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 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
@Kew Gardens 613, Cards84664, DanTD, and LRG5784: I don't think there is any official name yet. Furthermore, we should have waited until the 2018 ridership statistics come out before we merge the article. Otherwise it would look weird when the Cortlandt Street ridership and rankings are excluded from the infobox. epicgenius (talk) 20:33, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cards84664: Or... we can just keep the articles separate. Regardless of what the USSTATION names for this wikiproject turn out to be, I'm not sure that you need to combine all the information in the same station complex in one article, especially if the complex consists of two adjacent stations on the same line (I'm talking about Fifth Avenue and Times Square on the Flushing Line). Using a "connections" parameter in the infobox is just fine, and this was done in the previous version of this article. I assume it's not going to be a dealbreaker or anything if we had two connected stations with different articles. If we add too much information into the same article, we'd confuse readers, which is what we are trying not to do. (For instance, although you can technically connect from Park Place and Cortlandt Street in this station, it's very indirect, and the easiest access is between Chambers/WTC and Cortlandt Street.) epicgenius (talk) 23:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What's your justification for putting 3 stations in one article and putting the Broadway line station by itself? If we want to be consistent with "connections", Times Square (along with this complex) would and should all be split up. This is another all or none situation on the basis of consistency. (Yes I know my point is moot if the MTA says Cortlandt St is separate, but I really doubt it). Cards84664(talk)00:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My justification is that it's not an all-or-none situation. Exceptions can be discussed on a case-by-case basis, and the articles don't all have to be consistent with connections. In this case, the Clark Street Tunnel is really only connected to the Eighth Avenue Line, but not to the Broadway Line. Likewise, the Broadway Line is only connected to the Eighth Avenue local platform. This is not even the worst-case scenario. At least the merging of the Chambers/WTC/Park Place and Cortlandt Street articles is OK because at least two consecutive stations on the same line aren't being connected with a free transfer (Chambers and WTC are parallel so it's all right).With merging the Times Square and Bryant Park articles, because your proposal would have two consecutive stations on the Flushing Line with the same article. That would totally mess up the flow of the articles. There isn't any downside to having two articles about related topics if it helps clarify things. On the other hand, one article on two consecutive stations that aren't directly connected to each other will cause a lot of confusion and would be impossible to describe clearly. There is a "transfers" parameter in the infobox for a reason, and we should use it whenever it's relevant. epicgenius (talk) 00:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I personally have no objections to the article name but I would have waited a little. Not even this list by the MTA includes the Cortlandt Street stop on the R with the rest of the complex (see complex ID number 624). —LRG5784 (talk·contribs·email) 12:00, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still think the article could probably be split, although less strongly than six years ago. We split the PABT and Times Square articles because they were getting too large and because sources referred to them separately, rather than as a cohesive complex. However, this complex is a little different in that WTC is often referred to in conjunction with either Chambers Street/Park Place or Cortlandt Street, but rarely both. In other words, the complex is often referred to as either "Chambers Street-WTC-Park Place" or "Cortlandt Street-WTC", but very few sources refer to all four stations with a single name. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:04, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, but the shuttle platform is almost never described as part of the 42nd Street/Bryant Park/Fifth Avenue complex in sources, and even by the MTA itself. That passageway pretty much exists solely to connect the shuttle with the 6th Avenue Line; the shuttle platform is almost exclusively considered part of the Times Square–42nd Street station. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having just read this article, I think it could use split _or_ a restructure. For instance, it's very confusing that there's a History section, and under _that_ a BMT section, and way down further on the page, there's a separate BMT section for the track layout, which mentions a rebuild; however the upper BMT section does not have the word "rebuild" anywhere in it, so it requires a lot of time to understand what that section is talking about. Tduk (talk) 16:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
