Talk:Rede Integrada de Transporte

I added all references needed to each half line. I think they are all from well noted sources. I added a Criticism section, bringing the questions asked by this idea's critics. I think the "ref" can be removed? Pashute (talk) 21:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

REF removed

I added all references to the page. Also added a small critisism section, with the Light Rail guys. Its a lot of money involved... I'm learning to discover that the Wikipedia is better than any encyclopedia or university, since it is scrutinized by so many people, and you will hardly get by with erroneous facts. I now am hoping someone goes over the numbers and references. For instance site says 85% ridership, as in Upsala report while in US gov committee it said 75% Pashute (talk) 21:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your collaboration, I will indeed work on the RIT article, I have plenty of sourced info, but right now I want to concentrate on a couple of articles I am currently working on. I will even contribute a bit on the criticism section, the only caveat is that usually you don't put that section at the beginning of the article, but rather near the end (see any of the articles dealing with controversial subjects). For the time being, I just moved it below in the article, generated the ref list, added some Wiki links, and did some editing to avoid NPOV problems with the content of the new section. Mariordo (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Critisism

The Criticism section speaks too largely of the negative attitude towards public transportation in the United States. If this section is to be of use use to readers, it needs to be more neutral (positive and negative) and less focused on attitudes stemming from the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.217.119.2 (talk) 11:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this section has been removed, so no need to discuss this anymore. Let me know if otherwise. Felipecbg (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A number of issues with the system have been noted so I have restored a "criticism" section. There is a lot of pseudo-criticism that Curitiba doesn't live up to the its own myth which I have ignored.Tjej (talk) 07:31, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology

I have changed the term "terminal" to "transit center", which is the best description of what "terminal" means in Portuguese. Although they are homonimous, it doesn't necessarely mean the same thing.

Also, I removed the word "line" from most of the routes descripted here, because "express", "feeder" et cetera make perfect sense by themselves. "Around downtown" is now "Downtown Circulator", which would be the best term to describe "Circular Centro", once "Circulator" is largely used by English-native countries -- see DC Circulator or Las Vegas RTC's Mall Circulator. Felipecbg (talk) 19:24, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rede Integrada de Transporte. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 14:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

What is going on with the pronunciation? That’s not how it’s pronounced locally, and the source just mentions the Rio de Janeiro pronunciation, which is not standard nor used in the area. 2804:214:85CC:18AF:D8EE:804C:BAA7:F8BD (talk) 19:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]