Contents

Template talk:Connecticut transit navbox

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Buses This template is within the scope of WikiProject Buses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of buses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusesWikipedia:WikiProject BusesTemplate:WikiProject Busesbus transport articles Connecticut This template is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles New York City: Public Transportation This template is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles This template is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation.

Operators[edit]

Seems pointless to include all these operators (Dattco, Collins, etc), most of whom are too insignificant to have their own Wikipedia pages, and are not of interest to the average person.Mirza Ahmed (talk) 08:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agreed. The behind-the-scenes operating companies don't need to be listed here. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I debate the "insignificance" of the operators - the general state of the Connecticut transit agency articles has been (until somewhat recently) quite poor. Any of the listed operators would certainly meet the notability guidelines if their articles did exist, but as of yet, they do not. As for their interest to the "average reader" though, you're probably right in that they are "behind-the-scenes" for the most part - and hence, not of interest to most. Artsistra (talk) 00:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious that they would meet notability criteria. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 18:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All of CT Transit's operators ran their own branded bus services before becoming part of the CT Transit brand aside from Collins and North East Transportation (and the latter does have its own article). 30 years ago companies like Dattco ran comprehensive commuter bus service (which they still do - it's just part of the CT Transit brand now) and others like New Britain Transportation operated city bus systems larger and better-reported on than some which do have articles (like Enfield, NECTD, or NWCTD). If you really don't believe me I *can* find sources if you'd like some proof. Artsistra (talk) 20:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If they were formerly independent operators, I'm fine listing them there. They'll be notable enough for an article, or at least a section of a list. (We can probably also have a row for the currently operating private intercity bus companies like Peter Pan.) But we don't need a separate row for contract operators, and any that never operated scheduled service under their own brand aren't going to be relevant to link from this template. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. I support this idea! So, if I'm interpreting your suggestions correctly, it would include the removal of contract operators as their own section, listing the formerly independent ones in "former operators" (I'd assume), and adding a section for intercity bus companies? Just want to make sure before any changes are made! Artsistra (talk) 03:11, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Correct on all counts. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]