This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
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 Buses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
buses 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.BusesWikipedia:WikiProject BusesTemplate:WikiProject Busesbus transport articles
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Transbay Transit Center. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
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.
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below.
Dekimasuよ!02:04, 25 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose:
The agency in charge of constructing it and
multiplemajor local news sources use "Transbay Transit Center", so it's misleading to claim that only "Salesforce" is officially used. Despite the hamfisted naming rights deal (which is why signage etc uses "Salesforce"), the public overwhelmingly says "Transbay". The common name is what we should use; the official name can be noted in the opening sentence (as it already is). Besides, we don't need to do Salesforce's advertising for them.
Pi.1415926535 (
talk)
23:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)reply
That website is old; it predates the naming rights deal. The new official website is
salesforcetransitcenter.com, and most news articles use the name "Salesforce Transit Center"; see above. Antipathy towards our new corporate overlords is hardly a reason to make things more confusing for readers.
Fullmetal2887(
discuss me)00:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Oppose How many times do I have to point to
WP:COMMONNAME? We should also avoid
recentism as the "Transbay Transit Center" has been the name for ages; local conventions will not change overnight. @
Fullmetal2887: I also strongly dislike how you blatantly disregarded
WP:BRD, and I was going to warn you about
move warring, but as you've started a discussion and self-reverted all is well on that front.--
Jasper Deng(talk)16:22, 16 August 2018 (UTC)reply
No, the FORMER terminal (demolished in 2010) was called the Transbay Terminal (not Transit Center). Transbay Transit Center was the official name for what is now officially AND commonly called the Salesforce Transit Center.
Fullmetal2887(
discuss me)16:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)reply
Wrong. You can't dismiss sources for merely being slightly older, per pi's comment (I'm not going to rehash it). When sources are not unambiguous about the naming, it's best that you trust the opinion of a local like me. Nobody calls the
Bay Bridge by even the full name "San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge", let alone the official name for the western span, even though there was press about naming it as such. By contrast, Levi's Stadium had no such pre-existing convention, as it never had a previous incarnation. AT&T Park has the overwhelming majority of sources calling it that, and it is also common local usage.--
Jasper Deng(talk)16:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Abundance of issues
Closure - The place has been closed most of the time, it was open for 36 days and has been closed for months. As there is no re-opening time scheduled/defined, it is closed indefinitely.
Intermodal - The building was designed to be intermodal, and to have rail connections in the basement. In reality, it briefly served as a bus terminal - a single mode. The status of it ever being intermodal is uncertain.
"Serving as" - Being closed for over 6 months, it is not serving as a bus terminal at all currently, using the current tense is inappropriate.
Market Street - As a location reference, it is not incorrect. Claims of the street being the "primary" transportation artery of San Francisco is unsupported.
MUNI service begins December, 2017 - I cannot find any reference or source showing this. The
project's own site says construction didn't finish until Mid-2018, and Bus operations commenced Summer 2018.
"Regional bus" - Most regional bus services operate within a specific county. (
StaRT - Stanislaus Regional Transport, SJRTD -
San Joaquin Regional Transit District). Greyhound is nationwide, not regional.
May 10th update - On May 10th it was announced that structural repairs were completed and at least 4 weeks will be needed to train bus drivers. "Repairs expected to be completed by June 1" is outdated.
Other building issues. Aside from structural failure after a month of opening. The building had
escalator failure within a day of opening, and premature wear of
pedestrian walkways.
Millennium Tower - The Article for the Millennium Tower makes many references to the Salesforce Transit Center. The two buildings are virtually adjacent, under 30 feet apart. It is known that the soil at site of the tower was problematic which led to settling issues. The Transit Center is now having settling issues. It was also hypothesized that the construction of the transit center disturbed the adjacent tower.
I disagree with some of your claims here, and agree with others. In particular:
1: The closure is expected to be limited in time; while no exact date has been declared, it's clear that the closure is both temporary and coming to an end relatively soon. The TPJA continues to use "temporary" in their
official documents.
2: I modified the wording slightly.
3: I modified the tense for the time being.
4: Market Street being the "primary commercial and transportation artery" of San Francisco is patently obvious.
5: There are already two citations in the text supporting that fact, which you clearly did not look for, and a Google search would have found you even more. Citations in the lede are
not generally required for facts contained in the body.
6: I have changed it to "regional and intercity bus operators".
7: I have updated the lede and body, with citation, to reflect this.
8: Neither of those are significant enough for the lede. The walkway issues are discussed, with text, in the body.
9: The terminal has repeatedly been found not to be at fault for the Millenium problems; again, not worth including in the lede. A cited sentence or two in the body would be fine.
I'd like to start by thanking you for reading over my comment in detail, as well as your thorough response.
1: I'm not going to nit-pick on this
2-3: With your new edits, I would no longer consider it to be misleading or erroneous
4: While I will agree that Market street is 'a' primary transportation artery, I'm not sure that it is 'the' primary transportation artery when compared to I-80 and US-101.
5: I phrased this poorly - I was using the word 'reference' to refer to claims and not citations - this statement had two cited references. One from
Curbed and one from
ABC7. I read both cited articles thoroughly. I also did CTRL+F searches for "MUNI", "December", and "2017". I went to a search engine, and looked for articles. In both cited sources, and per my own research, I cannot find any claim that MUNI service began at this center in December 2017, all the claims I see state that it began in August 2018.
6: Mentioning words like "regional" seems redundant, I think something like "service from XXX and other bus operators began..." or "bus service, including XXX, began..."
7-8: Part of what makes Wikipedia great, is the effort to focus on and look at facts, which results less bias than many other sources. There's some slick verbiage by the people in charge of the building. They are basically saying something along the lines of "We totally finished 'Repairing' our building', but the building is closed because we're waiting for the 'government' (
MTC made the independent board) to tell us when to open it. And also we're done with repairs, but we still have to 'restore', 'reinstall', and 'pour concrete' this month."
Looking at the facts:
"repairing" - fixing that which is broken (the steel beams) - is complete.
Construction relating to this repair is not finished yet - this includes:
because of the above, "Nighttime street closures will continue throughout May"
Per another
source, according to "senior construction manager Dennis Turchon":
"the original pathway, made of decomposed granite, will be replaced with concrete because of its durability and longevity. The concrete is set to be poured this month".
"contractors will be reinstalling lighting panels and other physical materials that were taken apart during the repairs."
Given that some of these issues are mentioned later in the article, I felt it would be redundant to elaborate on these issues in the lede. Rather than mentioning a beam cracking, then a second beam cracking - I felt it'd be more concise to mention something along the lines of:
"the building was closed due to contained structural failures"
and more accurate to say something along the lines of:
"On May 10, 2019 it was announced that structural repairs were completed, but the closure will continue due to the need for staff training, further construction related to building issues, as well as necessary inspections and review."
9: I wasn't suggesting it be incorporated in the lede, though it would be worth mentioning in the article. The issue with the tower was with soil in the region, a ~1500' building 15' away should logically be built on similar soil. Lawsuits, even if dismissed, are often included in Wikipedia articles.
For public transit purposes, the
Market Street Subway unambiguously wins over the freeways. Most Bay Bridge traffic isn't specifically San Francisco-bound anyway (there's a reason why the San Francisco Skyway and not the bridge itself is the bottleneck).--
Jasper Deng(talk)09:57, 14 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Requested move 16 November 2021
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oh sure, something has changed. If you take a look at
this Google Trends graph, you can see that more people search "Salesforce Transit Center" than "Transbay Transit Center". It does not matter what the complex used to be called. For example, 1WTC was at one point called "Freedom Tower" but was then announced as "One World Trade Center". I do not know how much the "nothing has changed" argument holds against
WP:TITLE.
Aasim (
talk)
22:41, 17 November 2021 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.