Talk:New York City Subway/Archive 6

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Victoria1995, Kxie16.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Challenges
Is this section suppossed to be about all challenges or just current ones? If the former it is badly skewed towards the present, if the latter the 2009-2010 subsection should be removed. 103.212.120.231 (talk) 03:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It is current ones. No, the 2009-2010 subsection should not be removed, since that refers to a relatively recent major reconfiguration of the system. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

More stations in Shanghai
It seems I am being continually reverted for adding that the Shanghai system has more stations when it has over 500 stations on single lines.

Now it seems that the New York system still has more stations if you count complexes - which to be honest sounds more sensible - but then that figure should be the most prominent and the number of stations on individual lines should be removed from the lead. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 15:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

mention no pants ride
Is it necessary to mention the no pants ride. It is last held in 2020. Cwater1 (talk) 14:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it could be included. No Pants Subway Ride is currently a SEEALSO. New York's was the original of it, and the New York one still merited more-than-passing mention in news 2023 (the fact that it wasn't happening and discussion of the overall/annual NY event). In-depth reporting: ; major news outlet (but smaller article): . DMacks (talk) 15:20, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I added in the Public relations and cultural impact section. Since I added it, I removed the mentioning in the See also section. Cwater1 (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Great! As written, the event is organized and run by MTA. Is that correct? ||

Ridership figures
Hi @Kew Gardens 613: I switched out the MTA's ridership figures for the template based on APTA's numbers because I realized that other articles on metro systems use that template for their figures, including comparative ones like List of United States rapid transit systems by ridership. I figure it would be better for factual consistency if these various articles were to use the same source with the same ridership calculations. But I think it would probably be worthwhile to add an explanatory note with the MTA's figures and some brief distinction between linked and unlinked ridership. Shells-shells (talk) 22:13, 5 August 2023 (UTC)


 * What do you think, ? I think that if APTA's numbers are included, it should be mentioned in addition to the MTA's figures. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 01:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I also think we should add the APTA numbers back, but we should mention that the APTA figures refer to unlinked trips (i.e. transfers are counted separately). – Epicgenius (talk) 19:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Agree, just use an explanatory footnote to explain the differrences. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi 74.73.224.126, Epicgenius, and Kew Gardens 613: I've made an edit that places the APTA figures in the main prose and adds the MTA figures to a note explaining the difference between linked and unlinked ridership; let me know if it's agreeable! :) Shells-shells (talk) 00:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Ridership data table
Drawing inspiration from the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority page, would the readership of this page benefit from a table of ridership by year? Given the size of the MTA system, perhaps this information would be better collated on a separate page?

Is there any consensus on the best way to present this kind of data? Slyleigh12 (talk) 15:20, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

"The different lengths for the B Division fleet are necessary because 75-foot cars can not be used over the BMT Eastern Division.[178][179]"
""The different lengths for the B Division fleet are necessary because 75-foot cars can not be used over the BMT Eastern Division.[178][179]""

According to New York City Subway rolling stock, R32s are run on the A line, and are 75 feet long. According to New York City Subway nomenclature, the A line is part of the BMT Eastern Division. Does anyone know what's going on here? Tduk (talk) 14:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The first source doesn't even discuss car length restrictions on the BMT Eastern - only platform length; "Unlike most of the subway system, the lines that make up the former BMT Eastern Division – the J/Z, L and M – never had their platforms extended. The L is constrained to eight-car trains of 60.5-foot cars." Tduk (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure the 2nd source is a RS for this information; is there something better? Tduk (talk) 15:11, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, the original addition of this text here stated "There is also a special fleet of BMT/IND cars that is used for operation in the BMT Eastern Division, which is the J, L, M and Z trains. The BMT Eastern Division has sharper curves and shorter platforms, so these trains can only use eight 60 foot long cars.", which is counter to what's on the nomenclature page. So I think something needs to be fixed here. Tduk (talk) 15:11, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That is strange, because the Eastern Division is commonly considered to be only the Nassau Street, Jamaica, Myrtle, and Canarsie lines. The Fulton Street Line used to be part of the Eastern Division, but it is currently an IND line. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, the A train is not a ex-BMT Eastern Division train. The previous Fulton Street El was, but that's long gone. The Liberty Street El that the A still uses was a later addition built as part of the Dual Contracts and is not included in the ex-BMT Eastern Division trackage because it was built to the later, more robust specifications to begin with. The last passage Tduk quotes is the correct issue: the curves on the oldest Eastern Division lines, having been built for the shorter cars, and shorter trains, of the old Brooklyn Els, can't handle the loading gauge if 75 foot cars, and even when 60 foot cars are used, the platforms are only long enough for 8-car trains. If there's a conflict, it's anything that doesn't align with those facts. oknazevad (talk) 06:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * So I looked at the nomenclature article, and I think I know where Tduk is referring to, the chart with the ex BMT route designations. I think he may have overlooked the footnote pointing out that the IND Fulton Street Line replaced the BMT El, and is not part of the eastern division. That said, a) I can see how even listing the A there at all can cause confusion, so it may be better not to list it, and b) the footnote looks like a source reference, not a footnote because it's numbered with the refs, not in a lettered footnote group. Maybe it should be reformatted. oknazevad (talk) 08:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow, thanks for catching that. My take is the text for "Current service" in the "13" row should be either blank, or something like "replaced with the A". It's also unclear to me whether or not the stops East of Grant were ever part of the Eastern Division, since they were part of the original Fulton Street line. (The note says they were not, but it's not clear to me.) Thoughts? Tduk (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The El stations were served by trains from the eastern division, but were built later and without the physical constraints. I agree that "replaced by A" would make it clearer that it's not the same service just renamed.
 * Of course, none of the modern services are purely renamings of BMT services, being the entirety of the former BMT trackage is subsumed into the modern B Division, which also includes the former IND lines, includes operating patterns that are almost fully not pure IND or BMT thanks to connections like Chrystie St, and follows the IND pattern of letter labels, not numbers. Makes me wonder if we do a disservice to readers by even having the column at all. oknazevad (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed, the more I've been reading these articles, the more I come across some confusing/misleading text - and there are a _lot_ of assumptions these articles make about the background knowledge of the readers. However, in this case, I don't _think_ there are any cases where one of the old BMT lines is being served by several modern train services - meaning that the chart _does_ have meaning, at least in that one direction, translating legacy BMT to modern services. Thoughts? Tduk (talk) 18:20, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Re: "the El stations were built later and without physical constraints" - how do you know this? Is there a RS that we can include that might be in some other article? Tduk (talk) 18:20, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

" Stations served by express trains are typically major transfer points or destinations."
This feels like original research/conjecture to me, and also doesn't feel entirely accurate. Tduk (talk) 14:46, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * @Tduk counter example? Jeremyb (talk) 15:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)