Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Oslo Tramway and Metro operators/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 00:09, 11 January 2011 [1].

List of Oslo Tramway and Metro operators edit

List of Oslo Tramway and Metro operators (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Arsenikk (talk) 13:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This list presents the 14 companies that have operated the various tramway and metro lines in Oslo. With a complicated history of the operators, I hope this list helps make it easy for readers to get an overview of the field. Arsenikk (talk) 13:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Nice list, but I think the image File:Oslo tram forskningenparken.JPG is a bit overused here on enwp. In addition to illustrate the Forskningsparken (station) article, is it used as a lead photo in History of the Oslo Tramway and Metro and as illustration in the body text of the articles Sognsvann Line, Ullevål Hageby Line, SL95, List of Oslo Metro stations and List of Oslo Tramway stations. Although a very nice photo, I would suggest replacing it with File:Tram in Drammensveien 1919.jpeg, File:Holmenkolbanen entrance at Nationaltheatret.jpeg, File:Tram at Egertorget in 1907.jpeg or one of the other nice images from the articles on the list. --Eisfbnore (talk) 17:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's the perfect picture! Or more accurate: it is the only picture we have that shows both a metro and tram in it, which, as far as I am aware, is only phototechnially possible at that one station. I'll see if I can replace the image, though. Arsenikk (talk) 17:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, it is a very nice picture, but I think the Tram at Egertorget in 1907.jpeg pic is somewhat more "operatorish" with the ads in the upper right corner. --Eisfbnore (talk) 17:42, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was (and is, when it reopens) possible at Jar station also. Probably at Majorstuen if you take the picture from high ground which is more difficult. We/I could also take some other photos of the same object at Forskningsparken. Geschichte (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen a really nice photo of Majorstuen station with the trams and metro trains from above, so that's absolutely a possibility. Someone with great photographing skills, could be capable of taking a photo of Storo station with the tram and metro from Grefsen Station. Also a picture of Johanne Dybwads plass taken from Saga kino with the tram stop in the foreground and the blue-white metro sign in the background would be nice. --Eisfbnore (talk) 13:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, seeing that you both live in Norway and are interested in this stuff, couldn't just one of you take a new image and upload it to wikipedia commons? --TIAYN (talk) 14:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, maybe. Geschichte (talk) 16:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, I'm a mediocre photographer, and I've already taken som pictures of Forskningsparken. I think the pictures talk for themselves. --Eisfbnore (talk) 22:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added two new images, one old of a tram and one new of the metro. There aren't that many good pictures of the system—images that I'd proudly put in a featured article or list. Then again, taking good images is a challenge. I tend to reuse the good ones a bit. Arsenikk (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 22:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Caption - "meets an" perhaps "passes" instead. Otherwise the results would be undesirable!
  • You link " Oslo Vognselskap" but it redirects back to Kollektivtransportproduksjon which is already linked. A touch confusing.
    • Kollektivtransportproduksjon owns Oslo Vognselskap, and I havn't so far gotten around to making an article about the latter. Will look into it. Arsenikk (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "of whcih three" typo.
  • "large parts of Oslo and parts of Bærum.[3][2]" parts is repetitive, and order those refs numerically.
  • Link Akershus on the first use.
  • " who operates the ticket system and manages public grants" Ruter is singular so this should be "operate the" and "manage public" shouldn't it?
    • I would have said it the way it was written, but perhaps my grammar is off. I've done as you suggest. Arsenikk (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "parts of all of the network." do you mean "or" instead of "of"? If not, then just "parts of the network" is fine.
  • Note: "Kollektivtransportproduksjon" is the best word I have ever seen at FLC.
  • "company only was an infrastructure owner" - do you mean "company was only an ..."?
  • Repeated use of Aspenberg's reference, I'd be happy with "Aspenberg, p. 9" since there doesn't appear to be a need to disambiguate which Aspenberg reference you're using (i.e. you have only one)
    • Done. It makes it impossible to "link" from the refs to the bibliography, but I guess that is a bit redundant here. Arsenikk (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • format=PDF seems to be missing from PDF refs.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Arsenikk (talk) 22:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comments –

  • "The private light rail lines were gradually nationalized and transferred to Oslo Sporveier, that operated the entire network by 1975." The flow of the sentence would be improved if "that" was turned into "which" or similar.
  • "and an public transport authority". "an" → "a".
  • "the latter which kept the Oslo Sporveier name." Add "of" before "which".
  • The page ranges (more than 1 page) should have pp. in the citation, not p. I see the list uses a Harvard citation template, which I'm not too familiar with since I've never used it. There was a p. parameter; by chance, is there a similar pp. parameter? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Crisp text, clean design, and well-referenced. Well done. HausTalk 19:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from bamse (talk) 23:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, just a couple of comments/suggestions:
  • "...was operated by Oslo Sporveier,[13] who...", possibly "who"->"which"?!
  • In my experience copy-editors don't like phrases like "The following lists companies..." and would add a noun such as: "The following table lists companies...". Not sure if it is required by the MOS, but you might give it a thought.
  • The table is a little bit too wide on my screen. (about too wide by the width of the "Ref" column)
    • I've shorted "commenced" to "com". While I don't like it, it is the one column in which the header is eating up horizontal space which the content is not. Otherwise, your screen should be adopting, and there are no hard spaces (although I agree that Kollektivtansportproduksjon is too long a word to help, although the daggering approach may have helped a little). Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am unsure about the usefulness of combining different types (Infrastructure, Operator,...) of companies in one table. Maybe you could convince me?!
    • I've expanded the explanation. The alternative is five separate tables, some with only a single entry, which would look cumbersome. It would also make it impossible to sort the table, for instance to get a chronology by year of commenced operations or year of ceased operations, or by owner. The current scheme allows a reader to quickly see which were private, or in which order the companies started operations, or even which ones were bought by Oslo Sporveier. With separate tables, this would not be possible. Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • On second thought this makes a lot of sense to me now. bamse (talk) 23:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do all the lines mentioned in the table still exist?
    • Some to, some don't. I've added a note for those which have been closed. Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would it be possible to somehow distinguish between metro and tramway lines in the "Lines" column?
    • Part of the problem is that while for instance Akersbanerne operated the Røa, Kjelsås, Sognsvann and Østensjø Lines, they were still tramways (or light rails, more accurately). Only after Oslo Sporveier took them over would they be rebuilt to metro lines. I've added a not to those which would later become part of the metro. Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks.
  • Refs 3, 5, 14, 15 need a translation of the title.
    • I haven't come across any requirements for reference translation in the MOS or other-place, and I don't really see how it helps the reader much, but if you want to, I can always translate them. Done. Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • It has been requested in some of my FLCs so I thought it was a requirement. Thanks for translating the titles now. bamse (talk) 14:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the table, could "Kollektivtransportproduksjon" (in "Owner" column) be replaced with Oslo Municipality?
    • I was going to protest, but came up with a compromise which would solve the problem. Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Terms like "Agency", "Integrated" and "Operator" in the type column should be better explained in my opinion or at least directly matched (using parantheses for instance) to the second sentence of the paragraph just above the table.
  • You use both "Oslo Sporvognsdrift" and "Oslotrikken" in the table which appears to be the same (correct?). To avoid confusion only one of the two terms should be used.
    • Fixed. They just recently renamed themselves, causing some confusion (mostly in my head). Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is still "Oslo Sporvognsdrift" in the successor column and "Oslotrikken" in the "company" column. bamse (talk) 14:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

bamse (talk) 14:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed. Thanks for the feedback :) Arsenikk (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support now. bamse (talk) 23:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Shouldn't A/S Smestadbanen be included in this list? I know it didn't operate any trains, but neither did Tryvandsbanen... --Eisfbnore talk 20:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Does Tryvandsbanen have an article now? As I seem to have included the one paper company, I should add the other as well. I'm redirecting to Røa Line for the moment, but perhaps it is also worthy of an article. Arsenikk (talk) 23:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Oslo_Tramway_and_Metro_operators/archive1&oldid=1136457231"