rapid Transit based solutions.  Essen does not have an article dedicated it's special forms of bus services.  I will propose readding this information into the Guided Bus as it is more closely related to this topic. Bigglesjames (talk) 21:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essen tunnel buses 

message: "Pioneering research has been conducted by two American researchers about how Bus Rapid Transit brands are applied, and how BRT systems are visually identified."
This sounds a lot like sock puppetry, in fact, so does the section.  Is there a specific award that distinguishes this paper? Fooburger (talk) 05:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this really 'pioneering'? 

message: I've rearranged this article and revised the wording somewhat to make it easier to read and understand. It still needs citations to supporting sources for much of the text.Folklore1 (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikification 

message: If it looks like BRT but doesn't swim or quack like BRT, is it BRT? There seem to be a few services that are currently identified as BRT but that appear more to be Express bus service with a few advanced features. RapidRide (Seattle) and AC Transit are two examples. Rapid Ride (Albuquerque) is an example of an article that, in this contributor's opinion, more accurately describes the service. So where do we draw the line between BRT and rapid buses?
I found the table in this article quite interesting, albeit unsourced. It might be useful to create a rapid bus service article to differentiate the two. Ibadibam (talk) 05:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  BRT vs Express Bus service 

message: I think it would be a good idea to have an article about Busways themselves, ie highways used exclusively or predominantly by buses. The page, Busway is currently being used as a disambiguation page. I am proposing tat it is turned into an article would carry content that was relevant to both busways used in BRT systems also by other bus services which are not considered to be BRT system. It would also carry content about how guided busways are constructed and operated (as distinct from the article about Guided buses which already exists.
If people feel like joining the conversation then it might be best to do it on talk:Busway. Thanks.
-- PeterEastern (talk) 10:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed new 'Busway' article 

message: I am concerned that the examples section could keep growing and growing with more reference to more and more systems (see recent edits re Ottawa). In my view, this section should be limited to a small number of examples which are included because they illustrate important aspects of these systems. Notability for this section is not the same thing as notable for WP itself. PeterEastern (talk) 12:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that examples are being added without discussion and the merits of the additional one is unclear.  However this recent example is "The BRTS service of the city of Ahmedabad in Gujarat, India; ...", not the example of Ottawa which has been there since you created this section on 31 march this year hence my revert of its deletion.Bigglesjames (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is the Ottawa system an important example? Why are any of them? The "Examples" section is full of peacock words and definitely in need of better context for why a particular system is worthy of highlight in this article. Independent studies or reviews of BRT systems would be helpful sources. Ibadibam (talk) 22:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Might the examples section get out of hand? 

message: I think some care needs to be taken with the patronage figures on this and other BRT (and even transit pages).  When a figure of "Passengers" is given it often counts a patron making a single transfer as "two" passengers; in this case there should be some qualification.  The record figure for Curitiba of 2.3 million in a day includes transfers (i.e. people counted twice).  Assuming those people transferred on the way to work and the way home then they would count as "four" when they only made two "trips".  Technical specialists might assume this about such figures but for the general reader, IMHO, the word "passengers" denotes a single person on a continuous trip within a system.  I adjusted the Curitiba daily figure to reflect this.Tjej (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "passenger/patronage" figures- double count of transfers? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bus rapid transit. 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/20090227030154/http://camara.ccb.org.co/documentos/1935_Foro_TransMilenio_Fase_III_-TM_SA.pdf to http://camara.ccb.org.co/documentos/1935_Foro_TransMilenio_Fase_III_-TM_SA.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110713173303/http://www.kuchingptc.com/download1.php to http://www.kuchingptc.com/download1.php
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 09:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bus rapid transit. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20130828135003/http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698 to http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130703043300/http://www.itdp.org/microsites/bus-rapid-transit-planning-guide/brt-planning-guide-in-english/ to http://www.itdp.org/microsites/bus-rapid-transit-planning-guide/brt-planning-guide-in-english/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:59, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have placed a "by whom" tag on the "surface subway" label near the top of this page, since the cited source does not use that term to describe BRT. Since even the most optimistic ridership estimates appear to put BRT service levels closer to light rail than subway, we should be extremely cautious about any attempts to relabel BRT as "surface subway." Assuming no subway-like ridership numbers can be located, I would at the very least argue for the use of a framing device, such as saying "sometimes referred to by advocates as ..."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaphills (talk • contribs) 14:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Surface subway" label 

message: I have done some modest editing to improve readability and to reduce a non-encyclopedic tone in parts of the article. Remember, we need to maintain WP:NPOV in this article, and to focus on facts documented by WP:RS, rather than attempting to advocate or oppose BRT technology. Reify-tech (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Encyclopedic tone

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bus rapid transit. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20130605074801/http://www.vanhool.be/ENG/highlights/vanhoolpresentst.html to http://www.vanhool.be/ENG/highlights/vanhoolpresentst.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:24, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I noticed the line 'in Australia it is often called a "T-Way"'. I don't intend to start a dispute, but isn't this only true in Sydney? In Adelaide, there is the O-Bahn Busway and in Brisbane, there are 3 busway lines. Fauzi (talk) 08:05, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian "T-way" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Bus rapid transit. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20151018092300/http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/inicia-operacion-la-carrera-7-con-buses-duales to http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/inicia-operacion-la-carrera-7-con-buses-duales
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150810081725/http://www.tullaveplus.com/recarga to http://www.tullaveplus.com/recarga
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150919011327/http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/historia to http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/historia
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140309053717/http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/sites/default/files/informe_de_gestion_tmsa_2013_0.pdf to http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/sites/default/files/informe_de_gestion_tmsa_2013_0.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160501102439/https://algarete.com.co/2016/01/24/penalosa-y-su-trancon-de-intereses/ to https://algarete.com.co/2016/01/24/penalosa-y-su-trancon-de-intereses/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150919011327/http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/historia to http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/historia
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151018092300/http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/sites/default/files/informe_de_gestion_tmsa_2013_vf.pdf to http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/sites/default/files/informe_de_gestion_tmsa_2013_vf.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151018092300/http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/inicio-operacion-de-buses-hibridos to http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/es/articulos/inicio-operacion-de-buses-hibridos
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bus rapid transit. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20160506024550/https://algarete.com.co/2016/03/07/si-penalosa-no-va-a-la-ciudad-la-ciudad-va-a-penalosa/ to http://algarete.com.co/2016/03/07/si-penalosa-no-va-a-la-ciudad-la-ciudad-va-a-penalosa/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have cleaned up the table, split the country into a separate column, and alphabetized the listings. Some new entries have been added beyond the original 8, but no references are given. I propose deleting all entries that are not backed up by a reliable source, as well as adding new entries if they have good references. Reify-tech (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: BRT Gold standard listing

message: The text before recent edits called a system in England the first "comprehensive" BRT system (whatever that means) which has since been removed, changing the claim to that being the "first" (no qualifiers). So... Who was first? I often hear Curritiba in Brazil cited as "first", but it could be argued that any bus lane was the "first BRT" if one is willing to sufficiently water down the term... Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes something a "comprehensive BRT system"? Is there a certain minimum length? The fact that it was referred to as such by people in charge at the time? Is there a certain minimum amount of lines? The term is famously slippery and undefined, but I think it'd make more sense to give the early history in a more "complicated" form like on the high speed rail article, but I fear there'll be a lack of good sources... Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who was first? 

message: ====Dedicated lanes vs mixed traffic====
What portion of the BRT route should run along dedicated lanes? At least 50%? At least 70%? Or should it run entirely on dedicated lanes without any single portion of the route running in mixed traffic?
====Other routes on dedicated lanes====
May other bus routes of the same transit operator use the dedicated lanes intended for BRT routes? For example: Randomcity Transit Authority operates a BRT corridor running along Anyname Avenue intended for routes BRT1 and BRT2. But there are also routes 42 and 43 running on Anyname avenue also managed by Randomcity Transit Authority. Routes 42 and 43 are not BRT routes and operate in mixed traffic in the other parts of Randomcity. May these routes (42 and 43) also use dedicated lines intended for routes BRT1 and BRT2 in order to increase their service quality or the dedicated lanes can only be used by BRT routes? 
YS --88.196.69.76 (talk) 11:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A couple of questions 

message: May other bus routes of the same transit operator use the dedicated lanes intended for BRT routes? For example: Randomcity Transit Authority operates a BRT corridor running along Anyname Avenue intended for routes BRT1 and BRT2. But there are also routes 42 and 43 running on Anyname avenue also managed by Randomcity Transit Authority. Routes 42 and 43 are not BRT routes and operate in mixed traffic in the other parts of Randomcity. May these routes (42 and 43) also use dedicated lines intended for routes BRT1 and BRT2 in order to increase their service quality or the dedicated lanes can only be used by BRT routes? 
YS --88.196.69.76 (talk) 11:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Other routes on dedicated lanes

message: LightrailNow should not be accepted as an encyclopedic source:
Reasons: „De facto "BRT" is widespread in European cities“ is a strange statement of https://lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_brt007.htm published in Texas compared to https://www.itdp.org/library/standards-and-guides/the-bus-rapid-transit-standard/best-practices-2013/.
 
The cost "analysis" of LightrailNow refers to mystic „personnel discussion papers“ containing examples nobody could check and containing no indication of any objection to the study of the GAO. Nothing should be understood to be an objection to the GAO study which not even says so. As the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) had already regarded all mentioned aspects, this chapter is misleading.Waegend (talk) 12:47, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @"the US is neither a leading nation in BRT nor a leading country in passenger rail. It is also famously bad at cost control. Sources describing the situation in other countries should be added."-Reply: US institutes are certainly leading, US travel agencies differ. The US GAO used research wordwide. The situation in other countries was entailed in the GAO report.-Waegend (talk) 08:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost 

message: An edit last month to the “Environmental Issues” section by Waegend with a description that simply says, “hint” claims, “More news about Bogotá BRT follow in the next chapter.” There is no source.
I’m sorry to be blunt, but what could possibly be the meaning of this “hint”? I was going to just delete it due to the jaw-droppingly glaring break from encyclopedic tone, but seeing as how there’s no source cited for the preceding information, deleting it would probably require deleting a whole lot more. The way it is, it reads an awful lot like it’s been copy-pasted right out of a book. If anyone knows, please say so.
If anyone has any idea what cleanup tags are even relevant here, I think they’re more than necessary. Ntowle98 (talk) 18:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: SorryWaegend (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section: environmental issues. “More in next chapter”??? 

message: Do we still need the long chapter about tunnels? Why not remove it or substitute it by this section of chapter "Cost": 
"... Underground BRT was suggested as early as 1954.  As long as most buses run on diesel, air quality can become a significant concern in tunnels, but the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel is an example of using hybrid buses, which switch to overhead electric propulsion while they are underground, eliminating diesel emissions and reducing fuel usage. Alternatives are an elevated busway or an elevated railway, which costs differ."Waegend (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tunnels