User talk:Arriva436/Archive 2010

Archive 2005

←

Archive 2008

Archive 2009

Archive 2010

This is the fourth archive of my current talk page. It starts from the beginning 2010 and continues until the of the year.

Speedy deletion nomination of Abellio Surrey

A tag has been placed on Abellio Surrey, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadioFan (talk) 13:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but it is a redirect page, so I've removed the template. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 13:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

In the future, you should keep in mind that you aren't supposed to remove speedy templates from articles you create.--Rockfang (talk) 07:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Its all well and good saying that, but when the speedy deletion template was invalid it is common sense to remove it. Perhaps the person who added it should be more careful. Jeni ^(talk) 09:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Like I typed above, my comment was in reference to "in the future." If I saw that template on an rfd, I would have removed it too. That wasn't my point.--Rockfang (talk) 09:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't follow your point. Are you saying that "in the future", if someone incorrectly tags a page that I have created, that I shouldn't remove it? Even though it is wrong? I accept it should have been a redirect from the start (I did it so long ago I can't remember why it wasn't). But for the sake of less than one minute, from (it was 1329 to 1329), I don't see it makes that much difference. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 13:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I saw you make an edit that removed a speedy deletion template from a page you created. I agreed that the template should not have been there. But I thought maybe he/she doesn't know that in other situations, editors aren't supposed to remove speedy deletion templates from pages they create. So, I came here. I was just trying to help.--Rockfang (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, I understand now. It just threw me at first because it was a bit bizarre the topic coming back up when it happened back in October. Thanks for the help though! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 21:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I hope everything is well and that your wikibreak isn't for any bad reasons! Long time no speak. Jeni ^(talk) 22:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

No nothing bad, just I'm very busy. If I don't put the work in now then it's not going to go well - hence I'm staying off Wiki for a bit! Glad to see you decided not to retire in the end :) I find getting in the big discussions and arguments etc only gets annoying so I tend to just potter about doing more pleasing stuff! Nice to speak to you - happy new year! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If I'm honest, I'm still quite inactive and struggling to be bothered anymore! Just keep up to date on things and stick my oar in sometimes. Happy new year to you too! :) Jeni ^(talk) 21:08, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I prefer Commons, less people, more common sense and none of the "notabilty" arguments rubbish! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

New Year Metro

. Simply south (talk) 01:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

712, 721 and 723

Hi! A while ago on my talk page you said that 712, 721 and 723 were back over to the Island for roadworks and Wightlink. I was just wondering if this was a permanent edition to the fleet as spare vehicles or whether they were just on loan temporarily? It's just I have a photo of 721 in Newport and was wondering whether to upload it. You can tell I wasn't expecting to see it, it was only because was taking a photo of something else at the time that I managed it, so the angle isn't brilliant but it's better than nothing. Anyway if it was to be uploaded should it be uploaded as "File:Wilts & Dorset 721 G721 WDL.JPG" or "File:Southern Vectis 721 G721 WDL.JPG"? Thanks, Editor5807^speak 19:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

And thanks for the fleet update I noticed you must have been leaving as I was typing this! Editor5807^speak 19:09, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe it is only temporary, and they will move back to the Go South Coast special events pool eventually. So the "Wilts & Dorset..." name is probably best. SV are expecting some more coaches, which will displace some of the remaining Volvo Olys. I'm sure I read somewhere that some of the SV Volvo Olympians may stay if a new job which they'd work on takes place. Saying that, with the fleet problems SV have been having, the Volvo Olympians have escaped onto normal service. In fact, 723 has run on route 6! It's nice you got a photo, not all photos go perfectly sadly... Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks I'll upload it as that then. I heard they may stay as well, there's something about it on Southern Vectis' forum, here. Editor5807^speak 19:24, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

...Ah, that's where I read it! Thanks for the link. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Images

Would you mind selecting the images for this month's metro? Sorry for the short notice. I will launch the issue some time tomorrow. Wikipedia:WikiProject London Transport/The Metropolitan/Issue 22. Simply south (talk) 22:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Erm OK, I assume you want me to pick one of the ones from the selection at Portal:London Transport/Vote? If so, then I like File:Vauxhall Bridge 2009.jpg the most, nice detail and angle. Hope that's OK. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 21:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, i was meaning doing a range of your own selected images on the theme of transport, whatever you like and replace the current images in the Metro gallery. Just like Sunil has done previously. I also have realised that this is far too short notice. If you want, i can give it another couple of days. Simply south (talk) 22:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

So any images on the theme of transport in London (they have to be in London yes, or can they just be related)? Do the images have to be ones I've taken? Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 14:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Any images you like, whether you have taken them or not. It is up to you. And pictures to do with or related to transport in London but do have a link. Simply south (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Right, I've done it! The images are... File:Greyhound UK 23316 YN55 PXG and Cowes Co-op.JPG, File:London General MAL108 on 453.JPG, File:Arriva London MA90.JPG, File:Transdev London DPS677, DPS670 and DPS678.JPG, File:Arriva Heritage Fleet lineup.JPG, File:Signs at Woolwich Foot Tunnel.JPG, File:Why London Underground is nicknamed The Tube.jpg and File:DLR on flyover.jpg. One's not taken in London but I think Greyhound UK is relevant enough? I've added them to the newspage already if that's OK. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 18:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that's fine and you'll probably get away with it. Thanks. Simply south (talk) 18:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

And here it is...

Another issue to be adressed is, please could people indicate in the next month at the feedback page or on my talk page whether they still want to recieve issues of the metro. A lot of newsletters seem to be going to redundant pages. Simply south (talk) 20:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Arriva436. Just a quick message to say thank you for your supporting vote when another editor nominated the David Pugh (Conservative politician) article for deletion. Luckily the end result was keep, which you helped when you voted. I am particularly pleased as I was up till almost 3:00am writing it!! Editor5807^speak 21:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I even had some more stuff I was going to say to argue but didn't need to bother in the end! It was definitely a keep, especially after all the things surround him. Anyway, thanks for sending this message, as it's made me notice I never took the Wikibreak notices off this page. Whoops! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 22:08, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

An ever later Metro

Simply south (talk) 23:43, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 13:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

File:National Express Group logo.PNG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:National Express Group logo.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 22:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of London Buses route 71

I have nominated London Buses route 71, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 71. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

ChaseLinx

Hi, I was wondering if you could take a look at the ChaseLinx page and if we need it or not? MSalmon (talk) 19:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Probably not to be honest. The information could go in the Arriva Midlands North section of Arriva Midlands, and then the routes table could be all the routes, not just ChaseLinx. Then ChaseLinx could redirect to Arriva Midlands North.

If there's enough stuff, then perhaps you could expand Arriva Midlands North into its own article (like Fox County), at some point in the future. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, just checking MSalmon (talk) 20:06, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

It could be kept if you want, if there was enough stuff to expand it. I'm just not sure there is, though I only have limited knowledge of how big the brand is. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't know much about the routes apart from what is on the Arriva website MSalmon (talk) 20:11, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Your current signature

Is way too big, and plainly violates WP:SIG, in that: signatures should not be overly big, distracting, or obscure surrounding text. You need to decrease it in size pronto.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 04:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm working on a way to decrease it now in my 4th sandbox. I'll tell you when I have a solution.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 05:12, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Solution achieved. See here for code. I suggest you change your signature when you see this message. As said, a sig your size is not allowed per policy.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 05:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

As if I wasn't fed up with Wikipedia enough already, now even this has become a problem. I have to say that your message is rather blunt and rude, perhaps a polite request and not demanding it be changed "pronto" would have been better.

Anyway, I'm not sure how it's a problem. What do you mean by "big"? It doesn't seem too long. And it doesn't seem to tall, it doesn't use the <big> parameter or anything. I also don't see how it obscures surrounding text. Looking at WP:SIG, of length it says "The software will automatically truncate both plain and raw signatures to 255 characters." My signature is short enough for this not to happen. It also says "signatures that take up more than two or three lines in the edit window clutter the page and make it harder to distinguish posts from signatures". Mine's two lines, so should be fine.

I see that you have made an alternative version for me. However, I find it very small, and it probably violates "Do not make your signature so small that it is difficult to read." At ANI, where I see you have changed it for me without asking, the new signature is tiny in comparison with other text, and is nigh on impossible to read. Frankly it looks silly. Looking at the old version of the page, it looks much better as it was, and I also note the signature of admin user Brown Haired Girl, who started the discussion, is longer than mine.

Please can you clarify what specifically is wrong with my signature? Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 10:57, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't see anything wrong with it, and the replacement is a clear violation. All I see is your name in bold but normal font size, with talk/contribs links in superscript. All-in, it is barely one character longer than mine, which is the default. If Daedalus969 is seeing something different, he should post a screen grab. If not, then this is not a violation in the slightest. MickMacNee (talk) 13:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Infact, yours and his are virtually identical in style, except he only links to contribs. MickMacNee (talk) 13:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, mine links to talk and contribs. I should probably find a way to make it more apparent.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 21:40, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

He was *way* out of line with this message, I'm not sure he even understands policy he quotes! Arriva, whatever you do, do not change your signature, it meets all appropriate guidelines. I've dropped him a note on his talk page in the interests of saving other users from his harassment next time he gets bored. 19:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. I wasn't planning on changing it. The fact that I asked them to clarify what on earth they meant this morning, and they have since made a load of edits - but not replied here - suggests that it was a "turn up and go" kind of action. Thanks for the support both of you! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Please don't assume bad faith if you are. I left a message at your talk, and at the time, you didn't reply, you hadn't in awhile. After that, I made a few attempted changes/fixes to my user talk headers, and after those all failed, I went to sleep. My last edit was way behind(in regards to my perception of time/ my perception of time when I am tired) your first reply in time:

• 09:31, April 2, 2010 (UTC) My last edit before going to bed.
• 10:57, April 2, 2010 (UTC) Your reply, nearly two hours after my last edit.

So it wasn't much, but the point is I was still inactive for about two hours. In reality, I had given up for the night and gone to bed, hence my lack of reply. I realize I was rude, and I again apologize for that, but please don't assume bad faith if you are, in terms of reply speed.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 21:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. What I was trying to say was that after I replied, you made some more edits, before coming back here (though I may have read the timings incorrectly). Therefore I was unsure if you were going to return. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 22:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh. Well, my watchlist is 1500 pages.. last I checked I mean, so I may not have immediately seen it. Sorry for not checking here first.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 22:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

No logical reason for this. To exterminate the paranormal, call Ghostbusters. Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Apologies

Something was wrong on my end. I can see that it renders fine. I use two computers, a PC, my main computer, and a small MacBook. When I first saw your signature on the macbook, it looked like you were using double big tags. I can get a screen shot if needed.

I'm sorry that I wasn't able to control myself and became rude. I'm not trying to pass off my render settings on the macbook as a reason for my rudeness, but it seriously looked obnoxiously huge, and I am again sorry for my rudeness. I hope you can forgive me.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 21:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry - we all make mistakes. It wasn't unacceptably rude, though it was a tad aggressive. I understand the situation now, if that's what you saw at the time, that's what you saw, and not a lot could have been done about it. We all know how computers can mess things about! Anyway, as I said, no worries. Thanks for the apology though. That should be the end of this :)Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 22:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I wish there was something that could be done about it though, in that I can figure out what is wrong with the laptop's html processing and fix it. To make your signature work on it, through html in wikipedia likely wouldn't work, as it has no way of 'sensing' what settings exist on the macbook. :/ — Dædαlus ^Contribs 22:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Bus Route AfDs and possible knock-on effect

I was a little worried to read this. I have to say... PLEASE don't stop editing! We need you to keep our bus articles in any sort of presentable form. It was bad enough losing User:Lradrama, but with you gone much of our UK bus coverage would descend into chaos, despite the best efforts of the rest of us.

Regarding the actual AfDs, I see that you haven't contributed to very many of them yet. I would stronly suggest that you do. We may dislike the way that the AfDs were started, but now we're stuck with them so let's work within their scope to achieve the result we want. The situation isn't hopeless:

• One AfD has already been closed as Speedy Keep;
• A few others such as West Midlands bus route 8 and Capital City Red look near-certain to be kept, while Capital City Green seems fairly safe as well;
• An extra keep vote could make a real difference in several cases: WP:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 74, WP:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 71, WP:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 75 and WP:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 77 are very close indeed;
• Even WP:Articles for deletion/London Buses route 42 or WP:Articles for deletion/West Midlands bus route 7 still have a chance.

Your help would be very much appreciated. This isn't a case of WP:SNOW just yet; keep fighting and some of the articles may yet survive. Alzarian16 (talk) 15:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm not considering going! It's just the constant "ooh, this and that isn't notable", arrogance of some users, the "I'm an admin so screw you", AfD, AfD, AfD, PROD and narrow mindedness of some users that gets to you after a while. I mean, just look at how some people waste their life constantly starting/discussing AfDs. Note how I haven't started an article myself for a long time - I can't be bothered to argue about keeping it if someones takes a disliking to it. However, the support I seem to be receiving reminds me there are nice people about :)

I have voted keep for some of the articles, though only the ones I think are undoubtedly notable. However, I feel there will always be a negative view on bus routes articles. The bus is stigmatised as downmarket. It's a shame, but it's a fact. As long as this continues, we will always get dismissive views about bus related stuff on Wikipedia, such as this: "I used to know someone whose hobby was buses. I think there are a lot of people like that. Well enough to make pointless wikipedia articles and not know better. Szzuk". Great.

The fact is, I know that people use Wikipedia to find out information about buses and bus routes. However, everything on Wikipedia is focused purely on being "notable", not whether it's useful. If something is useful, it's useful. "But oh, it's not notable because it's not discussed in third party sources, let's delete it!". You'd think Wikipedia was to inform people about various topics. But no, if it's not covered elsewhere then seemingly no one ever wants to know about it, ever. If it's already covered in third party topics then arguably there's less need for it on here.

I feel the days of most bus route articles are numbered. I believe that focussing on operators is much better. Look at some of the articles you have made. London Country North East is fantastic. It is sad to say, but I've got to the point where I could let the London route articles go... Thanks for your message of support though :) Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:35, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I think the like you gave above could have been the wrong one??! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that, completely the wrong link. That's what comes of trying to source a BLP and leave a comment at the same time. The link I was looking for was this one. Alzarian16 (talk) 11:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

If I could make a suggestion—all this could be avoided if you merged all but the most significant into expanded-list format, as has been done with List of bus routes in the Bronx for instance. Nobody is going to argue that List of bus routes in Wolverhampton is non-notable, and a lot of the content of these articles consists of unnecessary duplication and virtually identical photographs-for-the-sake-of-photographs. As and when routes demonstrate enough coverage to warrant separating them into separate sub-articles for reasons of practicality, you can replace the relevant entry in the list with {{main}}. For most people, a single list is far more useful than a hundred separate articles, as it allows instant comparison. – iridescent 20:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I support that idea of creating enhanced lists. I would also suggest that there is a lot of scope for expanding the coverage of bus-related topics, by approaching the subject thematically rather than focusing on individual routes. For example, some of the individual bus company articles are good, but many of them need more work; and as another examples privatisation and deregulation of bus routes was a hotly contested and tumultuous change which caused numerous disputes and protests in many areas, yet even in London it receives poor coverage: Privatisation of London bus services makes it sound like an administrative process, and makes no mention of the disputes around privatisation.

Outside of London, coverage is even worse. England's second-biggest city is Brum, but Transport_in_Birmingham#Buses_and_coaches is only 5 paragraphs long, and there is nothing on the battles between service operators or the all endless debate on the fare structures and the lack of unified ticketing in many areas.

Part of the reason there have been so many rude comments about these articles at AFD is that taken as a whole they show a focus on micro-detail rather than on the broad topic. Here's an example: one of the articles currently at AFD had been expanded with a few sentences on hybrid buses, managing to conflate contradictory assertions in the sources and add one assertion which had no basis in any of the sources, despite being referenced to one of them. Several other articles have similarly patchy mentions of hybrids, but even tho TfL has been driving a big switch to hybrid buses there is only a bare mention of it in Hybrid electric bus, and AFAICS no article provides an overview of hybrid buses in London. That's symptomatic of the broader problem with UK bus coverage: far too much small detail, far too little overview. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleting individual route articles would not make the creation of articles like Hybrid buses in London any easier. Infact it would be harder, because you would have to endlessly repeat the same information over and over. The same is true with these regional articles, routes in London range over huge areas, again this would not hasten the creation of better articles, and would again just require the wasteful replication of information. Iridescent knows about trains - well, a loose comparison would be to argue that individiual railway line articles are not necessary, as it could be covered by Railway lines in Fulford and Fulford, Boxbridge and Nunwich railway company. It just wouldn't work, and would actually lead to less people working on articles, rather than more, because a lot of editors progress from adding a development to one route article, where they would notice a gap in coverage and hopefully go on to create a wider article. Funnily enough, that's the exact thought process that made me create Privatisation of London bus services! Individual route articles complement such works, they certainly don't harm it in the least. MickMacNee (talk) 13:28, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd say the better railway analogy is more that, when there's insufficient material on the individual stations on a line to have an individual article on them, it's more use to have a single article on the line including a list of stations, and only have stand-alone articles if a particular station has enough to say about it that it warrants mentioning. Which is exactly what happens; see List of stations and halts on the Talyllyn Railway for a good example. – iridescent 19:04, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

There are some cases where a single article can work, small towns... see what I did with Bus transport in Bromsgrove, though it still needs work (map and images really), whereas, in that format, Bus transport in Birmingham or Bus transport in London wouldn't work. I have long been an advocate of combining individual route articles into "corridor" articles where appropriate, such as West Midlands Bristol Road bus corridor, which works better than individual articles for the routes concerned. Jeni ^(talk) 19:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Original Barnstar
		For so much fantastic work to UK bus related articles, as so many would be a lot further behind without your expert help. Your work is greatly appreciated. Editor5807speak 17:56, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Thanks for all the support notes everyone has left on my talk page over the past couple of days. They're much appricated. :) Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Worcestershire bus route 144‎

Heya, I don't suppose you have any images related to Worcestershire bus route 144‎ in your vast collection do you? :) Jeni ^(talk) 11:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm afraid not. I'm a southerner really! I've got a few shots from Scotland and Shropshire/Wales from holidays, but that's about it. The two Warwickshire images of the X17 Dart and the Goldline Solo were grabbed as I passed through. Apart from that Oxford is the highest I've gone. It would be nice if we could fin someone to get some shots in the West Midlands etc, we're lacking at the moment. Especially with Rotala/Central Connect/Connect Buses/Red/Black Diamond (whoever they are) painting buses in various different colours at the moment!

Anyway, I've not got an image of the 144, but this was on the First Midland Red page... File:First Midland Red 67658.jpg. A stroke of luck, though it could well be a different 144, but I've added it for now. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 11:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

That is perfect! To be honest I should have looked! Thankyou :) Have a mini barnstar! Jeni ^(talk) 11:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

While I have your attention, what do you think about the table layout I just implemented on Bus transport in Bromsgrove‎? Could it possibly solve all our current bus route article problems? Jeni ^(talk) 12:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I like the layout of that table a lot. As you say, it could solve a lot of problems. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

April Metro

. Simply south (talk) 21:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 21:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Always a pleasure. Simply south (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Where do bus companies go in GA?

Question: If I wanted to nominate a bus company article for GA, which category would it go in: Road Transportation or Businesses? At present there don't seem to be any in either, or anywhere else for that matter. Alzarian16 (talk) 13:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure, as nothing's ever made it before as far as I'm aware. However, I'd say Road Transportation would be best as that it what "bus" is more associated with. Also, technically, not all bus companies are actually businesses. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 15:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Definitely Transport at GAN, and Road transportation and policy if/when it passes GA and gets listed. Transit Authority of River City is the only bus company article currently listed at GA, but see how Cathay Pacific, Cunard Line, Washington Metro etc are categorised; they set a clear precedent. – iridescent 15:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for that. I'll get back to you if I manage to get one listed. Alzarian16 (talk) 18:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Four days later, and my own London Country North East has been passed! Incredible considering it's only existed for a month. Alzarian16 (talk) 13:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Well done! It was a good article though (for want of a better phrase), so it should have gained Good Article status with a bit of work. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Bus stands

In answer to a question you asked me a while ago reguarding bus stands, the new route 37 leaves from stand H in Ryde bus station, unfortunately no photo as of yet as I was there after and before it stopped running on Wednesday. However the X10 and X11 are still a mystery to me. I cheched the obvious stands (stand F for both and stands A and C if they are still using the old ones) and there is no timetable information there, so I don't know if you know? Thanks, Editor5807^speak 16:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting the 37 info. I wanted to update the Ryde Transport Interchange article but didn't know the stand number. I have now changed it. The X10/11 is a good question. I did have a look Sunday before I caught the bus to Bustival, but I couldn't see anything either. I looked in the same places as you. I'll have to ask... Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks. Next week, if I'm at the bus station at the right time in the afternoon I'll take a look as well and hopefully get a photo. Also while we're on the subject, if I do upload a photo to Commons, should this be categorised under routes 10 and 11? Or does a new category need to be created for X10 and X11? Editor5807^speak 20:57, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I was in Newport bus station at the right time this afternoon and can now confirm that the X10 uses stand A and the X11 uses stand C and have updated the Newport bus station article. Both were photographed so I'll upload to Commons soon. Editor5807^speak 17:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Excellent work! I look forward to seeing the photos. Apparently 594/595 are the regular coaches. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 18:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I forgot to say, I think you should just put them in the route 10 and 11 categories, I think separate ones would be overkill. Though I suppose we could have a "Commuter routes category". Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 18:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I have now uploaded them, and just put them in the old routes 10 and 11 categories. It was 594 and 595 in use:

• X10 - File:Southern Vectis 595 R813 NUD 2.JPG
• X11 - File:Southern Vectis 594 R812 NUD.JPG

I think they are categorised correctly, although you might want to double-check as I'm not as familiar with coaches. I used Southern Vectis' fleet list as a guide and also noticed they have the name of 595 incorrectly listed as Mill Bay instead of Ethel Point, so hopefully everything else is ok. Thanks, Editor5807^speak 10:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice. The cats look good to me, as to the photos themselves! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Move First Student UK?

Hello, I added the above suggestion to Talk:First Student UK, just letting you know,Nankai (talk) 21:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I have now commented. Thanks for informing me. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 17:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

May + June Metro

Simply south (talk) 21:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Stagecoach Cambridge logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Stagecoach Cambridge logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like this was removed from the article and replaced by File:Cambridge Citi Logo.png. The uploader claims that he created the file by himself, but that clearly isn't true. Alzarian16 (talk) 10:36, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I did see the logo and was going to just change the license and add an FUR, but your method worked just as well. The logo does seem to have changed (probably in-line with the new buses that have arrived recently), so I have uploaded the new one over the old file. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

On the subject, have you seen Stagecoach in Peterborough Route 7? It's pretty rubbish, and I can't see it going anywhere. Deletion? Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that one. There doesn't seem to be any source material available and there's no list to redirect to, so I'll PROD it and see what happens. Alzarian16 (talk) 21:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hovertravel logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hovertravel logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Looking at both, I think the PNG version is much better and clearer than the svg version, so for now have reverted it back. Editor5807^speak 17:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for informing me. The trouble is with logos that they do tend to be replaced eventually and then you get bots here, there and everywhere telling you about it! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hovertravel logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hovertravel logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 16:14, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Reading Transport 475.JPG

Please note that this bus is nolonger with Reading Transport but with the Green Transport Company of Birmingham.

Just thought i'd let you know.

[[User:Dudleybus]] [[User talk:Dudleybus]] (talk) 09:37, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for that. I had heard some of the RTL Presidents were on long term loan to The Green Bus. Also, the two companies have worked together and there will now be some Green Buses in Reading. I hope to visit Reading again soon. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 16:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Sale of Kingfisher Travel

I noticed a while ago that you asked to whom Kingfisher Travel was sold. In 2008 negotiations involved both Diamond Coaches of Swansea and Edwards Coaches of Llantwit Fardre. Both companies made offers to buy the Kingfisher Travel(Coach Division of IBT Ltd). The deal was to include 3 Volvo Jonckheere Coaches and a recently purchased Neoplan Euroliner plus the UK and European programme of, maillist and group bookings. I believe that when the deal finally went though at the end of 2008, the selling price had drastically reduced. Prior to completion of the deal, the Kingfisher Travel shop in Blackwood High Street was taken over by Edwards Coaches. Edwards Coaches also took on several booking staff, previously employed by IBT. This could have been a factor in the reduced sale price of Kingfisher. The council have declined to offer any information on the final sale price of Kingfisher. Forecasts were available, prior to the sale, showing that the bus company could not survive without the Kingfisher income, but this was not made available to the Board of Directors. IBT Ltd was subsequently forced to sell. From the best of my sources, no other companies were invited to bid for the company. Unfortunately there are several other factors of which I am aware, but have no solid evidence and therefore cannot comment on. Summary - don't let Councils run coach companies ( or for that matter any companies) as they are just not commercially minded. 82.6.59.122 (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

OK thanks for that, it's very interesting. Do you have any references, this information could definitely be added to the article of Islwyn Borough Transport. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 16:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

July Metro

Simply south (talk) 19:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wightlink logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wightlink logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Aviance logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Aviance logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Bracknell bus station

Due to add an article for Bracknell bus station for the Bus stations in England category.

If you know anything about this bus station please feel free to contribute.

Ta v. much.

Whohe! (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, will do, if I can think of anything. To be honest it is quite a simple and bland bus station, but relatively smart nonetheless. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 07:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in here, but I looked at the article and am a little worried that in its present form it might be deleted for failing WP:GNG. I'm sure there are good offline sources available, but given what happened to Rawtenstall bus station it may be a good idea to add them sooner rather than later. (Hope this comment wasn't too depressing!) Alzarian16 (talk) 11:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it could definitely do with some sources. I can't find any though TBH. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 10:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Stagecoach Devon logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Stagecoach Devon logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

This month's Metro

Thank you. Sorry for the late reply, I have been away. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 13:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Arriva436,

My name is Iveco 59-12 I am mainly helping you and Editor update the vectis pages and other pages I can help with. if you can keep me informed off what your your updating on the Vectis Pages then I can help if your stuck.

Thanks

Iveco 59-12Iveco 59-12 (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Excellent. We're quite up-to-date with the SV pages at the moment, though they'll have to be tweaked after the service changes. We're also pretty up to date with photos, having nearly photographed the whole fleet. We are now focusing on photographing buses in places where the routes are no longer going to serve, for example buses in Merstone on route 3, as route 3 will no longer serve Merstone after September. I'll try and keep the SV talk page updated when we do changes etc, though you might want to keep a look at mine and Editor5807's talk pages, as we often talk to each other there. Also worth bearing in mind is that Wikipedia is a public site, so only put information on here if it has reached the public domain somewhere else. A good example would be not saying Ryde depot is going to be closed until the County Press has reported it, because if information given to bus enthusiasts ends up in the wrong hands, then SV will be reluctant to keep giving out good information to us. Hope that helps. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 14:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

You got an e-mail address

Hi Arriva436,

Its Iveco 59-12 here, just wondering do you have an e-mail address for me to keep you updated with pages I have done.

Thanks for all your help,

Iveco 59-12--Iveco 59-12 (talk) 15:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

No, 'fraid not. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 15:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

How often do you come to the island then?

Iveco 59-12--Iveco 59-12 (talk) 15:25, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Every few months or so. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 20:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Let me know the next time you do!

All the best,

Iveco 59-12--Iveco 59-12 (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:National Express logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:National Express logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Island Coaster logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Island Coaster logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 05:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Southern Vectis Roadtrains logo.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Southern Vectis Roadtrains logo.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 05:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wilts & Dorset logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wilts & Dorset logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wilfreda Beehive logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wilfreda Beehive logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

October Metro

Simply south (talk) 18:56, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

YN03 NCF

Hi, and thanks for your note on my talk page. Glad the pic has come in useful. MK is outside my normal patch: I was there for a stag night (!), and snapped a random selection of whatever turned up at the station between my train arriving and my friend picking me up. I must get round to uploading more bus pics to Flickr: I probably have nearly a thousand, mainly but not exclusively from Sussex (in fact I was out yesterday adding more to my collection). Although I like photographing them, I know comparatively little about buses, so help with the content of the Flickr notes and tags would be appreciated! You may have heard the name James Cox, a prolific bus photographer ... I am a friend of his from university, and through a shared interest in public transport he sort of got me interested in bus photography. If I can work out how to change the status, I will probably relicense YN03 NCF as Public Domain, in line with my other pics on Commons (@ The Voice of Hassocks). Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Well that makes it even more lucky that that very bus was photographed and released under a free license! When I hopefully get a picture of YN03 NCF I'll upload it! Your Sussex plans sound good, Wikimedia Commons seems to be lacking in photos from that area in particular. Sussex is interesting with the rural areas where shots are harder to get. I'm in Surrey, and the Council are reviewing service in order to save money - Phase 1 changes started at the end of August. Therefore, I went out over the summer and tried to photograph all of the things being changes & withdrawn, and I hope that eventually Surrey will have a comprehensive selection of photos. I have already been busy setting up route categories (Commons:Category:Bus routes in Surrey), which took a while! I think there is an option to relicense all your pictures on Flickr, not sure about public domain but I think you can waive all rights. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 11:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I hate to butt in, but as I have this page on my watchlist I thought I could help! There is a way to re-license all your work on Flickr, at [1]. It changes everything in your photostream to the new license. I took a look at your Commons account, Voice of Hassocks which certainly has some very nice photos you've already uploaded! :) Editor5807^speak 22:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Nice one Editor5807 – thanks for that link; I'll investigate it at home (Flickr is blocked here at work!). Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 11:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, here she is! File:Arriva Guildford & West Surrey 1508 YN03 NCF and Horsell High Street.JPG. Unfortunately, the light levels were not good, and the photo as the bus passing me was a complete disaster! Too blurry to upload. I walked up the road and waited for it to come back (this photo), but that didn't go very well either! Ah well, you get the gist, it's no longer purple! Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Arriva (Article Edited)

Dear Arriva436.

Wow didnt think there would be any bus enthusiasts here =)

You edited http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Overdrive_(transportation) ..... but whats Rm some bias ????

Thanks

Davey —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davey2010 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. It wasn't quite bias, more stuff that shouldn't have been there. Perhaps I should have made it clearer in my edit summary. Basically, I removed "which by the way none of them work." about the real time information system, because as an encyclopedia this shouldn't be there. I also took out "which due to reasons no one knows they have been moved", because it reflects badly on Arriva.

Interesting about the Mini Pointer Darts. Are these 1606 (GN04 UCW) etc? I know two are in Southend, and two have just moved to Guildford (which I've now seen many times), but where have the others gone?! And do you know what has replaced them? Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 17:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Hiya, apologies for late reply, i wasn't sure whether to put about the real time information system, but anyway thanks for making it alot better,

ever since the hit and run incident which involved a mini dennis dart they've all disappeared, theres new double decker but haven't had time to check it out,

i should point out that the school bus removal .... I was chatting to a driver about the height of me and the ceiling and she said there getting rid of them to stop most pollution ...

So i cant see the every 10 mins continuing as i would imagine the long dennis darts would be going too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davey2010 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Cool. What happened in the hit and run? They are still about within Arriva Southern Counties, as I say, Guildford gained two last month. Nice buses they are too!

To be honest I think the school deckers have reached the end of their lives, and need to be replaced, regardless of pollution. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 21:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Apparently buses kept hitting a guys car so one day he approached the front of bus but driver kept going and he got to the depot and said ive run someone over so yup not good

I agree school deckers should go but i was told they only use the buses so the new ones dont get vandalized ..... If the school decks dont go after 3 months i'll edit the article, been nice speaking to you =] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davey2010 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Company logos and copyright

Been having some trouble with File:Tillingbourne.gif, which I uploaded for the article of the same name. It was tagged as not having a copyright license by a bot. I tried to fix it using one of yours as a basis (File:London Country Bus Services logo.png), which seems to have fixed it... I think. Is there a simple way of getting that layout, or do I need to type it all out like I did here? Alzarian16 (talk) 18:07, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

If you go to Wikipedia:Upload, there is an option for "The logo of an organization, brand, product, public facility, or other item". If you click on any of those (usually organisation), it gives you the template - see this. I think it then puts the correct license under the summary table automatically when you upload it, but I'm not sure.

Personally, I just copy the whole page from another logo I've already uploaded, go to the Basic upload form, paste it all into the box, change the stuff that needs changing like the article name and source link, and then upload it. That works for me anyway, seems quickest. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 18:14, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

That's interesting, I selected the logo option on Upload but seemed to only get the FUR and not the whole template. The copy and paste idea is a far better one anyway. I'll be using that in future. Thanks! Alzarian16 (talk) 18:19, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

December Metro

Simply south (talk) 08:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 19:05, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Tillingbourne Bus Company/GA1

A GA review has started on Tillingbourne Bus Company. The article is in the early stages of being created, and there are gaps in detail and information, and the prose does not yet flow. However, the review is on hold for seven days to see if contributors are able to further develop the article to meet GA criteria. SilkTork *^YES! 01:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 17:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

---

2010 archive now completed. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 17:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)