Talk:Union Station (Brattleboro, Vermont)

Subject, image, and formatting
This article is about both the current Amtrak stop and the historic Union Station - as they are one and the same. The current Amtrak waiting room is located inside Union Station, as is clearly discussed in the Great American Stations source, and your strongly-worded claim that Union Station is completely divorced from Amtrak use is completely false. The style in which I rewrote the lede is entirely standard for active railroad stations with a historic station building at the site (whether currently used in railroad use or not); there is no precedent for the edits you have made. Outside of the station issue itself, I cannot fathom why you have chosen to remove a refimprove template from an unreferenced section, nor why you have chosen to use psuedoheadings (which are strongly discouraged by the Manual of Style).

I am particularly concerned about your behavior here. Why have you chosen to leave notices at five different WikiProjects over a single pair of reversions, and why have you worded them in a manner usually reserved for "I want more eyes to monitor for bad edits" (i.e, you want others to revert me) rather than a more neutral wording implying "I'd like more opinions about this disagreement"? You are the one who has substantially changed the article from its prior state - my edit largely rewrote existing information in the lede to make it clearer - so I believe the onus is on you to justify why your edit is useful and factually correct. While it is reasonable to discuss what image is best for the infobox - some articles of this type use a front view of the historic building, while others have a platform/train view - again it is your duty to justify your change. I am going to restore my previous version (i.e, the former state of the article with my corrections to the lede), then re-add the Great American Stations source and gallery in a second edit. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 08:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * In theory there could be an article split between Union Station (Brattleboro, Vermont) and Brattleboro station (Amtrak), but (a) there's not enough content to otherwise justify a split and (b) they're in the same building. While Amtrak doesn't explicitly refer to it as "Union Station", Amtrak often doesn't do that when a station is unambiguous within its system and isn't generally known by that name. However, Amtrak's information page does say this: "The former Union Station was built into a bluff along the Connecticut River. The waiting room occupies the ground floor, while the upper levels have been converted for use as an art museum." I think one building, one article, is a reasonable position and historic station articles often follow that approach. A contrary example might be Delmar Loop station and Delmar Boulevard station, but in that case the Metrolink platforms are truly separate from the old Wabash building and the content about the Wabash building would have dwarfed the Metrolink stuff. There's also a clean break of 23 years, and a mode change, between the closure of the Wabash station and the opening of the Metrolink line, while service here is almost continuous.
 * Regarding the pseudoheadings, I'm stunned to see that still adding them to articles after repeated warnings about their inaccessibility, and about inaccessible editing in general. There's no justification for that change and he shouldn't have made it.
 * I'm also not sure why it was necessary to contact five (!) WikiProjects before using the talk page here; it's strange to invite people to a talk page when you're not using it yourself, but there we are and more eyes are always welcome. I hope that we're not going to find ourselves in an intractable dispute over Brattleboro, for heaven's sake. Mackensen (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2019 (UTC)