Talk:King station (Toronto)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the King station (Toronto) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Trains: Stations / Rapid transit Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.

Canada: Ontario / Toronto Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on King (TTC). 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/20141204204305/http://www.tconnect.ca/stations.php to http://www.tconnect.ca/stations.php

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) 06:02, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

recent move[edit]

@Useddenim: I feel the fact that you described King station in Toronto as "arguably" not the primary topic for King station, plus the fact that King station (disambiguation) didn't exist until you made the undiscussed page move is a pretty clear indication you should have opened a WP:RM before making this particular change. When I went to the newly minted disambiguation page, I was sure I would find out about other "King station" articles that I just hadn't known about. I was pretty surprised that, despite the long list of stations you seem to think may be referred to as "King station" informally, there was literally no other station article for any station named "King".

I think next time it would be best to be a little less BOLD and do a little more consultation/consensus building. This seems like a classic example of a solution looking for a (non-existent) problem. —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trial route change[edit]

@Joeyconnick: The TTC has made a "trial route change", of undefined length of time, to each of routes 502, 503 and soon 141-145. These routes are listed via a table in the articles King station (Toronto), Queen station, St. Andrew station, Osgoode station as well as King Street Transit Priority Corridor. The trial change may ultimately be made permanent or cancelled. So how should we handle the trial period with respect to the above 5 artcles? Possibilities are (1) ignore the trial and don't modify the articles, (2) do not modify the tables but add a footnote about the trial, (3) modify the tables to reflect the trial and add a footnote, (4) same as 3 but omit the footnote. I prefer 2 for the station losing the connecting service and 3 for the station gaining the connecting service. What should be the policy? Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 03:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I couldn't check your source as Internet Archive wasn't working earlier. Uhm... I think your approach sounds fine. Weird they haven't even given a ballpark for the length of the trials. —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't do the task exactly as described above. Footnotes were used only in the corridor table; in other articles, trial periods for 502/503 were briefly described in the table. Table entries for 141-145 were commented out in the Queen and Osgoode articles so that they can be easily reinstated if the trial is revoked. Routes 141-145 were added to the St. Andrew article without comment as St. Andrew also served the old routing as well as the new. (Adelaide Street is only one block north of King.) TheTrolleyPole (talk) 19:19, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]