Template talk:NYCS

When to use this?
Typing is identical to typing K (NYCS), and the former cannot be disambiguated (note that K is a disambiguation page). Normal links are easier to deal with, and do not require recoding the template or forming otherwise-useless redirects like K Eighth Avenue Local (New York City Subway service) for cases like the K (which would be required to use ). Here are the reasons I have seen for not using normal links:
 * "Should the service articles be split, the change can be implemented easily. This has happened twice recently, when F-V and A-C were split into separate articles. Those references that used the templates were fixed in minutes. Those that were hard-coded took hours."
 * This is in fact not true; had A-C and F-V not been split when the templates were recently substed, the articles would contain, which would take "hours" to change to  . When the articles were split, we were still using template:NYCS A, which was changed from A to A . After the recent substing, such a fast change is no longer possible.
 * "They are an immense labor-saving device. It is easier to type (10 characters) than Q (44 characters)."
 * But Q (NYCS) is 13 characters, and much easier to deal with in special cases, and not-so-special cases (see below on overlinking).

The worst problem however with this template is overlinking. It encourages every instance of a service to be linked, for example:
 * Around 2:00 p.m. on January 23, 2005, a fire destroyed the interlocking plant at Chambers Street. This caused restriction of service and complete suspension of  service. Specifically, about one-third of the normal number of  trains ran. Some newspaper articles have blamed the fire on a homeless person trying to keep warm, but that has not been confirmed.
 * The in Brooklyn (east of Jay Street) was replaced by an extension of  service on weekdays. The upper level platforms of the Eighth Avenue Line at 50th Street are only served by the, and were thus closed; the only uptown service to 50th Street was via the Queens Boulevard Line's connection ( service) into the lower level of the station.
 * Additionally, the, which had formerly used the express tracks on the Eighth Avenue Line south of 168th Street (the 's northern terminus), switched to local at 145th Street, serving the two local stations that were only served by the (155th Street and 163rd Street–Amsterdam Avenue).

It is highly discouraged to use "the same link multiple times, because redundant links clutter up the page and make future maintenance harder. It is not uncommon to repeat a link that had last appeared much earlier in the article, but there's hardly ever a reason to link the same term twice in the same section."

It also causes every instance of a service to be bolded in the article on that service, in violation of Manual of Style:
 * "If the article title is an important term, use it as early as possible in the article. Use boldface for the first (and only the first) appearance of the title and any important synonyms (including acronyms)."
 * "Avoid other uses of boldface in the first paragraph, so the reader will not confuse the text with synonyms." (another issue with the current state of this template, which bolds the letter)

This can be seen in the lead section of R (New York City Subway service):
 * The R Broadway Local is a service of the New York City Subway. It is colored yellow on the route sign (either on the front and/or side - depending on equipment used) and on station signs and the NYC Subway map, as it represents a service provided on the BMT Broadway Line in Manhattan. Normal service is local from 71st-Continental Avenue in Forest Hills, Queens, to 95th Street in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn; during late nights it operates as a shuttle within Brooklyn from 36th Street to 95th Street. The R is one of only two services that have two or more stations with the same name (the other being the ); it serves two 36th Street stations (one in Queens on the IND Queens Boulevard Line and one in Brooklyn on the BMT Fourth Avenue Line).

I understand that there are good reasons for using other templates (which do not use template:NYCS) in order to ensure that mentions of services are accurate and updated when patterns change. (For an example, the G is to extend along the Culver Line; by adding G to the "Culver IND south" templates, this change will appear in all articles that reference this part of the line and use the templates. Standard uses of these templates can be seen at Bushwick, Brooklyn (without the time codes) and in the infoboxes on Times Square–42nd Street (with the time codes). I am not saying that we should cut down on use of these line templates. On the other hand, we should use them more often; the only places we should directly link to a service are on articles about the subway system itself, preferably only about services and lines. --NE2 00:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Here are my thoughts, as I don't believe I have taken any position on this before:
 * It is not my preference that when I write articles, I use links that redirect to other articles (although I support creation of such redirects); I prefer to link to an article using its current name. My view is that consistent use of redirected links discourage or disregard the settled name of an article. In other words, too many links to a redirect promote the idea that the redirect should be the name of the redirect target article. Saying that, since the names of the redirected articles do not semm to be in danger of being changed in the near future, and I have good faith that the redirects will point to the correct articles, I can accept the use of redirects, though I cannot consciously edit in that fashion.
 * I remember from a former discussion that the template may be changed to use image symbols. There are a couple of problems with using images such as : licensing and copyright issues (listed as public domain, though I cannot make a judgment if that is correct or not), the tacky appearance of such symbols in Wikipedia articles (including NYCS-related articles), and the symbols as being unnecessary and superfluous when there are suitable text alternatives. (They are used in articles about river crossings. I have no opinion on that.) So let's put this issue to rest and let's resolve to no longer support or entertain the idea of using service symbols in the text of articles and in this template.
 * The bold as used to indicate services appears to be a stylistic choice. Although I have tolerated the bolding up to this point, maybe it's not that necessary.
 * Finally, the overlinking concern is legitimate. Although a lot of links appear for convenience, only one in an article (or one per section and template at most) is sufficent.


 * Saying all of this, I have not really cared much about the usage and appearance of this template, as long as the template is appropriate to insert in an article. To me, the appearance did not seem to be disrputive before. So I think NE2's suggestions are reasonable and suggest an improvement to conform to Wikipedia standards.


 * (One other note: Why does Bushwick, Brooklyn demonstrate the time codes? That article uses NYCS Jamaica east J, NYCS Canarsie, and NYCS Myrtle, none of which implements a time code.) Tinlinkin 04:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * That's a good point... I meant it to demonstrate how leaving off |time=1 makes the times not show up, but forgot that none of them actually used there make use of the codes. In lieu of searching for a good example, here's one:
 * 163rd Street
 * vs.
 * 163rd Street
 * --NE2 08:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)