Talk:Millennium Line/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Route diagram
As the article itself says, the Millennium Line runs 'from VCC-Clark Station to Columbia Station via Lougheed Mall', while its trains 'follow the Expo Line from Waterfront to Columbia Stations'. The shared track belongs to the Expo Line, not the Millennium Line. The old diagram represents this interlining fully, showing the both the complete extent of the actual Millennium Line infrastructure, and the continued routing of the trains along the Expo Line. The recent revision not only fails to recognise this distinction, but also completely conceals the fact that the trains loop around – from reading it, one would think VCC-Clark was in the outer suburbs, and that a direct Millennium Line train from Waterfront was the fastest way to reach it. It is for these reasons that I have reverted to the original version. David Arthur (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- The Millennium Line does not run from VCC-Clark to Columbia. The M-Line runs from VCC-Clark to Waterfront. There are signs at Waterfront that shows "Millennium Line to VCC-Clark" and "Expo Line to King George". The shared track belongs to both lines, and not representing the shared stations is highly irresponsible. There are many transit systems with more than two lines sharing a track with stations. You wouldn't just cut off half of the Route 202 stations of the C-Train just because the 201 was there first and the stations were built first. The 202 would be misrepresented because it "uses the 201's infrastructure". Let's say the Evergreen was interlined from Lougheed to VCC with the M-Line. Why wouldn't there be a diagram showing that the Evergreen Line continues past Lougheed? The loop is irrelevant, I don't see a loop for the Expo Line map regarding the loop between Burrard and Waterfront. єmarsee • Speak up! 02:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Signs at Broadway-Commercial Drive's Expo Line platforms refer to a 'Millennium Line Transfer'; why would they do so if you were already on the Millennium Line? The Millennium Line was conceived as a replacement for Route 99 (shortened to only the eastern part for reasons of cost). If not for the decision to use the same technology as the Expo Line, it might not even have connected in New Westminster. Millennium Line trains currently loop around the Expo Line to increase the number of trips that are possible without a transfer – this may or may not change after further extensions open – but that doesn't give it ownership of the infrastructure. With Calgary, you're comparing apples and oranges; the northwest-to-southeast route comprises two separate lines (it would be equally possible for the northeast and northwest lines to be connected, but again that wouldn't allow as many direct trips). As for omitting the curve between Waterfront and Burrard, that misrepresents station locations by at most a few hundred metres, which isn't much of an issue compared to making Commercial Drive look like it's farther out than New Westminster. David Arthur (talk) 19:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- FWIW, I've always understood the transfer signs to reflect the fact you could move to another Millennium Line station, not to the Millennium Line. --Ckatzchatspy 19:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Signs at Broadway-Commercial Drive's Expo Line platforms refer to a 'Millennium Line Transfer'; why would they do so if you were already on the Millennium Line? The Millennium Line was conceived as a replacement for Route 99 (shortened to only the eastern part for reasons of cost). If not for the decision to use the same technology as the Expo Line, it might not even have connected in New Westminster. Millennium Line trains currently loop around the Expo Line to increase the number of trips that are possible without a transfer – this may or may not change after further extensions open – but that doesn't give it ownership of the infrastructure. With Calgary, you're comparing apples and oranges; the northwest-to-southeast route comprises two separate lines (it would be equally possible for the northeast and northwest lines to be connected, but again that wouldn't allow as many direct trips). As for omitting the curve between Waterfront and Burrard, that misrepresents station locations by at most a few hundred metres, which isn't much of an issue compared to making Commercial Drive look like it's farther out than New Westminster. David Arthur (talk) 19:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Don't understand the route diagram or description.
I can't seem to understand the map, nor reconcile the description with it. Is the route a large U shape? That's what the map seems to imply. Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ahhh, the map in the SkyTrain article explains it. I HIGHLY recommend using that map instead. Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
File:BSicon uBS2rg-ELEV.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion
|
An image used in this article, File:BSicon uBS2rg-ELEV.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Other speedy deletions
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC) |
