Talk:Gautrain/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

POV

Ssteedmans sticky POV tag (again) removed because first two links (To Gautrain Corporate site and Bohlweki EIA site) contain ALL the hard documentary evidence related to the project. Please read this (all 2000 plus pages) before venturing an opinion on the POV neutrality of the postings. Also being closer to the project would help.

4 January 2006: RSA taxpayer

An anonymous IP removed the POV tag - as he or she did not bother to explain themselves here, and as I still believe this to be a one-sided article, I am reinstating it.

POV tag removal should be done after discussing it on the talk page. Links may carry a lot of information - is it neutrally summarised in the wikipedia article ? Wizzy…☎ 11:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Point of view check

I’m not well-acquainted with anything about this project apart from the trains it is to use, but this article seems quite heavy on the opposition to it, and rather overconfident in denying public support for it; can anyone more familiar with the situation shed light on the issue? David Arthur 21:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

im sure. nothing about the number of jobs it aims to create, or that property values around station precincts will go up. it must have been written by one of the opposition! someone should add that additional information so people can decide for themselves. We all know politicians love blowing hot air to please their constituencies. Greensalad

Well, maybe 75% of public debate in the press and 90% of the comments I've heard personally have been negative, however, as you mention, there are some positives - getting third party support for this information is very difficult. Artagra

I am not well acquainted with the project. I do think that the article has a negative bias. South Africa desperately needs public transportation infrastructure - any - and this is a first step. In JHB you simply cannot get around without a car - black taxis require you to go in to town and out again, and most white South Africans and tourists are wary of taking them. I think that the successful 2010 soccer world cup bid depended on the Gautrain ?? I think a lot of the negativity is from NIMBY - Not In My Back Yard - the people who would be affected, not the people who would benefit. The timescale for 2010 is very tight - any hesitation and it won't make it. Wizzy…☎ 05:54, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree 100% that their is a desperate need for good, clean, public transport in JHB. However, it's this very desperate need for public transport that means we have to be 100% sure the Gautrain is the correct choice. In terms of 2010, it's unlikely the full system will be ready by 2010, and it was infact never a 'set in stone' date - additionally, the system is independant of the soccer world cup - although the Airport-Sandton link would obviously be very useful at that time (While the media linked the initial proposed finish date of 2010 to the world cup bid, it was never a condition of the bid). Personally, while the 2010 world cup will be a big economic event, the Gautrain should be independant of it. I'm not convinced that the people desperately needing public transport are likely to be effectively be served by the Gautrain, due to limited capacity and limited routes. While the Gautrain would most probably operate at full capacity, and while it would most likely operate at a loss that, for a rail system, is deemed acceptable, we have to look at what else could be purchased with the money - ie, the opportunity cost. Spending the same money on a light bus system, reforming the taxi industry, or building a better rail network that service Soweto are all things that come to mind. Of course, there are plenty of arguments for the Gautrain - it will be used by a lot of people, and it may well revitalise the stations along it's routes (to me, the Midrand, Rosebank and CBD stations will in particular be beneficial.) If succesful, it may become a source of national pride. Artagra 10:38, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it will be accurate to expand the need for good, safe, reliable public transport to beyond JHB so that we include the whole of Gauteng. Now, in August 2007, we see a lot of preparation work and so forth happening, and the question comes up once more: "Was that the best they could have done with that amount of money?" Having had a look at monorail technology, and taking into consideration that it must be imported into South Africa, my guess is that the Gauteng Provincial Government could have built an interconnected transit network between just about all its suburban areas and their 2010 sites for roughly the same money. Having been part of a corporate environment with a strong focus on eradicating fraud and corruption, I must admit that the "fast-tracking" and short review periods and all that just smells like a rat to me. But perhaps I am just over-sensitive. We have to realize that the transport industry in South Africa is a violent one, especially the transportation sector catering for the middle to low income commuters. The local authorities seem to have very little control over this sector in the sense that eruptions of violence can rarely be dealt with efficiently before they spiral out of control, so the lack of opposition for the comment that the Gautrain was a train for the rich is quite significant. I do not believe that the reforming of a failing industry or the revival of a dying one will have such a huge positive effect on the economy as we might have hoped. We have to align ourselves with practices that have proven themselves elsewhere in the world. After having traveled to some extent, I have to admit that we are not so much different from the rest of the world. i_am_root 07:03, 1 August 2007 (SAST)

NPOV

OK - now we know why there is a perception of lack of neutrality and frequent use of the NPOV tag - heard about the project from a family member in governmnet involved and all that....... and of course there is of course no posibility that a massive public project involves much more than rails, stations and carraiges .... details about these things will not necessarily "balance" the article but yes - ad them - especially the record on price as presented to the public over the last five years. But all is hard to judge though because your family member (and her cronies in provincial governmnet) never engaged in a public debate with taxpayers regarding the project, also probably thinks an EIA is a public consultation process that meets the requirements of section 6(1) of the GTIA..........

5 January 2006 RSA Taxpayer

We are writing an encyclopedia, not trying to win an argument.

It sounds like you know quite a lot about the Gautrain.

We have plenty of commentary already about the price. No more on that, unless it is wrong. Not in the article, or on Talk.
We have a piece about the EIA - is it correct ?
Please add an item about the GTIA (whatever that is) ?
Can you add any information regarding JHB public transportation as background to this ?
What is the link between 2010 soccer world cup and Gautrain ?

(Also, can people add comments at the bottom, so the discussion can be followed easily ?) Wizzy…☎ 07:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gautrain Underground.jpg

Image:Gautrain Underground.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

POV Removal

Correction required: Supplementary documentary evidence is supplied - yes - but merely supplying the information does not automatically render an article neutral. Whilst the sources cited may themselves be neutral, even the most casual reader can see that this article is slanted (given that the Criticism paragraph dominates over 70% of the article). The article needs to be neutralised - more information needs to occupy other aspects of the article (such as details regarding shareholders and development strategies) before it balances out. Simply supplying a link to 2,000 page document does not make the matter more neutral no more than reading a encyclopedia miraculously completes a schoolkid's project. There is a manner of translation involved from cited source to presented text, and this has not been adequately fulfilled in this instance.

Please also take the time to note that the NPOV tag disputes the *article's* neutrality, not the sources or even the nature of the article itself; just the article.

I do not wish to get involved in a flamewar, but, if you wish to remove a NPOV tag, please discuss it first in the talk page! You'll note that there was some talk when the tag was instated, and so far pretty much everyone has gone along with it.

Yours,

Ssteedman 20:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Kudos

Well done, Wikiwizzy... the sub categorisation of the 'Criticism' section is more readable and splits information up in a meaningful way.

Ssteedman 11:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - I still think there is over-emphasis on the negative side, but press reading appears to back this sentiment. Remove the NPOV tag ? Wizzy…☎ 12:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

No objections ? tag is gone .. Wizzy…☎ 16:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, NPOV removal is justified

Heading: Gauteng's Gautrain..

The inclusion of this heading is a bit clumsy, I think.. Can't we use other headings to deal with each issue, ie Cost, Construction, Alternatives, Integration etc..? Gregorydavid 10:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Fares mentioned seem far too low

I'm not sure I understand the fare structure, it looks pretty cheap in the article. But recently it was announced that the fare from OR Tambo to Sandton would cost R100 one way.... Much more than the article seems to suggest. See http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=132&fArticleId=vn20100521042731348C957727 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.217.180 (talk) 05:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

A heavy price premium on the airport branches seems to be the international norm.

Official 2010 prices are here: http://www.gautrain.co.za/index.php?pid=2269&ct=1&fid=7&click=3, 2011 prices will be different. reference: http://twitter.com/TheGautrain/status/14820814409

-- Firefishy (talk) 08:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Map

Original request

Can there be a map included of all the stations? Think it would add some information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.2.69 (talk • contribs) 08:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

You can see a map over here:[1]. I'll see if I can create a map for this article, but I can't just copy theirs because it it copyrighted. —Gary van der Merwe ^(Talk) 09:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Strip Map

I created a strip map of the route. This should do for now and you can add more information (river and highway crossings) - it's been quite difficult getting all the required info though as there isn't a lot of information available about the exact route where the split occurs (which side of the N3 etc). Mulderpf (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

OpenStreetMap

OpenStreetMap has started creating a map, mostly guesswork at present. Are any GIS files available? Any help greatly appreciated. Firefishy (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Your work is appreciated. The Gautrain's route is available in a pdf file on the website, refer to the to-do box above. This is the best data that I am aware of. Please elaborate on the GIS information you require. G.A.S 20:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Is this going to be a rapid transit or a commuter rail?

Is this going to act as a metro or a commuter rail?

A large number of people working in the Johannesburg/Sandton area actually live in Pretoria, making the N1 possibly the busiest road in Africa. The Gautrain project aims to remove some of those commuter cars by providing people with a faster/cheaper option to get to work and back.

The R21/N1 between is a huge bottleneck for travellers that make use of OR Tambo International Airport, but prefer to stay in Sandton.

Linking Sandton and Pretoria with Johannesburg's inner city should assist in the rejuvenation of the inner city.

Gautrain aims to alleviate severe traffic congestions in the Johannesburg-Tshwane corridor, where the traffic volume has been growing at seven percent a year for more than a decade.
— Gautrain right on track

I don't have time right now, but searching google for gautrain site:gov.za should reveal some of the parliamentary and Gauteng Provincial Government discussion and motivations that lead to Gautrain.

--NJR_ZA (talk) 05:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Restate question

As this first response doesn't answer the question at all, I shall ask it again: is this system a form of commuter rail or rapid transit (metro)? It appears to be a commuter rail system with pretty frequent service (based on the station spacing, type of rolling stock, and intended ridership), but the isolation from the rest of the rail network (due to the differing gauge) and frequency of service are more metro-like. I tend towards classifying it as the former, but am willing to be convinced otherwise. oknazevad (talk) 02:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

They classify themselves as a rapid rail network. Also consider:

The nature of Gauteng as a province (According to the State of the Cities Report, the urban portion of Gauteng – comprised primarily of the cities of Johannesburg, Ekurhuleni (the East Rand) and Tshwane (greater Pretoria) – will be a polycentric urban region with a projected population of some 14.6 million people by 2015.[2])
There are studies to add further stations within the existing network (Between Centurion and Midrand, Midrand and Marlboro, Marlboro and Rhodesfield).
Complete grade separation from other networks and road.
The fact that current plans are to implement a single ticketing system within Gauteng (For Gautrain, BRT, etc).
Gautrain serving high density areas.
They have a color coded route diagram.

The question is how one distinguish Metro, Commuter rail and Rapid transit? G.A.S ^talk 05:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Infobox

I recommend moving the route diagram to the infobox in the same way as {{Infobox rail line}} does. This will necessitate editing {{Infobox rail company}} as well. G.A.S ^talk 10:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm 50/50 on this idea. The problem is that the Gautrain is the name of a company and of the railway: is it best to mix the two or to keep them separate? {{Infobox rail company}} is for companies and not for railways, if they keep them separate it must be for a reason; however the two are conterminous, so why not since their won't be any confusion? Chris DHDR 12:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that this article is somewhat a unique situation... I will update the templates in due time (no rush) :). G.A.S ^talk 13:58, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I have updated the infobox in my sandboxes, see Sandbox1, Sandbox2, Sandbox3^{[Links removed -- G.A.S^talk 15:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC)]}. If there are no comments shortly, I will be updating {{Infobox rail company}} shortly. G.A.S ^talk 12:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Done G.A.S ^talk 15:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, it definitely looks better this way. As said earlier, I'll finally get round to swaping the colours around. Chris DHDR 18:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Much better now. G.A.S ^talk 20:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Map

Would this map be useful for the article? I'm also open to suggestions for how it might be improved. - htonl (talk) 21:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Interview source

http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/jack-s-train-is-his-track-record-1.1110188. G.A.S ^talk 14:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Bulk image deletion

Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gautrain construction006.jpg

Andy Dingley (talk) 02:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Gautrain construction003.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Gautrain construction003.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Gautrain construction003.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gautrain. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Gautrain. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gautrain. 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/20071217033756/http://www.sagoodnews.co.za/infrastructure/gautrain_moves_forward_with_the_big_lady.html to http://www.sagoodnews.co.za/infrastructure/gautrain_moves_forward_with_the_big_lady.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:59, 31 December 2017 (UTC)