Talk:98 B-Line

Spin off routes

A little bit should be added for the spin-off routes like the 491,496,etc (Theburlyman 08:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC))

If someone could find a route map of the 491 and the 496, that would be cool. Cganuelas (talk) 03:02, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Is this really a bus rapid transit line?

The lead sentences describes this bus route as a bus rapid transit line.

Is this really a bus rapid transit line? Isn't the term bus rapid transit usually reserved for bus routes that run, at least partially, in a dedicated right of way? Geo Swan (talk) 06:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely not. But it seems to be the closest thing to BRT that ever existed in TransLink's hands. Cganuelas (talk) 11:55, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. While the 98 did have some (not a majority) dedicated ROW and priority at some intersections these alone are certainly not sufficient to deem it BRT. Sweetnhappy (talk) 03:00, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Did some searching and found that the 98 was considered and promoted as one of the first BRT systems in North America. This does not mean the other B-Lines were/are since they did/do not use the same technology and other features that were exclusive to the 98. Sweetnhappy (talk) 22:44, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

that is not how you deal with dead references

@Cganuelas: Please never remove references like that. If you aren't going to improve them/find an archived copy of the content, please tag them as dead using the Dead link template. —Joeyconnick (talk) 07:10, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Aight. Thanks for letting me know. Cganuelas (talk) 07:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

B-Line logo

@Mightyputty2002: You've listed the image as "own work" but I'm pretty sure if that's not sourced from TransLink, it's a direct copy. What's the actual provenance of that image, because if it's from TransLink it's likely to be copyrighted and its use in Wikipedia could be limited or prohibited. —Joeyconnick (talk) 06:48, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

So according to the edit summary here, it's apparent Mightyputty2002 misunderstands how copyright works and we cannot use this non-free image in its current form. —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)