Talk:Bakersfield station (Amtrak)

Requested move 15 February 2016

 * 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: Move. Something happened to this RM and it fell off the log and was never closed. I participated, but am closing anyway, as the support is unanimous and in line with WP:USSTATION. Cúchullain t/ c 16:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

– Per WP:USSTATION. System disambiguation is the only option with three stations in the same city. Mackensen (talk) 14:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Bakersfield (Amtrak station) → Bakersfield station (Amtrak)
 * Bakersfield (Southern Pacific station) → Bakersfield station (Southern Pacific Railroad)
 * Bakersfield (California High-Speed Rail station) → Bakersfield station (California High-Speed Rail)


 * Comment You are really just moving the word "station" around. How could anybody object? Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a triple move, and there's no previous engagement with the CHSR stations. Also, I think the ground is less settled with disused stations, and there's no harm in letting this run its course. Mackensen (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Does this improve Wikipedia in any way? Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Which, the move or the discussion? In both cases I think yes, else I wouldn't do it. While readers likely won't notice a difference, that's true for lots of things we do here. The more natural disambiguation removes a bone of contention between TWP and the rest of the project, which is why I started the discussion that became the USSTATION guideline. This move request is a natural outcome of eliminating preemptive disambiguation. As for starting a request instead of just doing it, I prefer discussion when there's any possibility of doubt. In this case, that's mostly with the former SP station. The guideline is unsettled (though not a subject of disagreement) in that case, and a couple move requests with discussions will help build consensus. Mackensen (talk) 17:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Support all per WP:USSTATION. I'll create the dab page now.--Cúchullain t/ c 17:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and applicable guidelines. --Regards, James(talk/contribs) 18:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Just to make it clear, after my sarcastic comments above. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. I very much dislike the lower-case 's' in the context of the station name, but I realize that this is a decided matter. For consistency Merced should be included in this batch of moves. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 00:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅; no unsettled questions there. Mackensen (talk) 01:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Support per USSTATION. epicgenius ( talk ) 20:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bakersfield station (Amtrak). 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110523174505/http://www.amtrakcalifornia.com/index.cfm/routes/san-joaquin/ to http://www.amtrakcalifornia.com/index.cfm/routes/san-joaquin/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:12, 14 July 2017 (UTC)