Talk:Jamaica station

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

Remnants of South Street station after grade elimination (or something else?)[edit]

As visible here: "N+73°47'56.2"W and here: "N+73°47'52.9"W, there seem to be remaining elements of what look like spurs that were pulled down in the location described for the station. If these are station elements, perhaps they ought to be included in the paragraph covering South Street? --68.233.191.250 (talk) 02:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WOW! I never knew that these existed. I am not sure whether this related to the South Street station, but this is a great find. Thanks so much for the find. What led you to find this? Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 21:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to have a good eye for this stuff. Saw part of it riding back into the city, and made a mental note to check Google satellite images when I got home (like I did with Whitepot years ago). The collapsed one on the right looks like original wooden trestle too. Thing is, if this is part of the station (this is where the station is supposed to be, yes?) after grade elimination, what were the turnoffs for? Connection to trolley tracks at grade? That part puzzles me, but it's in the right spot for the station.
Hey, as it's close, take a look at the area on 158th Street between 109th-111th Avenues as well. I suspect it's what's left of a spur into a small yard at Brinkerhoff, if not a ROW along 158th. It's bracketed by some classic 1900s towers; two of which follow 158th instead of the line. Towers: [1], [2], [3]. Yard/ROW?:[4],[5]. I'd love to see an old 1900s map of this area to know for sure. It might shed light on those South Street turnoffs as well. --68.233.191.250 (talk) 03:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

LIRR station naming convention discussion[edit]

There is a discussion occurring regarding the naming of LIRR station articles. Please weigh in if you'd like to! Thanks! –Daybeers (talk) 06:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 May 2018[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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.

Moved as proposed. There is clear policy-backed consensus in favor of the proposed moves. Cases where ambiguity is asserted can be individually addressed post-hoc. bd2412 T 22:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– Per WP:USSTATION, stations without the need for disambiguation should be named "xxx station", and ones requiring it should be named "xxx station (disambiguator)". Previous discussion on the Wikipedia policy page can be found here. This list is in alphabetical order first of Category:Long Island Rail Road stations, and then lists Category:Former Long Island Rail Road stations in alphabetical order. Daybeers (talk) 01:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support based on extensive prior discussion of both the USSTATION guideline and its applicability to the LIRR as a mainline railroad that is part of the national railroad network. Though I wonder why Seaside station needs the long disambiguation; unless there's another seaside station in the LIRR, the line doesn't need to be specified. oknazevad (talk) 01:20, 1 May 2018 (UTC) Addendum, I don't think this article needs a dowambiguator at all as WP:PRIMARY; Jamaica Station already redirects here, and the only other item is the Royal Navy station, which is covered by the hatnote under WP:TWODABS. oknazevad (talk) 01:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree. Should I change it above or just leave it until the move occurs? –Daybeers (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • At this point, since no one else has commented, I would change them both. oknazevad (talk) 01:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as obvious and useful. I also concur with this article being Jamaica station, and with simplifying Seaside. Several of the others that are currently distinguished by line might better be distinguished by geography instead. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found this disambiguation page for Seaside. Hmm...both articles redirect to other articles...what should we do? –Daybeers (talk) 02:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Seaside station can continue to point where it does; that name was used for far, far longer there than at the other station. For the brief name, I would consider Seaside station (Babylon) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:20, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Right. We can do the same thing with that article as the ones on the MBTA RM: change the links to it, create the new redirect, and then possibly delete the page. –Daybeers (talk) 03:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This move is in line with current guidelines and I'm pleased with how thoroughly it's been addressed. I agree with the simplifications for Jamaica and Seaside. Mackensen (talk) 02:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose All because the current guidelines are rotten. Hey, look what I found; Another Medford Station. BTW, rename these, and not only will I never submit another new picture again, but I will quit WP:TRAINS, WP:NYPT, and publically denounce the whole system. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 03:36, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why do you think the current guidelines are rotten? Why make an article title longer than necessary? I see no advantage to Long Island City (LIRR station) over Long Island City station. The fact that there is another Medford station elsewhere in the world doesn't mean anything. If there isn't a Wikipedia article on it, it's not an issue. –Daybeers (talk) 03:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • They're not longer than necessary, and most are long enough. Regardless of the fact that there's no article on the former Medford (Southern Pacific station), the current proposal takes away the identity of Medford (LIRR station) as a Long Island Rail Road station. Also there's an Auburndale (MBTA station), and naming New York City Subway stations for the trains that use them rather than the lines is no better. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 04:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • The point of article titles is (usually) not to be descriptive. The fact that it's a station on the LIRR is explained in the article. Per WP:CRITERIA, one of the five characteristics of a "good Wikipedia article title" is "Naturalness — The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English." I don't know anyone who would actually say "Medford (LIRR station)" when referring to the station...do you? Therefore, readers searching for that article would most likely type in Medford station, which would yield no exact matches. They could do the full search for articles containing "Medford station", but most probably wouldn't, concluding that Wikipedia doesn't have an article on the station. The point of titles is to make it easy for all readers, experts or not, to find what they're looking for. Making titles more complicated than necessary defeats that purpose. –Daybeers (talk) 04:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The current guidelines are rotten [but I can't be bothered to try to convince the broader community of that]" -- please see WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. "I will quit" -- Wikipedia:Rage quit. But don't worry; editors who don't want to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines quit all the time, and the editors who do continue to collaborate on the project. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • editors who don't want to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines quit all the time - The difference here is that DanTD is a long-time constructive editor, not some vandal who just went on Wikipedia pages and wrote nonsense. It would truly be a loss if DanTD decided to leave the project. I also think the USSTATION guidelines aren't perfect and that it would now be harder to determine what system a certain station is on. However, it's a relatively minor problem in the long run. epicgenius (talk) 20:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • I didn't said he was a vandal; we've lost other non-vandal editors who didn't want to collaborate on the project, and DanTD's usual response along the lines of "god damn it not this shit again" has not been constructive. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Likewise. I was simply pointing out that DanTD does not have a history of disrupting Wikipedia. His objections are a bit benign in the sense that he hasn't done a mass-revert of USSTATION moves (so far, to my knowledge, and this only counts moving back the pages for all the stations in a system). I am just saying that it is probably not a good idea to alienate contributors who have historically been helpful to the project. If DanTD wants to leave (which I hope he doesn't), then it wouldn't help if you are encouraging him. epicgenius (talk) 20:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
            • It would be helpful if he didn't use the possibility of his quitting (which I hope he doesn't) as an !vote argument against following the guidelines and consensus. Which is why I linked Wikipedia:Rage quit. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
              • Dan doesn't seem to actively revert articles anymore that I've noticed, but other behavior like belittling comments, obstruction, and threatening to quit if he doesn't get his way are toxic for a collaborative project.--Cúchullain t/c 21:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
              • @JHunterJ: OK, thanks for the clarification. epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because several stations are ambiguous.

  • East New York (Broadway Junction)
  • Far Rockaway (Far Rockaway A)
  • Long Island City (Court Square)
  • Beach Channel (Broad Channel)
  • Brooklyn Manor (104th J Station)
  • Bushwick Station (L train)
  • Fresh Pond Station (M train)
  • Greenpoint (G train)
  • Hammels (A train)
  • Rockaway Junction (A train at Rockaway Blvd)
  • Woodhaven (E/F)
  • Woodhaven Junction (E/F)

Theoallen1 (talk) 03:42, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • East New York doesn't have its own article.
  • Disambiguation can be added to Far Rockaway.
  • Long Island City doesn't have its own article.
  • Beach and Broad are different enough to not warrant disambiguation. A hatnote can be added if it's really needed.
  • 104th Street (BMT Jamaica Line) clearly links to Brooklyn Manor (LIRR station).
  • Bushwick and Bushwick Avenue are different. A hatnote can be added if it's really needed.
  • Fresh Pond is different from Fresh Pond Road.
  • Same as with Bushwick.
  • Hammels Wye is different from Hammels station.
  • Rockaway Junction doesn't have its own article.
  • I'm not sure which article you're referring to here.
  • Woodhaven Junction doesn't have its own article. –Daybeers (talk) 04:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those names are different enough to not need disambiguation. –Daybeers (talk) 21:13, 1 May 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Jamaica station track count[edit]

 – – Epicgenius (talk) 16:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's a minor matter, but our Jamaica station article includes the AirTrain station, so maybe its two tracks should be counted in the info box. Perhaps "12 (including AirTrain)". agr (talk) 17:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ArnoldReinhold, good point. I assumed that @LIRRTrainMaster was referring to the fact that the LIRR tracks are numbered from 1 to 12. Tracks 9 and 10 aren't adjacent to any platform, but they are not the only tracks that bypass the station.
If we change the infobox like you suggest, though, we also have to change the "platforms" parameter to "7 (including AirTrain)". Currently, the infobox only mentions the six LIRR platforms and 10 LIRR tracks. The AirTrain is only listed as a "connection" and doesn't have its own infobox, which I've always thought was a bit strange. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did a closer look and there are other things that need to change. In any case, we need distance to Grand Central Madison. Should East Side Access be listed as a line? What then to call the line to NYP? The bigger issue is whether Jamaica includes AirTrain or not, i.e. is it an LIRR hub or an intermodal transportation hub? Take a look at Pennsylvania Station (Newark) which takes the later approach. I'm inclined to the later approach since that is what it is and doing so would give a better sense of the complex's importance to a casual reader. I wouldn't incorporate the subway station article, but would include a brief descriptive paragraph, and list passenger counts for LIRR, AirTrain and maybe subway, like Newark does. The services section could include AirTrain too. Thoughts?--agr (talk) 15:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ArnoldReinhold, that is a lot to consider. I agree that we need to list the distance to Grand Central Madison, since we already list the distance to the other three terminals. Regarding ESA, I think it may be considered its own line, but only between GCM and Harold Interlocking, where it rejoins the Main Line.
As for including the AirTrain station in the infobox, I think we should move that conversation to Talk:Jamaica station so we can get more eyes on the discussion. The Newark Penn article is a bit strange because the PATH station is part of the mainline railroad station there - there's even a cross-platform transfer between the NJT/Amtrak and WTC-bound PATH. I think something similar may apply to the AirTrain station at Jamaica, since the AirTrain's exit is connected directly to the LIRR concourse. But again, I think this would benefit from a wider discussion at the Jamaica station's talk page. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree we should move this discussion to the article's talk page. Do you want to just copy what we have to there? You have my permission to do so.--agr (talk) 16:09, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'll do that now. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the move. Maybe we should start with changes dictated by the new Grand Central service. I couldn't find a good source for the Jamaica — Grand central distance. I measured using Google Maps and got 10.5 mi. Anyone have a better source?--agr (talk) 17:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jamaica_station&oldid=1203056617"