Talk:Robert F. Kennedy Bridge/Archive 1

comments
Removed the word "significant" from "significant portion of the public transit subsidy." Latest statistics show that B&T contribute less than 20 percent of the subsidy to public transit - "significant" seems to suggest a larger fraction, though of course it is a somewhat subjective term (hence it is probably best that it be left out). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.114.123 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I have added the photographing ban based on the last time that I have seen the signs "USE OF CAMERAS PROHIBITED - STRICTLY ENFORCED". It is due to fears that any terrorists may use images to plot terrirosms. Should the situation changes, please just update.--Jusjih 09:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Not Encyclopedic
In what little the article offers, the article seems slanted against the topic. Furthermore, the article saysnoting other than some superficial comments. 67.87.92.56 03:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The article seems biased against the bridge? How?  I don't see it.  And while I suppose the article could say more -- and perhaps will someday soon -- I can't agree that it is superficial or unencyclopedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.232.225.159  (talk • contribs) 04:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

More Information
There is not enough information need more charts images diagrams etc. Trulystand700

Rename?
Has the bridge in fact been renamed? - Denimadept (talk) 01:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not yet but it seems a forgone conclusion. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Once it happens, we should likely rename this page, then. - Denimadept (talk) 02:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * According to the reference posted, the legislation was signed on Friday. I expect the various other web pages haven't had time to be updated yet.  We don't have that limitation.  The rename looks real. - Denimadept (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Even with legislation signed, the question of the article's title is still very much up in the air, and there is no obligation for the title to match the official name of the bridge. Alansohn (talk) 05:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. Let's name the article "Elephant". - Denimadept (talk) 05:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See WP:COMMONNAMES. If enough people call it "Elephant", I'd be fine with that. Will the "Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Bridge" be as successfully and broadly adopted by residents as the Avenue of the Americas? Alansohn (talk) 05:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Remains to be seen. It's only been two days. - Denimadept (talk) 06:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * An excellent argument for maintaining the status quo. I'd still like to see what the MTA does with the name. Alansohn (talk) 06:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup. It'll likely take them a while.  I just like the fact that they finally gave it an actual name rather than a description.  Many bridges never get beyond a description. - Denimadept (talk) 07:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * How is 'Triborough Bridge' only a description? Should the White House be officially renamed the George Washington Memorial Executive Mansion? After all, there are many white houses. --BOARshevik (talk) 05:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Certainly it's only a description. It's a bridge project which goes to three boroughs.  Not so much a name as a description, definitely.  Now, if I were to choose a name for it, using yet another Kennedy might not be the way I'd go, but I wasn't asked.  Should they have called it "John Joonya" or "the John-John Bridge"? - Denimadept (talk) 05:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The article should be renamed with the new RFK name, and all re-directs pointed towards the new name. The city has already started posting ads around New York and advised traffic authorities to start referring to it as such. Melia Nymph (talk) 03:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The name should stay the same until at least a sizable proportion of the population acknowledges the new name. Politicians can no more change the name of public landmarks as they can define Pi to be equal to 3.  It will be decades before this "official" name gains any sort of traction and Wikipedia should reflect the facts on the ground.  This should at least be subject to a consensus vote.  Sturmovik (talk) 20:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not a matter of consensus. The official name is what it is.  What people call it is related but not necessarily the same.  Should the Boston, Massachusetts article be changed to Bean Town?  Actually, that might be a solution: a redirect at Triborough Bridge to point to this article.  Oh look, one is already there.  So why should something change, again?  - Denimadept (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If the Triborough Bridge is to be renamed then the page for West Side Highway should be renamed to Joe DiMaggio Highway, Sixth Avenue to Avenue of the Americas, etc, etc, etc.Sturmovik (talk) 20:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree, we should swap the redirect and the article for the JDM Highway. Good idea. - Denimadept (talk) 20:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't forget the Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza or the Thomas E. Dewey Thruway. I don't even have to leave New York State to show that Wikipedia usually reflects the common name.Sturmovik (talk) 21:34, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I can't forget them since I'm not in the area and don't know them to begin with. I agree that there are cases where the common name makes more sense.  Note again that I'm not the one doing all the renaming, just that I prefer a bridge have a real name rather than just a description.  If we want to get "that" way, the Triborough "bridge" should be considered three separate structures, each with their own article and name, but they don't 'cause they were a single project, yes? - Denimadept (talk) 21:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The article is now at RFK Bridge… was this agreed upon? Should it be moved back to Triborough (the status quo) until a real consensus is reached? —Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 16:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There does not seem to have been a consensus to rename the article, yet someone went ahead and did it anyway. I have reverted it to the previous state, pending actual agreement on the article's name. Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 21:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - no opinion. - Denimadept (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose - The article's name should match the most common name used, which for the time being remains Triborough Bridge. This would be consistent with WP:COMMONNAMES. --BOARshevik (talk) 21:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Support RFK Bridge is now the official name of the bridge. In short time it will be the most comment name used.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 20:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Tell that to the West Side Highway. Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 21:43, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose (This opinion was emailed to me by User:Efb91, who does not know how to post to talk pages. The user may be contacted to verify its authenticity. —Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 23:55, 27 November 2008 (UTC))
 * "'No one calls the Interboro the 'Jackie Robinson Parkway.' No one calls the Tappan Zee the 'Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge'. It's plain ridiculous. Sure you can put in the article that the official name is the RFK bridge, I'm not disputing that. But no New Yorker calls it that. All of my relatives don't even know it's been renamed. To everyone here, the old names stay the same. To us, it's still the Triboro, and it may be years, if ever, before the name even begins to make a difference. The title of the page should remain the Triborough Bridge, and I hereby vote to keeping the name of the Triborough Bridge for the page.' —User:Efb91 (talk) 14:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)"
 * Your reasoning is based on a lot of unsourced OR. I highly doubt there isn't at least 1 out of the 20+ million in the NYC area, that call it the RFK bridge. I know nothing about your family, but they apparently don't watch the news?  C T J F 8 3 Talk 08:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it's safe to say that "no New Yorker" was a generalization :P Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 15:19, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL, good point.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 22:19, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

As the bridge's official name is "Robert F. Kennedy Bridge," should we move this article to there? Please let me know. SNIyer12 (talk), 19:10 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the page should redirect to its old name, Triborough Bridge or at least a compromised RFK-Triborough Bridge. And here why: take a look at Joe DiMaggio Highway in Manhattan. The Wikipedia page for this road still redirects users to its old name, West Side Highway. Its unofficial, but it's still the popularly accepted name in this city.

Another example is Sixth Avenue in Manhattan, which is officially Avenue of the Americas but the main Wikipedia page for this road is filed under Sixth Avenue, because that's how most of thep ublic refers to this road. The same rule should apply to Triborough Bridge. Nobody I know refers to it as the RFK Bridge, except radio and television announcers. I live in Queens and most of my neighbors still call it the Triborough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.8.210 (talk) 15:09, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Links
I don't want to put this link in the actual article because it could be removed as it's from a constantly changing news source:



This is viable evidence of the name change, should anyone disagree with me previous actions. Melia Nymph (talk) 07:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


 * No one is disputing the bridge's official name. The argument is about the article title :) Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 21:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Harrumph
The East River bridges and tunnels have long been rightly named, and the Hudson ones wrongly. Bridges and tunnels should be named for places, not people. Ought to be Inwood Parkway over Riverdale Bridge, passing the Fort Lee Bridge, to the West Side Highway past Weehawken Tunnel, Jersey City Tunnel, and then what crosses Arthur Kill should be Elizabeth Bridge and Tottenville Bridge. You should only get a bridge with your name on it if it goes to a place with your name. But, grumble grumble, RFK is official and the remaining hope is that the name won't stick popularly even though Wikipedia unfortunately went along with the change, and the idea won't spread to other old bridges and tunnels. Signed, your old grouch. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

RFK
As long as this article's name is Triborough and not Robert F. Kennedy Memmorial, then this article is deemed INACCURATE.

I don't care if locals still call it the Triborough - is the article of JFK Airport called Idlewild? 66.108.167.71 (talk) 12:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I sure care about the opinion of an anonymous person who can't spell. - Denimadept (talk) 17:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Find me 10 New Yorkers who, upon being asked what the big airport over in Jamaica is, say "Idlewild," and then we'll talk. Larry V (talk &#124; e-mail) 22:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Fick a pickle. Jerk.  As long as Wikipedia has this as Triborough and not RFK, then Wikipedia will forever be WRONG.  Inaccurate.  Douche'.  66.108.167.71 (talk) 02:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)