This article 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[New York City Subway#Artwork|Arts for Transit]] The anchor (#Artwork)
has been deleted.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Requested move
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The last word at the
relevant project was "articles should not be moved without first discussing in this WikiProject". Please find consensus there and request a move when an agreement has first been reached.It was
requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --
Stemonitis08:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose. This is a good example of a situation I described at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation#Station complexes. This station is in Grand Army Plaza on Flatbush Avenue and has very little space on The Map for its name, thus the MTA shortens it to "Grand Army Plaza". On the PDF schedules, such as the
2,
3 and
4 scheduls, the station is referred to as "Grand Army Plaza-Prospedt Park". This is part of the MTA's new emphasis on neighborhoods in station names, and an example of where the name on The Map is an unfortunate consequence of lack of space. --
Imdanumber1 (
talk •
contribs)
16:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)reply
If you would read my comments above, you would see that the only place that "Grand Army Plaza-Prospect Park" is used is in the schedules. No one else uses it, not even the MTA outside of the schedules. --
NE216:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Support. I use this station regularly — twice a day, in fact — and absolutely nowhere in the station itself does it appear to be called anything other than "Grand Army Plaza." Nor have I heard other straphangers refer to the station as anything else.
User:Imdanumber1's argument apparently agrees with the schedule and only the schedule; moving it would agree with the signage, the the map, and probably most of common usage. —
AnnaKucsma (
Talk to me!)
16:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Support I have been to this station once before, and pass by it when I take the Flatbush Av. bus. The entrance to this station is on the northern side of Grand Army Plaza. (
map) Prospect Park is on the south side of Grand Army Plaza, and the park is at least 2 short blocks from the station entrance. Of the stations that bear the name Prospect Park, this station is probably the least likely to be referred to. The recent addition in schedules does not suggest popular usage, and as with AnnaKucsma, I have not heard regular references to the park as part of this station name. (Let's not introduce expectations of signage changes until they are announced or they occur.)
Tinlinkin17:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment. Although I don't support the move, if the article DOES get moved, and if later, the MTA changes signage and maps to match the schedules, I think we should revert back to this name, if such a case like this happens. --
Imdanumber1 (
talk •
contribs)
15:19, 21 April 2007 (UTC)reply
That's probably valid. I do question why you've never moved the following to their names in schedules:
I suspect that the name on the schedule is no more correct than the name on the signs, and that the name on the signs is the one people use. Sorta like people whose birth certificates include a
middle name: most people don't use it (unless, of course, they're angry at middle-name-nonuser). —
AnnaKucsma (
Talk to me!)
20:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I have just modified one external link on
Grand Army Plaza (IRT Eastern Parkway Line). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.