Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by I64s (talk | contribs) at 04:57, 22 December 2005 (→MTR station templates). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

MTR received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Template:Featured article is only for Misplaced Pages:Featured articles. Template:Mainpage date Template:FAOL

Images

• image* *image* image* *image*...

This page is chock-full with images! Needa some urgent clean-ups. Let's give a big hand to Mailer diablo, who have been working hard on this insurmountably annoying drudgery! *clap* :-D

I have taken some photos recently, and I hope they would be useful. :)

Btw, could the images be much smaller in size? Though I'm not suffering from megalophobia, i.e. fear of large things, my heart would strike like mad if my eyes get contact with these goliath-sized pictures! ;P -- Jerry Crimson Mann 18:39, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

LOL! =D Most are useful, especially those ones on individual stations which can be used in individual station articles. Anyway, Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)'s next on my worklist! ;) - Mailer Diablo 19:09, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think some of the images placed in this article are misplaced. For example:

• Image: MTROlympicStation.jpg should be placed in the section West Rail Interface Works, since it is the only section in the article that talks about the station.
• Image: MTR Hong Kong station Diamond Hill.jpg should not be placed in this article as it does not say anything about the station. ( Image: MTR Hong Kong station Kwun Tong.JPG should be all we need for a photo of a station on the Kwun Tong Line.)
• Image:MTR Hong Kong station Central.jpg should not be placed in the Tsuen Wan Line section since the section doesn't say anything about it. (I know the Central Station is part of the Tsuen Wan Line, but Image: MTPrinceEdwardStationPlatfo.jpg is more suitable for that section, because the station name "Prince Edward" appears a few times in it.
• Image:MTR Hong Kong station Tiu Keng Leng.JPG should be placed in Tseung Kwan O Line, since it is part of the Line.
• Why is Image:MTR North Point station (1).jpg not being shown? It is placed in a perfect location, and if you say the caption is too long, well, I have shortened it.
• Image: HK MTR ChaiWan Waiting 2003Jan17.JPG should not be placed in West Rail Interface Works because it is not about Island Line. But since it shows the look of an M- , place it in MTR rolling stock should be better.
• Image: Ifc hong kong station.jpg should be either removed or moved to Airport Express and Tung Chung Line instead, since it is not related to the section. (Well, the section does talk about toliet facilities in the Airport Express, but in any case, placing a photo of the facilities is better than a photo of the station entrance, isn't it?)

I also think these two images should be added to the article: Image:Mtr.gif and Image:WIL-SIL-Proposal-4.png.

Opinions are welcome. Riddle | Talk 05:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I must say that the rearrangement is a mess. Serious disruption is found upon textual arrangement. I don't like the changes at all. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 06:04, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I guess I finally get it - we are using different screen resolutions. I'm using 800×600, while you, PZFUN, and perhaps the others are using 1024×768, or something even larger. I'm really sorry for the mess. Riddle | Talk 06:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've rearranged some of the images yet again with trial and error. To abate monotony, some have been staggered. Feel free to improve further. Mission9801 09:40, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Advertisement

Seems it's one of the main sources of MTRC's income...could anyone write something about it? :) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 12:20, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Quarry Bay Relief Works

The platform number 3 is actually a new platform, built as part of the project to extend the Kwun Tong line from Quarry Bay to North Point. — Instantnood 15:25, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Better remove it or relocate it...too many pictures in this article. The lengthy caption has dirupted the arrangement of the text. Btw, the same pic has already been added to the Island Line page...:D -- Jerry Crimson Mann 15:51, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agree. :-D — Instantnood 16:43, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Fare of the Airport Express

The Airport Express, on top of a different fare system, has its own gates. — Instantnood 15:25, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Redirect

What there's a redirect page for Nam Cheong, which is absent in the case of Kowloong Tong? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 16:22, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

PS There is a caption: Admiralty station in Central, on Hong Kong Island. Is that true? Or should it be Central District? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 16:27, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Nam Cheong is an integrated station. Passengers are only required to pass through the gates once (instead of twice as at Kowloon Tong or Mei Foo). Admiralty is actually part of Central. I'm not sure if people actually used the name Admiralty or 金鐘 to call the area, then full of barracks, before the station was built. Queensway (金鐘道) used to be part of Queen's Road East. :-) — Instantnood 16:43, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

West Island Line and South Island Line

" The first proposal was submitted by MTR Corporation Limited on May 2002, but had some major drawbacks. After permission was given, a feasibility study was then conducted in mid-2003 to determine the cost-effectiveness of the lines, the external benefits and impact on other modes of transport. The company derived a modified proposal in November 2003 to address the earlier drawbacks, and proposed three alignment options for the South Island Line.

" A third revised scheme was handed in end-March 2004, which included an extension plan on the Island Line. The plan was turned down by the government to favour the construction of highways. MTR gave a fourth try in February 2004, in which the legislative counsellors support the building of West Island Line. "

Is the above removed paragraphs going to be relocated to West Island Line and South Island Line? :-D — Instantnood 17:54, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Very likely. ;) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 19:28, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Good. — Instantnood 20:51, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Standards

I have noticed that a lot of the station articles have been changed recently so their opening paragraphs read different from each article. I propose that we create a standard as follows: Station name (Chinese character, Chinese pronunciation) is a ] on the ] ] located in ]. It is located between ] and ] on the {{MTR Line Name}}. The station's ] is '''colour'''. Any objections? - PZFUN 02:17, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Very considerate. :-D --Jerry Crimson Mann 04:02, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

TLAs for lines and stations

The MTR has three-letter abbreviations for all its stations and lines. Should these be added to the articles? — Instantnood 11:47, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Why not? :D -- Jerry Crimson Mann 12:30, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Haven't got the information on hand right now.. :-( — Instantnood 20:51, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

My work: Station Code of MTR Lines and Stations --Xavier Fung 18:17, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Right-aligning logo

I tried right-aligning the logo in order to make the intro paragraph less narrow (it's all of about ten words per line, five with my Firefox sidebar open) and to make the flow of text less jolting (in particular, the article's subject should be the very first thing in the article proper), but simply got reverted. Any reasons for having it the way it currently is? « alerante ✆ ✉ » 30 June 2005 20:10 (UTC)

Because it looks perfectly fine on my computer, and there's no reason to have the logo be so large, and I actually like it on the left. Páll 30 June 2005 20:15 (UTC)

Same here. It works perfectly on my computer. :) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 1 July 2005 14:30 (UTC)

Security measures of the MTR

Shall we add a section on the security measures taken by the MTR Corporation, such as CCTVs, staff at concourses and platforms, police stands, the Rail District (previously MTR District) of the Hong Kong Police Force, armed police officers on s and in stations, etc.? (in response to the bomb in the London Tube :-D ) — Instantnood 17:39, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

So do you have any information? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 11:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Not at the moment. Haven't taken any pictures for the MTR so far. — Instantnood 20:51, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Shocking fact

Today I got a leaflet from an MTR kiosk, and I found that the MTRC do not consider the Airport Express as part of the MTR system; they're totally separate. So should we separate the AE from this article or what? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 11:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Which leaflet did you pick up? I don't think Airport Express should be turned into a separate article, and by the end of the year this line would pick up citizens to the new Expo center too. Despite the different ticket system, I really don't think this should be separated. --Xavier Fung 07:21, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

I guess the reason why it is presented as such is that they want to make it clear that the Airport Express is not in the same fare system. — Instantnood 20:51, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Art in MTR

I'v got some information about the "art in mtr" campaign, and I shall upload them afterward. :) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 11:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Great! — Instantnood 20:51, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Why it is 53 stations?

When I try to correct 53 station to 52 station. Someone (may be admin) change back it.

from the websutes MTRC

"We are currently operating a railway network of 90.9 kilometres route with 52 stations. With a daily patronage of over 2.4 million passengers, our system is one of the most ntensively utilized systems in the world." http://www.mtr.com.hk/eng/railway/railway_details.html#quality

Please edit it with the correct datas.

--Mmlcs36 19:31, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

The 53rd station is AsiaWorld-Expo, opening late 2005. --Xavier Fung 18:34, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Page is now 40K+, ideas to split something up?

I have found out that the page has grown over 40K. I read the page Misplaced Pages:Article_size and they suggest of keeping it below 32K to enhance readability. I think the part for History is already too lengthy so I suggest spilting the detail history part into a new article. A brief summary could be a rewrite of the overview section. I get an idea to briefly present the history by means of a table or a list in chronological order.

Any ideas from all of you? --Xavier Fung 20:45, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I think that the History part can be restructured. It is currently not only history, but also introduction to most of the lines. I think the detailed history of the currently existing lines can be incoporated into the articles of respective lines, with just a very brief introduction (summary) listed on the main article. -- Spring Dennis 11:01, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Future MTR System Map image?

As interesting as the image is, it's missing some information already in the article, namely the missing West and South Island lines, and the Tung Chung Line extension to Fortress kill will have new stations, namely Tamar Station and HKCEC Station. Victoria Park Station will depend on which alignment they decide to use. Jonathan Stanley 15:33, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks to the anonymous person whom updated the map... :D Though on another note, if Fortress Hill a dual line interchange as show, or should it be a triple interchange (Tung Chung Line)? I've looked at the plans from the MTR and it actually doesn't seem clear... Jonathan Stanley 15:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

MTR Route Maps

What do you guys think about my MTR Route Maps? (Especially on the future MTR map!) I want to see some feedback from users so that I can be able to add/subtract things from the maps so it will be more presentable and user-friendly. ng_iman@USA 20:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

What a good drawing!

I think the colors of some lines are different from the official documents from MTR. The South Island Line (W) is grassy green, and the (E) section is reddish purple.

The Kwun Tong line section from Whampoa across the harbour is just a proposal for the fifth rail crossing and it is not yet planned. So I would say remove this section to avoid ambiguity.

One minor issue is on the Tseung Kwan O Line. The line is continuous through Tsueng Kwan O station to its two legs, so it is nicer to show its continuity by altering the lines.

I have also drafted one for my own drawing pleasure \:> , but I have added the portions of KCR lines to it. My drawing.

--Xavier Fung 07:36, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Requested move

The requested move was unsuccessful. The discussion can be found here. I note that I voted in this discussion, but consensus was definitely to keep the article at the current location, with only one supporting vote. enochlau (talk) 01:24, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Article "Modernisation"

Just like the M-Train, I think it's time for the article to receive a bit of refurbishment. Basically at this time, there are two immediate issues I can think of :

• Revised reference format, i.e. new 'Notes' section. I'm referring to In-line citations. That'd be great.
• Revised prose for smaller and newer sections.

What do you guys think? :)

- Mailer Diablo 05:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

It sounds great to me, at the same time, implying lotsa drudgery... :-/ -- Jerry Crimson Mann 06:23, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

MTR station templates

Please see the {{MTR station}}, {{MTR station 2 lines}} for the proposal MTR station infobox, and share about the comments regrading to the infobox in Template talk:MTR station. Also see Quarry Bay (MTR) and Tai Koo (MTR) for the sample effects. --Shinjiman ⇔ ♨ 1~6:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the infobox and the station box should be implemented. We shouldn't make the whole page out of a template. The article should have a normal flow. Cos some may have more information and they can't add due to a template. Like just the station infobox and the station box. :P --Terence Ong 18:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Great ideas, but will it be difficult to maintain the exact data for some field, like the number of esculators? --Xavier Fung 06:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Not really, but needs lots of research though. --Terence Ong 07:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Number of escalators? Hmmm... call me crazy but that seems like an odd thing to include in an infobox. enochlau (talk) 09:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Removing the article text from the template will be better, and it can be implemented look at Westminster tube station or Oxford Circus tube station. for examples.

• Old requests for peer review