Template talk:Metro Line

Template:Metro Line

Please revert your changes to Template:Metro Line. Your additions are unreferenced, and no one has stated they want proposed stations and lines in the route diagrams. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 03:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Firstly, I do not appreciate being referred to as a “no one”. Just be honest and admit that you don’t want proposed stations and lines in the route diagrams. Secondly, you are the source of the St. Albert stations—specifically this edit from 10 September.
Your edit summaries indicate that you don’t understand the function of a route diagram, and you didn’t seem to think that Template:Valley Line (ETS) was of any use until the links to neighbourhoods were added, so stop being such a hypocrite. Useddenim (talk) 01:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Where or when have you stated you want proposed stations in Edmonton route diagrams? There is a consensus here and here to not include this information in the diagrams or images. In that edit I added the identified locations, the table does not say that it is the stations' names. I am removing your references because they do no support your added content. My edit summaries are to encourage discussion (WP:BRD), something you need to greatly improve upon when you make edits you know are controversial, or appear to be redundant. I don't think I am a hypocrite, I have always wanted a consistent list and navboxes, and to not mislead readers. Is this diagram supposed to be a list of stations? I assume it is, since MacEwan links to MacEwan Station, not the university. It is misleading to make Griesbach linkable also, but have it lead to an article unrelated to public transit. 117Avenue (talk) 03:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Did you just leave another conversation without garnering consensus for the changes you want to make? 117Avenue (talk) 02:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Why the sudden concern? You don't seem bothered that you apparently bullied Gingeroscar off Wikipedia. Useddenim (talk) 21:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Again you are avoiding the issues. I don't want to bully you, but the only way to get you to talk is to revert you. 117Avenue (talk) 00:06, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed stations and lines often don't happen. The City of St. Albert has only started looking into locations for stations on an extended Metro Line. They certainly don't have names yet. I think it is too early to be adding them to a route diagram. The mention on Metro Line is sufficient. 117Avenue (talk) 03:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Any other thoughts? 117Avenue (talk) 02:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I thought the current version of the the diagram is a reasonable compromise in that the St. Albert extension isn't shown unless and until someone clicks on the “expand” link. Useddenim (talk) 03:03, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Route diagrams aren't for showing "possible futures", diagrams and articles just can't be opened up to that, it is a clear CRYSTAL violation. The study is mentioned in the article, but it isn't anywhere near planned out, so there is nothing to show in a diagram. 117Avenue (talk) 03:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to once again state that the St. Albert route is only being studied, so there is nothing to show in a diagram, except maybe an arrow saying possible extension to St. Albert. And stating station names is outright false information. 117Avenue (talk) 04:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Nice Work

Nice work on the template as I had a month ago had asked for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingeroscar (talk • contribs) 06:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

It is being used on Metro Line as a graphical illustration of the list of stations, in the infobox. I don't really see a need for it to be used elsewhere. Template:ETS LRT route has been used for years, and can still be used in the other Edmonton LRT related articles. 117Avenue (talk) 03:31, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

You don't get it, do you? Your idea that an RDT is merely a Navbox or a list of stations is utterly at odds to nearly everyone else’s. Useddenim (talk) 12:08, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

You're right, navboxes aren't a graphical illustration, and this template is more than a list of stations, it also has a couple of crossings. But why does it link to neighbourhoods? 117Avenue (talk) 18:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Linking to neighbourhoods is a carry-over from some other RDTs that show future expansion. Admittedly, it's not as precise as saying “Station X will be located at ▣, be laid out thusly, and have these services and amenities”, but is does serve to point a reader towards more information about the area where the station will (or is proposed to) be. It provides content, and one of the advantages of an RDT is that it is far more easily revisable and editable than an svg or png image. As the links seemed to be an acceptable addition to Template:Valley Line (ETS), I thought it would also be appropriate for the St. Albert extension (but I must admit that I don't know anything about Edmonton neighbourhoods, having never been closer to Edmonton than Calgary). Useddenim (talk) 12:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Linking landmarks work on Valley Line because it is entirely future, and there are no articles for stations. Here it is mixed use, one NAIT links to the institution, and another NAIT links to the station, I think this misleads readers. 117Avenue (talk) 03:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know... I don't believe that anyone has ever raised that point before. It should probably be discussed at Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template. Useddenim (talk) 20:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

{{Stnlnk}} (and related pages) state “Discretion should be used on whether to name the place itself or the station that serves it. In railway articles it is generally preferred to use the station unless specifically talking about the place, for example that Peterborough serves the city of Peterborough.” Useddenim (talk) 13:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

NAIT is probably a bad example: the temporary terminus actually exists (but is only temporary); the permanent/future station will be somewhere on campus, but at a yet-undetermined location. Useddenim (talk) 13:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually the Edmonton locations have been determined, that is why there are sources on the template page. I've also listed the coordinates on Metro Line. It is currently on the City Centre Airport lands. When the airport closes it will mostly be developed as residential, but NAIT will be expanded. 117Avenue (talk) 01:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Metro Line St Albert Diagram

In my sandbox I am working on the Stations that could be in St Albert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingeroscar (talk • contribs) 11:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I did as the title suggests, I added the St Albert Section. It includes station locations, the North Terminus, and a mark to indicate where the line leaves Edmonton. It is on my sandbox if someone wants to copy the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingeroscar (talk • contribs) 11:21, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I applaud your efforts, but,

• 117Avenue will never allow it; and
• I already tried to add it—see here. Useddenim (talk) 18:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Useddenim, please don't discredit me before I've had a chance to speak. Gingeroscar, as I explained above, the proposed St. Albert stations aren't named yet, so there isn't anything so show, except for an arrow that says there is a proposed extension to St. Albert. 117Avenue (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)