Français
ItalianoLatest comment: 2 months ago by AlasdairW in topic Bus routes
| Archives |
Bus routes
[edit]The list of bus routes in this article violates Avoid long lists, and may be out of date. Would someone familiar with Leeds be willing to cut this list down to the 4 or 5 routines of most interest to visitors, and update them, or should delete the list? Ground Zero (talk) 03:56, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've removed the list. Ground Zero (talk) 10:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Cheers, GZ! //shb (t | c | m) 10:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. Most of the districts have a list of relevant bus routes, which is a better place to have them. If anybody know Leeds bus routes, please add relevant bus routes to Leeds/East. AlasdairW (talk) 21:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Cheers, GZ! //shb (t | c | m) 10:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
List of bus routes
[edit]Do we have a policy on lists of bus routes, such as the one at Leeds#Get around? It doesn't seem to be focussed on travellers, and I have concerns that it may be out of date, but no interest in experiencing the tedium of updating it. I can see listing the bus routes in a place that has just 4 or 5, but this many seems encyclopedic. Ground Zero (talk) 02:31, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- Avoid long lists. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:33, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- I would only ever list express bus routes which tend to be a lot more relevant and go out of date a lot less. Leeds#Get around, which lists every bus route, is just ridiculous. --SHB (t | c | m) 07:15, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- I noticed that with Wakayama, as well. In the "By bus" section, I tend to just mention what regions or major attractions ARE served by buses without mentioning the actual routes (bus stops near attractions should be written in their listings) and tourist areas or attractions that are NOT served by bus. Like you said, a route that is made for or is particularly relevant to travelers, I think is okay to list them, but most should not be listed. It's better for travelers to look up routes themselves. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is no point in listing bus routes unless the destinations mentioned are also in the article. Furthermore, what is the likelyhood that the information will still be usweful in say five years time? It might be useful however to indicate whether or not the bus routes traverse the city concerned or terminate at the city centre.
- I am quite happy to state that Heathrow Airport is serviced by buses from the Woking and Reading railway stations (as these services have been running for years and will probably continue to run until they are replaced by rail links. Giving the route numbers - well these change regularly, so I would not give them.
- In short, give the traveller enough information that they can plan their trip before they leave, but do not give details that are liklely to change and that can be found out easily on arrival. As such, I fell that the list at Leeds#Get around is over the top. Martinvl (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I noticed that with Wakayama, as well. In the "By bus" section, I tend to just mention what regions or major attractions ARE served by buses without mentioning the actual routes (bus stops near attractions should be written in their listings) and tourist areas or attractions that are NOT served by bus. Like you said, a route that is made for or is particularly relevant to travelers, I think is okay to list them, but most should not be listed. It's better for travelers to look up routes themselves. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Explore the world
United states
New York
Japan
Tokyo
Singapore
Singapore
