Talk:TheBus (Honolulu)/Archives/2014

Comments from 2004 and 2005
From that external link, shouldn't this be at "TheBus" (no space)? That would also make it clear that it's not just any bus. Dori | Talk 17:04, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm going by the way the Honolulu City Charter officially recognizes it in law as The Bus (with a space). Gerald Farinas 17:14, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

TheTrasit buses repurposed to the CityExpress routes, are diesel-electric, not gasoline electric (from my memory, also noted in http://starbulletin.com/2005/04/23/news/story9.html), fixed.

TheTransit, Route E, service lasted from November '04 to June '05, not "2 months" as stated, fixed (see http://starbulletin.com/2004/11/19/news/story3.html (debut), and http://www.thebus.org/New/new.asp (shows discontinuation effective 6/12/05).

Although it may be reffered to with a space in the city charter, it is overwhelmingly more written without the space in OTS's own signage and timetables, as well as most media articles in the local papers, and the websites of local TV stations. Typing as one word with mixed-capitalization also helps to distingush that it is a brand name, as it is, opposed to a bus in general.

Futhermore, the current incarnation of TheBus, as operated by public-benefit corporation Oahu Transit Services is different than the preceding service outlined in the city charter. ryank808 | Talk 02:36, Jul 16, 2005 (UTC)

‘America's Best Transit System’
What is it that is special about this bus network that won it this title despite its lack of higher-end services? The article seems quite incomplete without this information. David Arthur 02:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

The photo linked on bus says that TheBus was disqualified from some award. I was hoping that this article might say why, but it doesnt.

Fair use rationale for Image:Thebus logo.png
Image:Thebus logo.png 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 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 03:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Separate article for routes?
I'd like to include information on each route TheBus operates, but I'm not sure if I should create a separate article for that. Musashi1600 07:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Flag for advertisement
Whoever flagged this article that it's written like an advertisement, can you provide examples? There really isn't another way to mention how much fares and services are. Lookup other mass transit articles for other cities and they are very similar. 162.115.108.120 (talk) 19:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Fleet count discrepancy?
Can someone explain how the fleet list is 50 buses short of what the National Transit Database indicates as the number of buses in the fleet (shown by the "Vehicles Available for Maximum Service")? I'm confused right now. Musashi1600 (talk) 08:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Article needs citations
There's a substantial amount of information currently in the article that simply isn't cited. (See Verifiability and No original research.) I've tagged most of the problem statements where they appear in the article, and will try to find references for those myself, but I will remove them from the article if no one (either myself or someone else) doesn't add a reliable citation to go with each one. Musashi1600 (talk) 21:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Suggested changes to fleet information
Gillig Advantage buses #230-297 were a single order delivered at three different times. Buses #230-269 arrived in summer, 2012, along with eight 35-foot buses (#60-67).

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/new-transit-center-buses-dedicated-by-honolulu-mayor/123

Buses #270-279 arrived between December, 2012, and March, 2013.

Buses #280-297 arrived in October, 2013.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/newspremium/20131024__City_set_to_deploy_18_new_buses.html?c=n — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wvankirk (talk • contribs) 19:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The 68 new 40-foot buses are divided evenly between the Pearl City (#230-263) and Middle Street (#264-297)garages (34 each).

In the "50" series, buses 50, 53 and 57 have the expected license plate numbers 050, 053 and 057. The rest of the series uses license plates 591, 592 etc.

In the historical section, there were 82 buses from TMC in 1993, not 83. Bus #201 was never delivered.

In the 1995 Gillig Phantoms, there was no bus #666. The 1994 order was for buses 601-659. The 1995 orders were for buses 660-665, 667-699 and 740-773.

For the future fleet, according to the honolulu.gov site, bids went out in December, 2012, for four 60-foot low-floor heavy-duty articulated series hybrid-electric buses.

Bids went out in May, 2013, for eight 45-foot turbine electric buses, and in June, 2013, for thirty-two 40-foot low-floor diesel buses.

http://www4.honolulu.gov/bfspurchasingbids/main/vueBidResults.asp?sType=G

Wvankirk (talk) 18:57, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Removed fleet information
The reason I've taken off the list of vehicles in the TheBus' fleet is because there were no citation for almost all of the information that was presented, and I have not been able to locate any reliable cites; therefore in accordance with the Wikipedia policies of verifiability and no original research, I removed the lists. There was also a notice in the "Fleet" section dated July 2012 requesting citations, meaning no one has been able to produce a reliable citation fifteen months. If anyone can provide any reliable citations backing up the information, feel free to restore the lists with citations. Musashi1600 (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Need to restore fleet information
Here are examples of how other major American cities use fleet lists in their Wikipedia articles. Lots of pertinent information and no apparent issues with citations or original research. Don't understand why a "clear consensus" of fewer than 10 individuals has determined that the fleet lists are not of interest to Wikipedia users in Hawaii.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_County_Metro#Fleet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Metro_bus_fleet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Transit_Authority

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTA_Regional_Bus_Operations_bus_fleet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEPTAWvankirk (talk) 02:48, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

RFC: Vehicle lists in "Fleet" section
Should the vehicle lists in the "Fleet" section be removed from the article? Musashi1600 (talk) 10:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Support

 * Musashi1600
 * bobrayner
 * FeralOink
 * FeralOink

Threaded discussion
My point was that it would be good if the editors googled the fleet lists from Wikipedia sites in other cities to see the amount of detail provided for current and historic fleet lists. Honolulu is a major international city and deserves a complete and accurate listing. As far as I know, there are no transit enthusiasts here who keep their own lists, making it all the more important for Wikipedia to provide the information. There have been books written about the Streetcars of Honolulu and the Oahu Railroad, and there is bound to be one about TheBus some day. Until that time, the history could be lost forever if it is not on Wikipedia. So I would hope the discussion would change from removing the lists to making them more complete, more accurate, and reaching further back into the early history of buses on Oahu. There must be people at OTS and/or City and County of Honolulu who could provide this information.Wvankirk (talk) 01:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support, see section above explaining why I tried to remove the lists in the first place. The "History" section also needs citations, but I'd like to focus on the "Fleet" section for the purpose of this RFC. Musashi1600 (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The fleet section is an excessively large collection of poorly-formatted and poorly-sourced trivia. However, it could help readers if we included something shorter in prose (ie. "Nine ABC buses were bought in 1990 to replace the elderly fleet of DEF buses used on lines G, H, and I...") since that would actually be readable. bobrayner (talk) 11:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - Such a section is extremely trivial, articles have encyclopedic value, and this section violates what wikipedia is not, and wikipedia is not a directory. Eduemoni↑talk↓  03:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - I don't like removing information from articles, but really, such a list is not appropriate to WP types of article. It might be appropriate to include some sort of pointer to stable sources of information on such material, but only if the reference fits into the article in an encyclopedic way. "Not a directory" and all that... JonRichfield (talk) 06:25, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - I personally like the list, but if an updated source cannot be found, then I don't think there is a way to justify keeping it in the article. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support removal even if a reliable source were found. I do not think this is an appropriate level of detail for a Wikipedia article. I would consider a link to such a source in the external links section, if one were found, under the "cannot be integrated ... due to ... amount of detail" provision of WP:ELYES point 3. —me_and 18:32, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support removal - I don't feel like this adds anything to the article, and share the thoughts of Bobrayner. Samwalton9 (talk) 00:12, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Support removal - The fleet section has a disproportionate amount of coverage in comparison to the good quality, important and most relevantly, truly encyclopedic content in the first through fourth sections. It is very challenging to assure currency and accuracy of fleet information. I share the thoughts expressed by Eduemoni and the first sentence of Bobrayner's response. --FeralOink (talk) 04:43, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Virtually every major American city (e.g. San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, New York, Chicago) includes current and historical fleet rosters in its Wikipedia article. So the idea that such information is trivial and inappropriate does not seem to be widely held. Some of these lists contain even more detail than the Honolulu article, including streetcar and subway rosters. Most of the fleet information undoubtedly comes from transportation company and local government purchasing departments, often aided by transit historians who also publish the rosters on their own websites. Wvankirk (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you mean "oppose"; the question is "should the vehicle lists ... be removed ...?", so "support" means "support removing them". However, you haven't addressed the lack of sources for this article's lists, and I'm wary of appeal to WP:Other stuff exists. —me_and 10:44, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I recognise that many transport-related articles tend to accumulate listcruft. (Sometimes it's timetables, instead). We should fix more of them, rather than letting them all suffer the same problems for the sake of consistency. bobrayner (talk) 20:22, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I still don't understand the difference among Support, Support Removal and Oppose, but I'll take your word for it.Wvankirk (talk) 01:17, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "Support" and "Support removal" are identical in this RfC; I used the latter because the intent of the former isn't entirely clear, as you saw! —me_and 13:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Your sentence "there are no transit enthusiasts here who keep their own lists, making it all the more important for Wikipedia to provide the information" is exactly why Wikipedia shouldn't have this information – it goes directly against Wikipedia's policy of No original research. —me_and 13:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

As far as accuracy, I suggested several corrections to the listings in a post above, but they were never made, probably because there was no citation. For example, I know that the license plate number for Bus #50 is 050, not 590, because I have seen it. I could take a picture, but that should not be necessary. I also know there was no bus #201 in the 1993 TMC order and no bus #666 in the 1995 Gillig order. It is inconceivable that I would never see them in all the years they were in service. So I have no proof, but certainly there is someone who does. If larger cities, with larger bus fleets can publish accurate listings on Wikipedia, Honolulu should be able to do it too. Wvankirk (talk) 01:55, 21 November 2013 (UTC)