Talk:504 King

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

King Street Transit Priority Corridor[edit]

The transit mall on King Street is permanent and the City has dubbed it the King Street Transit Priority Corridor. Thus, I am proposing to split the section King Street Transit Priority Corridor from the article and create a new article of the same name. The corridor does not belong exclusively to the 504 King route; other routes using it are 503 Kingston Road, 508 Lake Shore and, starting November 25, 2019, the Downtown Express bus routes (141-145). I would gradually add more material such as a list of routes using the corridor, etc. Comments? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:46, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is there enough material and, most importantly, does it have enough independent coverage to establish sufficient notability to warrant a separate article? I.e. is it ever covered as just itself or is the coverage mainly in the context of the 504? I would err on the side of caution and move the material to the generic Toronto streetcar article until there is enough coverage of the topic in and of itself to establish independent notability. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Today, over ¼ of the 504 King article is about the corridor, its infrastructure and how the pilot project increased transit efficiency. Mentions of 504 (and the defunct 514) are incidental in the description of corridor efficiency. We should be adding the other routes using the corridor, but that seems awkward to do in the context of the 504 King article or the Toronto streetcar system article as bus routes will soon be involved. The new article would grow. The subject is noteworthy as other transit operators have been looking at the pilot. The section is already referenced from the transit mall article, which also links to a couple of existing transit mall articles. We already have something similar with the York University Busway article in the sense that it is about transit infrastructure. The new article would mainly be about infrastructure with a summary of the routes (streetcar and bus) using this infrastructure. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 03:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is used by the 504 King streetcar. Why do you think there are multiple streetcar and bus routes here? Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:36, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The corridor is also used by 503 Kingston Rd and 508 Lake Share. Effective November 25, 2019, it will also be used by the Downtown Express bus routes. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 13:49, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@TheTrolleyPole: You are correct! That's good news about the Downtown Express. Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:56, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • AGREE with the split now that it's permanent. Unnecesarily long articles are harder to read and it's not exclusive to the 504 King route. Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article has been reformatted for splitting, and section King Street Transit Priority Corridor now looks much as it would if split. The section now occupies 50% of the 504 King page. @Joeyconnick: Does everyone agree to the split? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 22:41, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • The reformatting was premature—should have waited until the discussion here was done or done it up in draftspace. It doesn't matter how big the material is relative to its (potential) parent: what matters is that the subject is independently notable in reliable sources. Also doesn't matter if there are other similar articles. Content certainly doesn't meet requirements of WP:SIZESPLIT.
      So issue becomes: is it independently notable? Sounds like, given its use by various services and the extent of the coverage of it, it is. However, since a discussion has been started, I would wait a full seven days to let others chime in as this is a big change. There are pretty conceivably more than 3 people who may have an opinion on the subject. —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Reading over the discussion and looking at some sources, I agree that the King Street TPC should be split into it's own article. This is especially the case now that the priority route is permanant and is used by a handfull of streetcar and bus routes. It also has a substantial history documented by RS. BLAIXX 12:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Geo Swan (talk) 04:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The material for the King Street Transit Priority Corridor would completely dominate a "Transit priority corridors in Toronto" article as, at the moment, there are not yet any other similar projects in Toronto. We could add a new section to describe any copycat ideas if politicians show interest. However, 14th Street (Manhattan)#Bus rapid transit was inspired by the King Street Pilot Project, and I would reference it in the "See also" section if we split the article. There is already a separate article for York University Busway, which is similar in nature to "King Street Transit Priority Corridor". Thanks for the links on the new King Street platforms; they will be useful. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:30, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Joeyconnick: Hello again: Seven full days have elapsed. Two more people have commented. Shall we split? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:30, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah I think you've established there's a clear rationale and editor consensus. Thanks for your work on this! —Joeyconnick (talk) 21:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Not now; to keep separate for now pending further re-organization of routes which might make a merge target for 514 clearer. Klbrain (talk) 08:01, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As of today, the combined prose size of this article and 514 Cherry is ~11 kB, about the same as the King Street Transit Priority Corridor, but the thing about it is that there is quite a bit of content duplication between the articles. In October 2018, the previous 514 route was merged into the 504 King, so now not only is the former route much of a duplication, but the history is now part of the 504's history. Due to this, I think that:

The 514 Cherry article should be merged with this article.

I would not prejudice against merging some of the 514 article into the Distillery Loop and Cherry Street branch article, given the loop's similarities with it. Username6892 15:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense to me, especially given its short tenure. —Joeyconnick (talk) 16:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I would prefer to keep the two routes in separate articles to avoid a more complex, interwoven narrative. If you refer to Toronto streetcar system#Future expansion, it appears that more complications may be coming by 2022, where today's 504 King is modified/replaced by new routes: 504B from Distillery Loop to Humber Loop and 503 from Bingham Loop to Dufferin Gate Loop. Assuming my preference is rejected, I would then suggest that 514 Cherry be presented similar to 507 Long Branch which is effectively a mini-article within an article, and would keep 514 as a separate topic. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:08, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense to me, given that 100% of the 514 route is now 504A or 504B. Nfitz (talk)

@Username6892, Joeyconnick, and TheTrolleyPole: its not clear what the current situation is, a year on. Any updates? Klbrain (talk) 20:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have not changed my opinion; I prefer separate articles for the reasons I gave above. Something similar was done to the Cherry Street streetcar line which was merged into 514 Cherry only to be reversed after the reorganization of 504/514. If I lose this argument again, please put all of 514 Cherry into one section similar to 507 Long Branch in case there is another route reorganization. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:35, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:504_King&oldid=1197057405"