Talk:List of Edmonton Transit Service bus routes

Former Routes

These are on my userpage: User:Alexlatham96/List of former Edmonton Transit Service bus routes Alexlatham96 (talk) 06:40, 23 December 2019 (UTC) Interestingly, it seems that route 169 was discontinued in September 2016, but was restored in September 2017.Alexlatham96 (talk) 23:21, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Alexlatham96, I do appreciate your contributions to ETS. We can always use more people finding interesting facts! I myself have thought long and hard about including former routes. As a self proclaimed transit nut, I too hate the fact that whenever a route is discontinued all traces of it's former existence are practically gone. However there are many reasons why I decided not to start compiling a list of former routes on Wikipedia (and by no means is this an exhaustive list of all my reasons, and it isn't really in any particular order):

• WP:UNDUE weight: Having existed for as long as ETS has, there is undoubtably a much larger list of former routes than current routes. Including all former routes would place way too much weight on former routes compared to what ETS has now. This also leads to the next problem:
• How far back to go: I believe ETS has been operating buses since the first trolley bus in 1939. Including all routes since 1939 would definitely place undue weight on former routes. This also leads to many more of the issues below;
• WP:VERIFIABILITY: Even for routes that have reliable sources showing that they existed, way too many routes simply have no remaining verifiable sources verifying their existence. Removing unverifiable routes (as per Wikipedia policy) would leave us with a massively incomplete picture of everything.
• Layout: So many route numbers have been used more than once in the past. Trying to find a way to organize this into a way that makes sense, especially when nobody has the dates for which each iteration of the route started and ended in any verifiable manner, would be... to put it bluntly... impossible. Not to mention:
• The WP:SIZE and WP:READABILITY of the page (not to mention editability): Things that are already difficult with a page the size of this one. The bigger the page is, the higher it ranks on Wikipedia's list of Special:LongPages and the more attention it gets from other Wikipedians... which ties into my next concern.
• WP:Notability: As you can see from the template above, this page already has had a nomination for deletion. I think we can agree both of us don't want that. I have worked very hard to make this page as encyclopedic as possible and to demonstrate the notability of the topic. Placing undue weight on not very verifiable former routes and increasing the size of the article to a point where it's getting more attention would not help the case for keeping this page.
• Completeness: By no means would any former route list be complete in any way (even more so when you consider verifiability as mentioned above) I can already think of several routes that are not on your former route list (although your list is very impressive by the way): 599 to Snow Valley, 596 to the Zoo and Fort Ed (before the number was used for Hawrelak), 561 as the night bus down whyte ave, and probably hundreds of other routes that have disappeared since 1939.

Like I said.. this isn't necessarily a complete list of my concerns. It's just what I've been able to synthesize into text at this point in time.

While I agree book keeping of former routes for historical reasons is a noble cause, I don't believe Wikipedia is going to end up being the right place. In the end it simply boils down to WP:What Wikipedia is not. I don't think placing former routes on it's own page will solve these issues; In fact, I am concerned that making a new page for former routes may end up with both pages being deemed unencyclopedic by other Wikipedians and them both ending up getting deleted.

That being said, it is perfectly okay in my mind if you want to keep a list in your user area. I could even help you fill it in if you'd like. - Vanstrat ⁽⁽🗼⁾⁾ 05:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Please help me out, like when the original route 319 was discontinued.Alexlatham96 (talk) 05:39, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

You will be the first to know about any new info I dig up regarding former routes. :) - Vanstrat ⁽⁽🗼⁾⁾ 05:59, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

I just completed the list of former routes from the 1997 redesign to now. I have made a new page under construction: User:Alexlatham96/List of pre-1997 Edmonton Transit Service bus routes.

It's complete for now. Alexlatham96 (talk) 02:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Missing routes prior to the 1997 redesign (we have evidence that Routes 2, 190, 303, and 307 existed, but where did they start and end, and when were they discontinued?):

• 2
• 25
• 29
• 31
• 47
• 48
• 59
• 63
• 64
• 79
• 81
• 89
• 90
• 95
• 190
• 303
• 307

Using Rbox

Hey all, with the upcoming route network launch, I'd like to propose using Rbox tags in this article to identify route numbers. OC Transpo routes is an example of these in action. Here's what it could look like, all colours based on the ETS official Google map [1]

 2  Frequent routes
 700X   140X  Rapid routes
 54  Crosstown routes
 123  Local routes
 726  Community routes
 580  Regional routes
 613  School routes

Any thoughts? With the introduction of these new route types, the colours will help distinguish everything better. Plus, since it's based on ETS' own map, it's not original research. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 22:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Update ETS just released all the new route maps here and it doesn't seem like this colour scheme has carried over. I still think the Rboxes are a good idea, however, we'll just have to follow the colours that ETS sets out in its official materials. As of right now (source), looks like dark orange for Rapid routes and the airport bus ( 110X ) and royal blue for all others ( 912 ). Also this ( ODT ) to indicate On Demand Transit. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)