Jump to content

Talk:Proposed expansion of the Buffalo Metro Rail

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

Untitled

[edit]

Wikified as part of the Wikification wikiproject! JubalHarshaw 18:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

White space and balancing of the document.

[edit]

I was able to create a number of linear maps of a few of the lines and am wondering if there's a way to balance the article so that the top part of each section aligns with the top of the map?

The document looks a little awry at the present time, and would like to maintain the maps if at all possible, without making the rest of the document look incorrectly formatted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allamericanbear (talkcontribs) 17:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is so awesome!

[edit]

I am so glad I found this page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.221.166 (talk) 21:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Buffalo Metro Rail

[edit]

Many of the plans here are historical/previously proposed and can easily be introduced into Buffalo Metro Rail. This organization just isn't notable enough to warrant its own article. Buffaboy talk 16:00, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do not merge. Yes, the article needs work, but the CRTC is a completely separate independent entity from the NFTA. Also, merging the two would make Buffalo Metro Rail too long. Useddenim (talk) 01:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What if we rename the article as List of proposed Buffalo Metro Rail lines? Then we can implicitly refer to the CRTC within both articles, but find neutral references that support the plans. Buffaboy talk 03:47, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A better title would be Proposed Buffalo Metro Rail lines, given that it's an article rather than a simple list, and would also put it in line with such things as Category:Proposed London Underground lines, etc. Useddenim (talk) 13:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a good idea, should we move forward with this plan or wait for a broader consensus? Buffaboy talk 18:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support this title as well, because there is too much to merge, but the article needs some cleanup. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:27, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citizens Regional Transit Corporation. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 06:58, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]