Hi for this page we need pictures of the demo buses here: http://www.cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php/Metropolitan_Transportation_Authority_demonstrator_bus_fleet
They are pictures from here: http://gallery.bustalk.info/thumbnails.php?album=16&page=1
Please only upload photos on the CPTDB Wiki if you own them or have permission to use them. Thanks! --A. Wong 06:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, none of those are my photos -- Ripta42
Question about your spliting the model year
Why the hell are you spliting the model year from (example) "2003-2004"?
it makes no sence and no it does not provided less information if the years of the bus order if toghter.
I mena if you wanted to spilt the model year you cloud have done it in a better way like on the ttmg.org way and heres an example: http://www.ttmg.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=New_York_Metropolitan_Transportation_Authority how they spilt the model year in better way and not in your way that takes space off the roster. Edit: There no need to spilt the model year, thats why there is "NOTES".
Because I asked in the "Fleet Rosters" thread on the discussion board and the feedback I received was that splitting by model year is preferred. The Wiki table format doesn't lend itself to being broken down as well as the HTML format Trevor uses on TTMG.
Orders could easily be broken out on separate pages (note I kept "dead links" to NYCTA Novas 8750-9349, even though 8750 is a '94 and 8751-52 are '95s. They could all go on the same page). I think that method presents the greatest amount of information in the most concise way possible, given the constraints of the Wiki format. ---Ripta42
Re "Notes" -- Adding another line looks a lot cleaner than adding a note. Separate entries also make it possible to sort a fleet by model year (e.g., 1994 Orions, 1994 TMCs, 1994 Novas, 1995 Orions, 1995 Novas, etc.) whereas a note isn't sortable.