Talk:C (New York City Subway service)

Is text in article justified by source?
In edits such as this one, an editor insists on the following text, attributed to a New York Times article: "The New York Times has called the C the 'least loved of New York City subway lines,' citing its fleet of R32s, the oldest cars in the system, frequent breakdowns, and low scheduled service."

Are the words "low scheduled service" justified by the text of the Times article? Or are they original research that go beyond what is in the source? I'm not finding anything in the Times article that says that, but maybe I'm missing something. Requesting input from previously uninvolved editors on this. ScottyBerg (talk) 02:56, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think 'low scheduled service' is OR, I think it's just odd English. I really don't know what it's intended to mean.  can one of you clarify?  -- Ludwigs 2  05:45, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't know. It's not in the Times article. The Straphangers Campaign report says that overall, maintenance is better. ScottyBerg (talk) 13:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I've removed, and reworked the paragraph to bring in conformity with the source. ScottyBerg (talk) 14:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Appears to be resolved - ScottyBerg did the stand up thing and changed the article text to better reflect the source. The RfC appears to be resolved. --Noleander (talk) 15:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'd suggest leaving it open, in case there are any objections or further comments. ScottyBerg (talk) 16:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. I wasn't suggesting that the RfC be closed: I was merely saying that - from my point of view - the issue appeared to be resolved in the text of the article. --Noleander (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, the editor who made an issue of this has not commented. He seems to be focusing on the related RfC at R32 (New York City Subway car), but I assume he knows about this. ScottyBerg (talk) 16:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh I missed commenting here, as I said at R32, the info belongs here unquestionably - the source is unambiguous as relating to the C line; I agree that from my perspective the issue has been resolved.--Cerejota (talk) 23:07, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't remove template
The templates reflect the current subway car assignments and it should not be removed.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:38, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

R211 replacement
I have removed the statement that the R211s will replace the R32s on the C in 2021-2022 if everything goes to plan. It is unsourced, failing our verifiability policy, and speculative (claiming that the C train will have a certain fleet in the future), failing our Wikipedia is not a crystal ball policy. If someone has a reliable source for both statements that will end the speculation, then feel free to add it. epicgenius (talk) 18:18, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Fleets can interchange Edit War
"Fleets can interchange between A and C". Why there is an edit war going on right here? Please add references when adding the statement, thank you.SunDawn (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)]


 * IP's were being disruptive and potentially violating WP:3RR. This is why it got semi-protected. LOMRJYO(About × contribs) 13:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * And please, don't SHOUT. -- Deep fried okra ( talk ) 13:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, R160's returned to the (C) line with 3 trains used on March 4, 2024, since the (M) was shortened to 57 Street in Manhattan instead of to Forest Hills 71 Avenue, requiring less trains for service as well. So now ENY has extra trains available for the (C) lines usage as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:7800:18BB:540F:A4B1:F9E1:465B (talk) 05:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)