Jump to content

Talk:Inwood–207th Street station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:163rd Street–Amsterdam Avenue (IND Eighth Avenue Line) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:31, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Inwood–207th Street (IND Eighth Avenue 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:10, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed move

[edit]

Per the naming conventions, this article should be moved back, as "Inwood–207th St" is the name in the official map, which is what we use as our basis for names unless otherwise noted (like station complexes). Why this was moved without discussion when it clearly had the name from the map is a good question. oknazevad (talk) 19:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As a user of this station, I am not aware that "Inwood" is actually any part of the station's name. Epicgenius cites "MTA internal data", but I do not believe that is sufficient. I think that someone needs to provide a reliable source, from the MTA, which calls it "Inwood-207th Sareet" in a public document. We are not an arm of the MTA, we exist to give information to our readers that is accuarte and helpful. As far as I know, anyone looking for "Inwood-207th Street" on a public MTS document, such as a subway map, will not find it, which makes our title confusing. If I'm incorrect about this, fine, but please cite a source, a public source, to show that I'm wrong. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Oknazevad: What "official map" are you referring to? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:45, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: 1) MTA Subway Map 2) Subway Service Guide 3) MTA Inwood Neighborhood Map Tdorante10 (talk) 23:03, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to add to the confusion, but I see another source calling it "207th Street-Inwood." If anything this seems more like a signage issue such as "71st Avenue-Continental Avenue" for Forest Hills-71st Avenue (IND Queens Boulevard Line). ---------User:DanTD (talk) 00:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the Transit Wifi is an MTA source; it's probably a contractor that works with/for the MTA. Tdorante10 (talk) 01:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that makes sense. Either way, we still have the issue of maps and other official papers calling it "Inwood-207th Street," and signs at the station merely reading "207th Street." ---------User:DanTD (talk) 01:23, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's the way it is with a lot of stations. Norwood-205 is signed as "205th Street". Jamaica-179 is signed as "179th Street" (but announced as "Jamaica-179th Street"). Briarwood is still announced as "Briarwood-Van Wyck Boulevard". And then there are the various name combinations for 71st-Continental. Personally, when I think of this station, it's "Inwood-207th Street" automatically. Tdorante10 (talk) 01:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @DanTD: It is the official name according to current MTA public documents like the New York City Subway map and public timetables, which I've told BMK on his talk page. It may be that BMK is basing his move off of what he sees on current station signage, which may not be exactly correct anymore.
Also, Tdorante10 is right: Transit Wireless is not a primary source since it is contracted, not owned, by the MTA. epicgenius (talk) 01:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I kind of got the hint about "Transit Wireless." And I'm still wondering when they're going to start announcing "Briarwood" simply as "Briarwood." Nice capture of the Beach 105th Street - Seaside (IND Rockaway Line) sign, BTW. Speaking of the Rockaway Line, whatever happened to that proposal to change the name of Beach 67th Street (IND Rockaway Line) to "Beach 67th Street - Arverne By The Sea (IND Rockaway Line)?" ---------User:DanTD (talk) 02:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Nice capture of the Beach 105th Street - Seaside (IND Rockaway Line) sign, BTW Thanks. I found it on the Subway Nut.
And I'm still wondering when they're going to start announcing "Briarwood" simply as "Briarwood." whatever happened to that proposal to change the name of Beach 67th Street (IND Rockaway Line) to "Beach 67th Street - Arverne By The Sea (IND Rockaway Line)?" Let me let you in on a little secret. See this sign they haven't updated for 8 years? Yeah, it'll take eight years to update this one, too. Proving that the MTA is either lazy or reckless. Don't be surprised, this was up for even longer. epicgenius (talk) 02:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm convinced. "Inwood-207th Street" it is. Sorry for the undiscussed move. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Since we go by what the official map says, why does Beach 105 St have the suffix? Perhaps that should be removed, like the rest of the Rockaway stations (except Rock Park) – Train2104 (t • c) 03:23, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Train2104: The article on Beach 105th Street (IND Rockaway Line) doesn't have a suffix, and neither does any of the other pages in Category:IND Rockaway Line stations that are titled "Beach ... Street". epicgenius (talk) 12:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh! I must've thought the link above wasn't a redirect. – Train2104 (t • c) 15:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inwood–207th Street (IND Eighth Avenue 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:47, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Inwood–207th_Street_station&oldid=1245211737"