Talk:512 St. Clair

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Canada: Ontario / Toronto Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario. This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Mid-importance). Trains: Streetcars Low‑importance Trains Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This article is supported by WikiProject Streetcars.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:512 St. Clair.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:St. Clair detailed.

Replacing the list with the map was a good idea, I'm just not sure why the map shows long abandoned/no longer existing trackage up to Mt Pleasant and Eglinton. My suggestion would be to remove this, and keep it as the current route exists, in the process removing 'Keele Loop' as the loop is actually at 'Gunn's Road' eja2k 18:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I included it because it is a part of the route history (although that section is rather thin, and would benefit from expansion). Useddenim (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that it may lead to confusion as the infrastructure no long exists and hasn't for many years, perhaps 2 maps one current and one historic would be in order (if a larger historic section was established), or perhaps a new article on the abandoned routes of the TTC and the existing routes can be kept current eja2k 17:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now minimized the historic routes and clarified the current information. I haven't removed anything - just lessened the visual impact. If one current loop is to be shown in detail - then all of them have be depicted like that. I hope this is satisfactory. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with both eja2k's and Secondarywaltz's comments. I intend to create a more-detailed map which will show all of the current & former connections; at which point the current map could be simplified. Just one question, though: what's the best way to show that cars going through St. Clair West only loop counter-clockwise? Useddenim (talk) 00:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What we need is an overlay of the arrowhead part of this series of icons, centred in the box. Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:32, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re No stop/station at Oakwood Loop: There used to be one there... Useddenim (talk) 11:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not last week. The stops are located on St. Clair and on Oakwood. Photos for four of the loops have now been posted against the loop info. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a detailed track map to the RDT. Feel free to edit out the long-gone stuff from the route diagram, as all those details are now included in the track map. Useddenim (talk) 04:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted additions of material by User:GoldDragon because they present only one side of the issue. They are inconsistent with WP:NPOV, which says:

"Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. This policy is non-negotiable and all editors and articles must follow it."

Gold Dragon responded in an edit summary: "editors are welcome to add supporting info in the aftermath section". This puts the onus of balancing Gold Dragon's POPV on other editors. it is the responsibility of all editors to ensure a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not a debating forum where each side tries to get its viewpoint across by building up their own arguments. Wikipedia is about facts and about neutrality. If Gold Dragon is unwilling to fairly present both points of view, then his contributions violate a core Wikipedia policy and are not welcome. Ground Zero | t 15:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Ground Zero should look more carefully at the edits, the only POV section was this unreferenced segment, which was in the article before I edited it. I might be okay with removing it or rewording it.

The project itself is locally ridiculed as an example of poor coordination of construction; although the Yonge to Vaughan stretch was completed in early 2007, long-awaited shelters were only constructed at the end of that year; freshly laid sod was not watered in an unusually dry summer and thus died. Streetcars were briefly operated on the partially completed line in spring 2007, but were removed a few months later so that the streetcar loop at St. Clair West Station (which lies within the "Phase 1" boundaries) could be replaced (a project that has itself run far longer than initially scheduled due to unmapped electrical cables), rather than doing all the construction all at once and minimizing the disruption to residents. Although the replacement buses had driven on the completed right-of-way previously, the later replacement service operated beside the (operationally useful) right of way in congested mixed traffic lanes. Phase 2 itself has been delayed so that it is not being started until late in the construction season. Replacement of the tracks on Bathurst Street is scheduled for 2009; this will take the then-complete 512 streetcars (which depends on these tracks for yard access) out of commission for another year. Additionally, frustration is found in the three-year (five year, given various delays) timetable for the project, especially given that other projects, such as the 2007 505 Dundas track replacement, generally take less than a single year to complete. The daytime replacement bus service serves the curb beside the streetcar stops, which are "near-side" on old segments and "far-side" on new segments, a tactic designed to take advantage of transit priority signals, as "far side" stops (where the vehicle serves the intersection after passing through it) allow passenger loading independent of traffic-signal sequences. However, the Blue Night bus that operates late at night retains "near-side" stops, causing confusion about where to wait for a bus that runs infrequently. However, the bus's operators are usually accommodating either way.

My edits state what was reported in the news (Toronto Star, National Post, Toronto Sun), so this can't be considered POV. For instance there is nothing POV about referencing a consultant's report on the project, the effects on local businesses, or that a lawsuit has been filed:

- Then-TTC Vice Chair, Joe Mihevc, one of the strongest supporters of the right-of-way was quoted as saying in 2008 “I had a full head of hair when I started this project, and now I’m counting the ones left.”^[1] A report by a consultant for the TTC found numerous faults with the project, among them a lack of centralized project management.^[2] - - The original price of $48 million in 2004 soared past $106 million by the project's completion in 2010 (In 2005, the TTC predicted completion for the end of 2006 and budgeting $65-million, but as of December 13, 2008, only half the work had been completed and costs increased to $70-million, with a new target date being the end of 2009).^[3] - ^[4] - - The construction delays and reduced parking have also appeared to negatively affect local businesses, with a reported noted that seven shops have closed down on St. Clair between Oakwood to Dufferin. A local business owner, Annamaria Buttinelli, has filed a $100 million lawsuit on behalf of 200 businesses that failed or fell into “financial peril’’ as a result of the protracted construction, and is seeking in court to certify it as a class action.^[5] - ^[6]

GoldDragon (talk) 18:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't any need to refute these points, such as delays and cost overruns, a consultant's report, and a pending class-action lawsuit. Of course it would be POV to conclude that the project is good or bad, which should be left to the readers themselves. This is not different than how the Toronto Computer Leasing Inquiry article is presented, which listed out all of that project's questionable practices, in a similar stance to the St. Clair streetcar right of way. GoldDragon (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, don't edit war. You have been advised before about Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Your edits are contentious, so wait until the issues are resolved on the talk page before reinstating them.

Secondly, being reported in a newspaper does not make something automatically NPOV. What is POV about your edit is that you are marshalling facts to present one side of the story: that the St. Clair project was a cock-up. There is another side of the story that you scrupulously avoid:

• many of the delays and additional costs were the result of design changes made to accommodate the community's wishes;
• transit advocates argue that the project will increase the speed and reliability of transit along the corridor;
• St. Clair was originally designed to include a streetcar right-of-way; and
• half the people moving along St. Clair are doing so on the streetcar, while the other half are in cars.

All of the text you are trying to add is critical of the project. The way you present the story, there was no good reason for doing it, and the TTC did everything wrong. That in no way meets the WP:NPOV requirement of "representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources". And to remind you again, "All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. This policy is non-negotiable and all editors and articles must follow it."

Your refusal to edit in accordance with WP:NPOV, your edit warring on this and other articles, and your insistence on incorrectly capitalizing the subheadings in the article shows your ongoing disregard for Wikipedia style and policies. Ground Zero | t 03:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So you are claiming the "moral" high ground of NPOV by leaving in the below unreferenced POV section, all while going all out like a gangbuster and accussing me of violating NPOV in your comments and talkpage ?

The project itself is locally ridiculed as an example of poor coordination of construction; although the Yonge to Vaughan stretch was completed in early 2007, long-awaited shelters were only constructed at the end of that year; freshly laid sod was not watered in an unusually dry summer and thus died. Streetcars were briefly operated on the partially completed line in spring 2007, but were removed a few months later so that the streetcar loop at St. Clair West Station (which lies within the "Phase 1" boundaries) could be replaced (a project that has itself run far longer than initially scheduled due to unmapped electrical cables), rather than doing all the construction all at once and minimizing the disruption to residents. Although the replacement buses had driven on the completed right-of-way previously, the later replacement service operated beside the (operationally useful) right of way in congested mixed traffic lanes. Phase 2 itself has been delayed so that it is not being started until late in the construction season. Replacement of the tracks on Bathurst Street is scheduled for 2009; this will take the then-complete 512 streetcars (which depends on these tracks for yard access) out of commission for another year. Additionally, frustration is found in the three-year (five year, given various delays) timetable for the project, especially given that other projects, such as the 2007 505 Dundas track replacement, generally take less than a single year to complete. The daytime replacement bus service serves the curb beside the streetcar stops, which are "near-side" on old segments and "far-side" on new segments, a tactic designed to take advantage of transit priority signals, as "far side" stops (where the vehicle serves the intersection after passing through it) allow passenger loading independent of traffic-signal sequences. However, the Blue Night bus that operates late at night retains "near-side" stops, causing confusion about where to wait for a bus that runs infrequently. However, the bus's operators are usually accommodating either way.

Can you add supporting information to your assertions ? You have to be able to substantial these allegations, otherwise you cannot use pending-other POV to hold up the article.

• many of the delays and additional costs were the result of design changes made to accommodate the community's wishes;
• transit advocates argue that the project will increase the speed and reliability of transit along the corridor;
• St. Clair was originally designed to include a streetcar right-of-way; and
• half the people moving along St. Clair are doing so on the streetcar, while the other half are in cars.

I actually addressed point #2. TTC officials suggested that the dedicated right-of-way would save two to eight minutes per trip.^[7]

Point #3 was stated briefly in the history section but it is unreferenced, so it must be cited. When first built, the St. Clair streetcar operated in a dedicated right-of-way, similar to the modern 510 Spadina route. A dedicated right-of-way is a lane generally in the centre of the street, reserved for transit vehicles. However, it was removed between 1928 and 1935 and replaced with paved trackage open to mixed traffic. The TTC later came to regret this decision, and in 2005 it began rebuilding a dedicated streetcar right-of-way.

Overall, I never removed any material in support of the dedicated right-of-way, you actually did by removing point #2. Furthermore, I noted that Joe Mhevic easily won re-election despite facing a challenge from John Sewell who had campaigned against the right-of-way, but you removed this as well.^[8] However, it must be noted that even Mhevic himself acknowledged with some humour that the project wasn't going well.

Including the info that the right-of-way did cause businesses to fail, spawned a lawsuit, and had project delays and cost overruns, is no different than other wikipedia articles such as the Fast Ferry Scandal. In both cases there might have been a good intention of the project but the outcome was not exactly so.

GoldDragon (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the St. Clair right-of-way project didn't go well, there is at least a silver lining as the planners of Transit City hope to learn from the experience.[9][10][11] GoldDragon (talk) 18:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for the section Headers, I will admit that I made a mistake, however you could have just quietly corrected that rather than use that as justification to kill my edits. GoldDragon (talk) 18:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that you have strong opinions on this. I will look through these edits more carefully in the coming weeks to see what can be added without giving undue weight to one side of the argument. With respect top the headings, it appears to have been an on-going problem with you, rather than a one-off mistake. I trust that that disruptive behaviour has come to an end and we won't have to discuss headings again. Ground Zero | t 12:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the detailed track map in the infobox there's a red image link for BSicon_uexv-STR+lq.svg (near Oakwood Avenue). Could someone take a look at this and see what's wrong? (I don't know enough about it to work out if it's really a missing image, or if the track is specified incorrectly.) --Zundark (talk)

 Done Useddenim (talk) 12:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do the streetcars have priority at traffic lights, or do they stop for reds? I was looking for this information, so I think it should be included whether or not it does. Thanks! Mattximus (talk) 00:17, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they stop for red lights... Red after all does mean stop. Traffic priority holds lights longer, brings a green up quicker, and in some cases with the white bar, will allow a streetcar first crack while all other directions have a red. some aspects of this are used on St. Clair, others are not. eja2k 00:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]