This template 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
This template 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
I see that the Eglinton surface stops are now listed. I don't have an objection to this per se, but I feel some way of differentiating them from full, grade-separated stations may be in order. An extra symbol? reduced point size? something else? Radagast (talk) 22:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do we really need these symbols? Streetcar and subway connections are acceptable to me, but all the accessibility and washroom symbols really clutter the navbox IMO. --NaturalRX22:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked around, and I have failed to find other navboxes for rapid transit systems with accessibility/washroom symbols in them. These are small details that can be found in the article infobox or body. WP:NAV also states "Navigation templates are not arbitrarily decorative", and that "There should be justification for a template to deviate from standard colors and styles". I'm failing to see a reason that accessibility and washroom symbols have such justification. --NaturalRX22:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So...in light of the insane overloading Secondarywaltz reverted, would we want to consider removing all symbols adjacent to station names. All of these symbols and their links are on the left side anyway. Yeah, it's nice to denote connections but this is a navbox, not a route template. --NaturalRX17:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think showing TTC subway line interchanges is valid and generally shown in subway/metro navboxes. The previous stuffing was out of line, and so that would leave streetcar connections as questionable. Each station article shows which specific streetcar routes connect there, rather than this generic link. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For now id recommend only making the pages(edit:+put them on the template but not link them), as non of them seem to exist. Though they are under construction, the pages should be at a decent standard before doing that. (That might be your plan anyway). Id be happy to help with them. Humulator (talk) 01:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've already made the edits - after waiting 5 months for comment. I might start some of the Ontario line stations - it took a long time to get most of the first phase of Eglinton line stop/station articles after it was added to the template; I don't see a need to rush the remaining few. Nfitz (talk) 02:42, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Links to all stops red link or not(Includes possible alternative page names):
Just a note that stops (not stations) do not warrant their own separate articles (the Line 5 ones were created in error and we've never cleaned them up) as locations with minimal infrastructure that aren't notable in and of themselves. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In light of this - I've been bold and linked all the stops that do not warrant their own separate articles - to the stops section of the relevant article (Finch West, Eglinton etc). That way, we don't get people starting these articles unnecessarily! Turini2 (talk) 14:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does the stl|TTC|(station name) mean? In the source editer