Talk:42nd Street Shuttle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
S - Grand Central/Times Square Shuttle (New York City Subway service) → S - 42nd Street Shuttle (New York City Subway service) – This New York City Subway line is more commonly known as the "42nd Street Shuttle," rather than the lesser-used "Grand Central/Times Square Shuttle." [1] This page was recently moved to the current name, and I moved it back, citing the reason just given. However, the same user inexplicably moved it again, without giving any reason for doing so. — Larry V (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support as per move request. — Larry V (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support. 43nd Street Shuttle is the common name and on Wikipedia we usually use the most common name as the article title. It is also the name the NYCTA uses on its timetable and web site[2] -- Cecropia 03:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Support; why was this moved anyway? Pacific Coast Highway (blah • typa-typa) 03:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Comment I don't know, Imdanumber1 initially moved it without providing any move summary, then did so again after I moved it back (providing explanation myself). — Larry V (talk) 03:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
- Add any additional comments
What's the point of this whole discussion? Just do it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by I.M. Rich (talk • contribs).
-
- Done -- Cecropia 14:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Moves and move protection
I have tried to iron out these page titles. The current title S - 42nd Street Shuttle (New York City Subway service) is correct by style, usage and consensus. The former titles redirect here. I have also move protected this article so that anyone can edit it but only an admin can move it. If anyone attempts to move this again contrary to accuracy and consensus, he or she will be subject to blocks as a vandal, beginning with 24 hours. -- Cecropia 03:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thing of the past
Maybe I should have discussed this first before I moved the page. Excuse me for the trouble. Besides, page discussions make things a lot easier. Look at the A-C (New York City Subway Service). The split of the article was my idea, and so I think page discussions save trouble. --imdanumber1 15:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article name
The current name of this article was chosen before I became heavily involved in the subway project, so I am not fully briefed on the history. The issue was apparently contentious enough that, at some point in the past, the article was move-protected (and still is).
The very sensible standard at WP:NAME says:
- Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.
- Another way to summarize the overall principle of Wikipedia's naming conventions:
-
- Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists.
The same article says, "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things."
The name of the present article seems to flunk that test, and badly. No one on earth would think of "S - 42nd Street Shuttle (New York City Subway service)" as the name of this article, unless that person were an expert on the WikiProject New York City Subway. It is an ugly name, and has far more qualifiers than necessary to disambiguate it from other names.
Recently, Second Avenue Line was renamed Second Avenue Subway to conform with the usual guideline that things should be named for what the average person calls them. Why on earth isn't this article called, simply, 42nd Street Shuttle?
My question would apply with equal force to S - Rockaway Park Shuttle (New York City Subway service) and S - Franklin Avenue Shuttle (New York City Subway service), but I thought I'd ask it here first. Marc Shepherd 14:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fire
Should there be something about the fire that occurred on the shuttle back then? All about the wooden platforms and the first truly automatic train which ran on electrical signals. I read about it on NYC Subway.org Herenthere (Talk) 23:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The "8" train
I am having difficulty finding a reliable source to support the claim that this line is known as "the 8" by Transit Operations? Does anyone have such a source? -Seidenstud 14:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Here are a few sources of varying reliability:
- "Many New Yorkers wonder why there is no such thing as an 8 train, and yet there is. The S, or Shuttle, train was once the 8—current lingo only for MTA employees in the know."
- [3] is written by a NYCTA worker, and says that "The Times Square Shuttle is currently designated 8 in RTO use." It's definitely not reliable though.
- --NE2 18:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Eight was never a number for the 42nd Street Shuttle. Eight was the IRT Astoria Line, and then the 3rd Avenue Shuttle remnant in the Bronx. I can't say what RTO does, but in the schedule department, the internal letter or number for each route is on the PTT as the fifth character in a code beginning "tr00x." This letter or number is also in the URL for the PTT, e.g., "http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tecur.pdf" for the E service. By this nomenclature, the only true "S" train is the Franklin Shuttle. The Rockaway Park Shuttle is "H" which was formally the official designation (or HH) for Rockaway Shuttles (earlier HH was the Court Street Shuttle). What is the 42nd Street Shuttle? Zero. Sorry, 42nd Street Shuttle. That's the breaks. -- Cecropia 15:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
So what number is really used for 42nd Street shuttle by the NYCTA workers? 8?, or 0? It is confusing! Takuma IshizekiTakuma Ishizeki 22:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think it is a very minor point that has too much emphasis in the article, even if true. On top of that, we are not sure it is true. I would be happy to just see the statement deleted. Marc Shepherd 23:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Infobox troubles
I've mentioned this before, but I've been trying to reformat the infobox in a similar manner to the Franklin Avenue, and Rockaway Park shuttle infoboxes. Why have I been having so much trouble doing it? ----DanTD (talk) 14:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

