Talk:TransLink (South East Queensland) services

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	TransLink (South East Queensland) services is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Brisbane.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 May 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus, so keep.

Contents 1 Dodgy Move 2 Tips for improvement 3 Too slow 4 reordering TL bus routes list

[edit] Dodgy Move

What's with the dodgy move by SM247? Someone more senior should take action. Tell SM247 about proper procedures, etc, and revert the move and move the pages properly if necessary! Mathieumcguire 00:39, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Whats wrong with the move? Translink is not just about Brisbane, thats the whole reason why it came to existance in the first place. Unfortunately the region goes by no other name than the verbose South East Queensland - so thats all we have to run by. -Bunza 13:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tips for improvement

During the AfD period many suggested improving the current formatting of the article. As there is a lot of data, it is imperative that we get it right first time to prevent too much stuffing around.

I'm thinking perhaps a table with columns for Route Number, Type (eg. link, BUZ, cityxpress etc.), terminii, major ports of call, and an abbreviation for operator - basically the info already there reformatted. I believe that would tidy up the presentation of the article somewhat, though it may be a tad messy to implement.

Any suggestions? --Bunza 12:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

What would be handy would be some sort of template, so that any changes made to routes here would automatically show on other pages which also show the routes. E.g. if a change is made to Route 745, it would automatically show up in the Nerang Station, Pacific Fair and Surfers bus station pages. This would require reformatting of the other pages too, but should not be that hard, just a long job. Some device that would allow me to type under the Routes section on those pages something like {TransLink (South East Queensland} Route 745} or something to that effect, which would mirror the relevant content here. I'm not very well-versed in programming or the like.

A table would be good - maybe have the text in white and the region colour as a highlight, so it is more legible. For ferries, go with Brisbane Central (darkblue). SM247 21:39, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, I have a spreadsheet that fills a similar function to this page, and in creating it I learned some of these entries will have to be changed (mainly relating to operating hours and service types). SM247 21:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I have created a series of templates that can be used as a basis for an upgrade, at the moment all it does is spit out what we already have (almost) but can be changed very easily as it is all tiered functions fed into one "display" template.

Its only got a handful of routes at the moment, but its just for testing right now. So far I've been able to feed in route numbers and get colours out. I'm testing it over at my user page if you're up for a look. --Bunza 14:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too slow

This article came to my attention when it showed up in my "slow parse" log at an astonishing 22 seconds. This style of data generation is really not acceptable. Wikitext is not a programming language, you can't expect an array lookup implemented with such an ugly hack to be executed in any reasonable amount of time. Although the concept is admirable, it will have to wait until we have m:wikidata. Basically I intend to subst every template, both here and in the route articles, and then put the TL templates on TfD. -- Tim Starling 17:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

• Why is a TfD necessary? If your only problemn is with size, then this article can go and the others can remain. There is nothing wrong with the templates in operation on most other pages. SM247^{My Talk} 01:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

If you intend to start attacking this article, then you will have a fight on your hands. This article has a lot of supporters as evidenced by a recent attempt to delete it.[1] Any problems can be addressed in a sane and proper manner. Any intended or threatened changes need to gain consensus on the Talk page. --WikiCats 02:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The thing is, once it has been parsed the first time after a change, it is cached and loads as quickly as any normal page. Whenever I change anything, I load the services page to have it cached for future visitors. --Bunza 13:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of the parser cache, I wrote most of the relevant code. It's important to have decent cache miss performance so that diffs, previews, saves and certain kinds of page views are displayed to the user in a reasonable amount of time. I have no problem with the size or content of the article and I have no intention of deleting it. My problem is just with the {{array}}-based templates. I'm asking for your help here in keeping Wikipedia responsive. If implemented widely, this kind of technique could have a significant performance impact, and the simplest way to prevent that is to deal with it on an editorial level. I don't want to have an adversarial relationship with the editors of this article. I'm sure we can come to some kind of compromise. -- Tim Starling 00:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I have replaced the use of {{array}} with {{#switch}} throughout. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 17:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, its just that the templates, if you will examine their usage, are quite widespread now. It became quite a pain in the arse to update each entry manually when a change occurred, thus why a template was required. If there is an appropriate alternative that will enable us to simply alter a template rather than many text entries on separate pages, please feel free to enlighten us as then the problem could be averted. SM247^{My Talk} 00:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree that the page is slow. What upset me was the threatening language. I have just gotten sick of attempts to delete this editor's work. --WikiCats 10:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Most of our performance issues are because of good intentions ;-) But as we all have intention to create the nice encyclopedia, than anyone can use (and edit), we should not make them wait for zillions of seconds on an article. Parser cache is not used in many cases for editors - only latest revision is saved. If you see slow-rendered article somewhere out there, it is every editor's obligation to make it faster. Or of course, there is always another path - optimizing the software itself, and you are welcome to do that. Domas Mituzas 15:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I like the hide/show feature, thanks to whoever added that. Now that the whole thing has been substuted, I guess the new protocol for route additions/alterations/deletations is to change the source templates, so that the Bus stations which rely on the templates (and can do as they are far less "intensive"), and then resubsitute it into this page. --Bunza 11:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] reordering TL bus routes list

Should a reorder of the regions easier for users to navigate? Although following the route numbers is a good idea but it looks wierd.

I propose - Brisbane N,E,S,W, and then N,E,S,W regions and then Sunshine and Gold Coasts as the order of the routes list.Matt ke 04:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but Brisbane's buses are already sorted by cardinal points anyway, 100's South, 200's East, 300's North, 400's West. Would it not make sense to keep it ordered the way it is - predominantly ordered by route number. (However I do believe 'Brisbane Central' routes should be assimilated into the other regions.) --Bunza 10:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

• I think it was better organised the way it was, personally. Numerically makes more sense. But keep up the good work with the templating, looks even better now. SM247^{My Talk} 04:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)