Talk:Buses in Sydney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bus route articles[edit]

My afd nomination seems to have stirred up a hornets nest, but as I've stated over there Wikipedia should provide insight and knowledge, and not just indiscriminate information. I think a good strategy for articles on Buses in Sydney would be:

  • Delete the nominated articles
  • Expand this article so that is includes:
    • More historical information
    • A discussion on the importance of bus transport in Sydney
    • Some patronage information (current and historical)
    • Information about regulation and political issues
    • Detailed information on all routes is not needed. It isn't important that the 316 runs every 30 minutes, or that 132 (and 133) travels between Manly Wharf and Warringah Mall. Some current route information is useful though, such as a description of the suburbs serviced and the main corridors (eg Military Rd, Anzac Pde). A link to www.131500.info should be prominent so that readers who need timetable information can find it.
    • References for the above
  • As this article becomes large, split it into smaller articles, either:

Think about the kind of article that could make a featured article, and what it would contain. It certainly wouldn't just be a list of bus routes.

I'll do some research, and help out on expanding this article. What do others think about these ideas? What do others think should be included in articles on Sydney's buses?--Mako 02:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some level of information on the Route numbering system would be nice. That is, are routes just allocated a number in the order they are drawn on a map? Is there a map that says "Routes starting here have route numbers starting with 1, if they start here it starts with 2..." ? That is encyclopaedic information. The number of the bus route that runs from Central Station to Circular Quay via whatever road, is trivia or directory information best left to 131500.info. Garrie 04:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with both points. Out of curiosity, does anyone know when the current numbering system started being used? Photos of buses prior to the 1950s don't seem to use the current system:[1] [2] [3] [4] . But by the 1960s the current scheme seemed to be used: [5] [6] -- Mako 04:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the routes in the 1950s were pure replacements for the tram lines that were being removed, so they followed the tram lines and therefore (as was the convention with the tramways), did not carry route numbers. By the early 1960's when all tram lines had been removed, this situation became untenable and the current route numbering system came into play, at least amongst the government run areas. I can't vouch for the private company areas- they seemed to just do what they liked with route numbers until the early 1990's when the private company areas were reorganised into the current 3 digit route number system. Quaidy 21:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Claim that Tram Routes = Bus Routes[edit]

Is there a non-OR source for

STA generally operates services in Sydney's east, north and part of the southern suburbs, a legacy of the former tram network, most of which was replaced by the current bus network in the late 1950s.

I am wanting to refer to this same information on the Circular Quay article.

This article is sadly lacking in non-primary sources so it is currently OR. Garrie 04:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With no references, the entire article probably needs to be regarded as OR. I think a lot of the historical info on the Sydney public transport articles is from railpage.org.au[7], I'm not sure of its reliability as a secondary source, but it does list some books etc that would make good sources. Anyway, STA buses do cover all of the tram routes out of Circular Quay, though they probably don't all follow exactly the same route as the trams did. And of course not every STA bus route follows an old tram route. -- Mako 05:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For a quick example, T-Ways.Garrie 05:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think its a fairly well established fact that the area that the STA bus network covers is the area that the tram network formerly covered, as most of the bus routes were direct replacements of the tram lines as they progressively closed. Of course, the route network expanded and the routes themselves were altered over the 50 years since the trams were replaced. But the point is that it is the main reason taht the STA essentailly does not operate in any graet density in areas further west than they do, apart from recent additions such as the TWay. It is hard to find online references for such information.203.10.55.11 05:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're still misreading the concept of original research, Garrie. Unsourced doth not equal OR. A better course of action would be to, if the statement is actually disputed (as opposed to disputing for the sake of disputing), actually look at some offline sources. Rebecca 00:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from List of bus routes in Sydney[edit]

Why does List of bus routes in Sydney redirect to this page? They refer to two different things. There are quite a few articles which include lists of bus routes. I would like to remove the plethora of lists and replace them with a centralised List of bus routes in Sydney, which sensibly enough should include

  • Route number
  • Origin
  • (general) path followed (eg: via Silverwater Road)
  • Destination
  • Operated by XXX (from YYYY to yyyy)

Garrie 05:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh you have missed a bit of a story here, there were pages which had much of this info on but it was all NfD and subsequently deleted. I have saved most of it at User:Quaidy/Sydney bus routes. Quaidy 05:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know there were a lot of articles. None of them were encyclopaedic and I supported their deletion. But I thought one article, List of bus routes in Sydney]], was going to be kept?
I have just seen this on the TransLink SEQld article. It would go really well in the Buses in Sydney#Routes. Garrie 05:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the information people feel is too directory-style is Hours of operation | Frequency | Journey time | SectionsGarrie 05:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suggested that the article be changed to that sort of format, but no one would listen. I think hours of operation should be included in the sense of the type of bus service it is though. (JROBBO 13:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Scope of this page[edit]

This page is ideal for covering bus company names, the regulatory framework and the general role of buses in the Sydney public transport network. The information on the individual routes, and the infrastructure that serves them, is better delegates to more region-specific pages. Joestella 10:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I disagree- I believe that the route number information was very well packaged and subtley presented on this one page. Quaidy 21:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The information has now been updated and sorted by region, and linked back to the main page. Pages covering interchanges, suburbs and bus companies can now be linked to more specific bus information. The 100 series etc articles seem unlikely to be deleted, now that the nominator's concerns have been addressed. A list of bus routes in Sydney, without the context of their history and accompanying infrastructure, borders on a directory - something Wikipedia is not. There is still scope for a general Buses in Sydney page beneath Transport in Sydney: regulatory frameworks, the role of buses in the wider network and issues facing the bus industry as a whole. The expanding lists were cool, I won't deny it, but were they compatible with old browsers?

In truth, I'm mystified that you would want 100 series bus routes, Sydney and its sister pages deleted. I thought you'd be supportive of more detailed coverage of public transport. Joestella 21:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually with Quaidy on that one - the 100 series bus routes are a fairly arbitrary concept for an article, as was the case with your merged ferry articles, and some of your proposed expansions above. Rebecca 00:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to question your knowledge of the Sydney bus network, Rebecca, but on routes in the MoT's system, the first digit of the route numbers is by no means arbitrary. Buses would be as difficult to sort by region as trains, part of their role is to move between regions. You can see from the template that buses fit rather neatly into 14 categories this way, allowing more specific articles on history and infrastructure. As for your comment on ferries, again without wanting to question your knowledge of the network, these areas are formed on the basis of the divisions set out in the agency's annual report. As a bonus, they also probably accord with a casual observation - specific ferry routes are invisible, and subject to change. Joestella 08:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buses in Sydney. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 06:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Buses in Sydney. 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: 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) 21:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:22, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contracts[edit]

"Most services are provided under a service contract between the operator and Transport for NSW."

Which services are not contract services? Does Transport for NSW directly own/operate any bus service in Sydney? It'd be nice to see this definitively said somewhere in the article. This may seem unimportant for people use to this kind of setup, but in the United States, for instance, this setup is highly unusual, where local governments - or companies owned by them - own and operate local and commuter bus services. Criticalthinker (talk) 10:04, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence is from pre-2022 when State Transit still existed. Clearly, that is no longer a case, so I have updated the statement. Marcnut1996 (talk) 22:41, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, so a public agency did operate bus service in Sydney? Between which years was this? Also, though supervised/overseen by the state, would this be considered privatization or something in between that an public operation? I'm not ever sure how to describe the structure of this kind of setup, which is very similar to how transit is often done in England. In the U.S., if anything is contracted out to private companies, it's usually ancillary transit operations such as paratransit, though there are a few large systems whose entire operations are outsourced. Criticalthinker (talk) 10:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Criticalthinker: State Transit (and predecessors) operated bus services since the start of buses until 2022. To my understanding, it is a government agency but the state government does not directly manage the bus operations, the day-to-day operations, maintenance and human resources are left with the State Transit management who are hired by the state government. Since the Sydney Metropolitan Bus Service Contracts in 2005, the state government (through its transport department) is responsible for route planning, timetabling, fares (since 2010) and bus livery (also since 2010) for all bus operations in Sydney, regardless whether they are operated by privately-owned companies or State Transit. This means there is no real difference in operations between State Transit and the privately-owned bus companies. State Transit's operations were "privatised" in 2021–2022 to other companies, which meant change in management of the day-to-day operations, but otherwise all bus network planning remains with Transport for NSW. Marcnut1996 (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buses_in_Sydney&oldid=1200473749"