Talk:School bus/Archive 3

Revisions to page
I decided to try something out, and it looks to be a change for the better. The school bus yellow subsection was moved from the history section to the safety section. I moved it there because it contributed even more to the safety content than it did to the history-related content. (I also put a link to its main article).

In other parts of the article, I just did some minor adjustment to some wording (in the environmental section, I took a tag off because I thought it was attached mainly from the POV of the sentence, so I re-worded it). SteveCof00 (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Moving North American content into a new article
Seeing as I'm not the one making the changes, I'm probably not the one who should be posting here, but anyways....I'll give this a start

As far as the recent "changes" went, I also disagree with them, as making a separate article for North American school buses (while well intentioned) basically re-creates this page again, which leads us back to here, so why do it in the first place? I wouldn't scream vandalism, but this is what the talk page is for; with this page, we can come up with ideas together before jumping in headfirst and making big changes. Talk pages are excellent sources of feedback :-) SteveCof00 (talk) 11:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Steve, I hope you don't mind that I changed the title of this section to better reflect the nature of the discussion.

I must vigorously oppose Nankai's decision to take all of the North American content from this article — or, in other words, 90% of the article — copy it, paste it into a new article, and then delete that content from the main school bus article. Making such a heavy-handed, unilateral decision, without even one word of discussion with the other editors, is... well, I don't know what to call it, and I'm trying to be as open-minded as possible... but I just don't think it was very respectful of those of us who have been working so diligently to improve this article.

I realize that some editors may feel that this article is slanted too heavily towards North America. It would appear that Nankai feels that way as well. But we have discussed that issue extensively (please refer to the talk archives), and a consensus was reached. I know that one of the tenets of Wikipedia is to "be bold", but one of the other equally important tenets of Wikipedia is that it is a collaborative project and that we operate on consensus. Before doing something controversial — and I think ripping the article apart certainly qualifies — discussing it with the other editors involved in the article is the first step. Had that occurred, we could have talked about the issue of North American bias, and perhaps we might even have come up with a new consensus that was different from the last one. We can still do that. But until we do, I feel very strongly that we should leave the article in its current form until a consensus is reached.

In good faith,

–BMRR (talk) 16:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for assuming good faith; you are correct in assuming it! I did glance briefly at this discussion and didn't see anything here, it seems most of it had been archived as linked above, and this small pair of links escaped my attention. I will try to look more carefully in future.

Thanks for reverting my edits in accordance with a previously achieved consensus. :-)

On behalf of the "rest of the world" as appended at the bottom, it would be nice if the article treated us more equally; but I do accept that North Americans pretty well invented the school bus. I think a "main article" type of treatment might work well. Keep up the good work, Nankai (talk) 02:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking the time to clarify what your intentions were. I must apologize for being a bit harsh in my last post. 90% of the time I spend on Wikipedia these days is reverting vandalism, and I have to admit that after I've spent an hour or two dealing with vandals, my patience has worn thin and my usually friendly demeanor has gone missing. ;-)  I need to remind myself to take a deep breath and look at things with an open mind, and always assume that people are doing things with the best intentions.


 * I would like for this article to be as "global" as possible, and to give equal coverage to all types of school buses around the world. I hope that we can continue to work toward that goal.  If it gets to the point where we need to split the various regions/countries into separate articles, I would not be opposed to that, as long as we discuss it first and figure out the best way to do it.


 * Thanks again! –BMRR (talk) 01:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The consensus, of a sort
This, from the archived talk page, School Bus Talk Page Archives was the discussion that decided most of the consensus of how to handle the issue of the "slant" on the article. Admittedly, in terms of space, yes, there is a lot dedicated to North American school buses, but the yellow school bus is a design that evolved here and this has become an article that has started to discuss its technical and manufacturing aspects (in the spirit of many other bus articles, perhaps). This is not information that should just be randomly deleted. The part of the article which discusses school buses outside North America is a bit different in its scope. It also has been improved in its layout over the past few months to promote its expansion.

SteveCof00 (talk) 21:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Clarity of topic
This article is about buses designed and manufactured specifically for taking children to and from schools. Because these vehicles are dominant in North American school transport, it looks like this article is mainly about school transport in North America. I understand that it is not. I suggest that it would be helpful tohave the following heading at the top:


 * this article is about buses designed and manufactured specifically for taking children to and from schools. See also school transport.

Most of the "rest of the world" info (except of course information about specifically designed school-child-friendly buses) could then be shifted to school transport.

Nankai (talk) 02:34, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * This post makes a very good point that I have seen a bit before, but haven't figured out how to come up with a good solution. The part of the article that deals with American school buses deals mainly with the vehicle itself (most bus articles talk about the technical aspects of the bus in the same manner), while the part about school buses worldwide deal more specifically with their usage.  An article about school transport could be an interesting way to deal with the topic on a worldwide basis, as the vehicle itself is already explained.

The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is how to categorize it...most WikiProjectSchools articles are about actual schools, and i'm not sure if it would fit under WikiProjectBuses, due to its different focus. I hope that other editors on here can help with ideas for that. SteveCof00 (talk) 04:02, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Request Added
I took the plunge and put in a request for a student transport article (that's how I've seen it worded) with a small description of why it's needed. I think this may help bring in other editors who can start an article. SteveCof00 (talk) 22:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

School transport started
full discussion below.

Something worth expanding
Over the past couple of days, the recent discussions have brought up something that I've never really noticed before. With North American (yellow) school buses, the article seems to focus on their technical aspects ad nauseum but there isn't much information or research that has been done into the aspects of their usage in the education system (aside from the brief statistics mention near the introduction and the content which was brought in from the merger of the short bus article).

The content about school buses outside North America focus primarily on this, so maybe it's time to expand on it for yellow school buses (along with more information, it would mean some minor re-writing). There is a very short stub about school bus contractors, if that's of any help for inspiration. SteveCof00 (talk) 09:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Minor page re-write
I just did a fairly major change to the page layout, and here's my list of change to it:


 * I moved the "Industry Contraction" section out of the Manufacturing section and made it another part of the "History" section (a part of the article which needed looking after); also created a "Present Day" subsection there as well. Although it makes the History section longer, the overall article will flow much better now that there is only a single part dedicated to chronological order.


 * As far as the safety section goes, I made a couple of changes:
 * The tag on the 1977 subsection wording is gone (I took out the sentence that was tagged, as it was actually a redundant sentence.)
 * Changed the name of the seatbelt section to make it reflect the content and also avoid any conflicts (in the past, there were POV issues that were tagged on and off)


 * Other general wording changes just to help things flow easier (small tweaks that can best be seen in the Revision History)

SteveCof00 (talk) 07:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

dubious statement
"Canadian school buses are very similar to their U.S. counterparts"

That's easy to understand, if you know what an American school bus looks like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NorthernThunder (talk • contribs) 13 November 2009


 * While some may view that statement as jumping to a conclusion, it's well supported by photographic evidence. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of school bus pictures out there on the Internet that anyone can view from search engines.  Even the Commons has separate categories dedicated to school buses in the United States and Canada (and a number of other countries).  SteveCof00 (talk) 11:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Tagged History section
I placed a tag on the History section of the manufacturing part of the article. With this, I hope this attracts the help of other editors who can provide help in improving this part of the article. As it is now, it's a bit long-winded and probably needs to be re-thought, considering how far many other parts of the article have come along. SteveCof00 (talk) 22:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Freeing up space
I've floated the idea a couple of times, but I think I've gotten something serious down. The big list of manufacturers is somewhat ungainly and might lead some viewers of the page to believe that this page has a bit of a North American slant to it. For now, I decided to turn it to an actual list page linked to hereUser:SteveCof00/List_of_school_bus_manufacturers. Right now, I have the actual page set up as a user page as it's not 100% ready to be added (feel free to edit and talk on the talk page there), but it will be soon. Once that is moved to replace the redlink, I will work on paring down the "Manufacturing" section. Many of these companies in the list are linked in the list and in the content throughout the article, so orphaned content will not be a problem. Another reason for streamlining is the navigational template(s) of manufacturers at the bottom of the page. SteveCof00 (talk) 04:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Space freed, for now
I put up the list and moved it into article space List of school bus manufacturers, so that's why I deleted the table in the middle of the Manufacturing section. As far as losing access to articles, that shouldn't happen. There are plenty of internal links and there are two templates at the bottom of the page that should take care of that issue. Now the list can have content that will thrive on its own without taking over this article. :-) SteveCof00 (talk) 07:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Statistics seem weird
General stats section says "About 440,000 public school buses travel more than 4 billion miles and daily transport 25 million children to and from schools and school-related activities in the U.S. every year." This can't possibly mean 4 billion miles daily, or each bus would travel over 9000 miles per day (4 billion divided by 440,000). The uses of the word "daily" and "every year" are confusing here. perhaps reword?

Also, the source for these stats is no longer available on line, which is a bummer. Bugjah (talk) 05:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I think what it means is that the nation's school buses travel 4 billion miles a year, and transport 25 million children to and from school every day. At least, that's my interpretation of it.  I attempted to re-word it, and I added a new source.  Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  –BMRR (talk) 01:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * There is some good stuff at this page; any of you who are interested might want to check it out and see if any of the info and stats can be integrated into the Wikipedia article. –BMRR (talk) 02:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I've been pressed for time lately, but when I have time, I'll take a better look at the NAPT website and see if its content can help us out here on the article. This is probably another good external-link candidate.  SteveCof00 (talk) 00:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Safety section improvements; other odds and ends
I used a bit of content from the STN website to help me out, but I THINK I was able to fix the section that dealt with seatbelts once and for all. At the very least, I cleaned it up to the point that it could be untagged (it used to be the most-tagged part of the article).

Additionally, I added a part on about school buses and their emergency exits; to include content about reflective tape and strobe lights but not emergency exits seems a bit odd, as they are a significant part of the design of a bus. SteveCof00 (talk) 10:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I just focused some major attention on the configurations subsection, referencing some content in the wake of re-formatting it (I wanted to have something more a bit more uniform).  The multiple image template of related pictures is gone, as the new format now allows room for side-by-side pictures and will cut down on scrolling.  SteveCof00 (talk) 10:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Rewriting the History subsection
The History subsection of the North America part of the article has quite a bit of content that has been added somewhat heavy-handedly over the years (it's also been caught in the middle of content being shifted around and moved from different parts or even to different pages). As a result, it needs some attention now.

Here's my proposals that I'm going to float around on the talk page first: SteveCof00 (talk) 21:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is about history, shouldn't the sub-section headings be written into chronological order?
 * The content that is here can probably be re-written for length.
 * There is content about the history of transit-style school buses, but none has been added about the history of small (Type A) school buses.


 * If this is about history, shouldn't the sub-section headings be written into chronological order? Agreed.
 * There is content about the history of transit-style school buses, but none has been added about the history of small (Type A) school buses. Agreed.
 * –BMRR (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * –BMRR (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * –BMRR (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I've taken care of the section headings now and I created a new section (the creation of school bus yellow used to be in here, but it was moved and left a chronological gap, so I think the gap is taken care of now).  Also...there is a start on the history of small buses, but I admit, it is ONLY a start.  So why did I delete the "short bus" sub section?  I thought enough of its content was starting to be duplicated unnecessarily that deleting it would help the remaining content make a better contribution.    (If others disagree, it can be added back :-)  ) SteveCof00 (talk) 10:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I think I've got the whole History section taken care of for now...the next-to-last section was one I cut down for length and also because most all of it is well-duplicated in articles (so I will let said articles expand on that). Re-writing this brought up a couple of new points (i put about how safety standards changed school bus design) that might could be interesting to expand on a bit. SteveCof00 (talk) 23:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

A couple of proposals
I am making a couple of suggestions as for some ideas for the future of the page; the page has come a long way from its past, but I think these are changes that could help make the article even better.


 * As there are several sub-articles that deal with the topic, I think it now may be the time for a school bus safety article.  Although the existing content in this article is a bit different than the automobile safety article (and I can't find much in the safety-related articles related to buses in general); I don't see any reason why it wouldn't meet notability guidelines unless it was poorly written.  On the bright side, some content here is well-referenced.


 * Writing a school bus safety article (therefore, shortening down to an introduction and a article link) would give it greater emphasis. On the topic of emphasis, I also propose moving the "Outside North America" section  from the bottom of the article right beneath the content about Canada (before the History section starts...)

I'm just putting these out for feedback...

SteveCof00 (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Taking off the OR tag from the article
Over the past few months, the article has evolved a great deal; along with extensive reformatting, there has been an increase in the amount of the content in the article that has been referenced. At this point, it probably is no longer appropriate for the Original Research tag at the top to be there; although there are parts of the article that need improvement, as a whole, it is no longer needed.

As such, it would be better to tag specific sections with that tag now; that would serve as a guide to show what needs to be changed (or at least referenced) the most. That is also why I left the tag for additional references at the top in place (theoretically, what article couldn't use additional sources if they proved beneficial?) --SteveCof00 (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Significant page re-write
The article is a bit different now, as I've found a way to essentially move the bottom of the article to the top. The part of the article where it goes into the statistics about American school buses and the Canadian school buses almost started to feel like it was becoming a second introduction. It's now the "Usage" section, which ties together North America and the rest of the world as opposed to having the latter down at the end. It seems like a good fit. Also, the History/Manufacturing/Safety/Environment/Retirement sections are all dedicated sections of their own (at the very least, it makes the TOC less intimidating to navigate). Some other minor changes (mainly grammatical fixes, and changing main article links to see also as needed) round out the rest. --SteveCof00 (talk) 22:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

School Bus Driver Outsourcing
The General Statistics and the Transportation System Design sections report a ratio of "approximately 40%" of US school districts rely on contractors for school bus service. There's no reference to a supporting source for this percentage and I haven't been able to track down this or any other percentage for school bus privatization. How old is the percentage? Is it still accurate? Folklore1 (talk) 18:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The school bus contractor article doesn't seem to have much in the way of its own sources to track down. The two trade publications listed in the external links are probably a good place to start if looking for sources of statistics; if they don't list any themselves, they have articles of their own that have different sources of information.  --SteveCof00 (talk) 23:23, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Argentina
The Argentina section contains the phrase replacing it with old "collective". What does this phrase mean? What is a "collective" and what is the collective replacing? Folklore1 (talk) 18:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The entire Argentina section was added several months ago all at once by an user. As far as the definition of the phrase "collective", I am beginning to wonder if that was derived from its translation from Spanish to English when the content was added to the article.

As far as the section itself goes, I'm kind of on the fence about its future...I don't want to delete it if all it needs is some further explanation. If I don't get to it first, I strongly suggest adding something like this to the section:

Someone might notice that and give the answer that we all have been looking for --SteveCof00 (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)