User talk:Pi.1415926535/Archive 15

'''This is an archive of past discussion threads on User talk:Pi.1415926535, from December 2020 (the end of Archive 14) to May 2020. Please don't modify it. If you wish to revive a discussion, please start a new section on my main talk page and link to the discussion here.'''

Station naming
You recently changed the name of an article I created: Agnew Depot became Agnew station. your reasoning was cited as WP:USSTATION, though that provision states that "In some cases, a station has a common name that does not include the word "station". In those cases, default to the common name per the Use common names policy."

I bring it up in this case as the actual entry from the Santa Clara Historical and Landmark Commission (the most reputable source I can find) refers to this place as the Agnew Depot, which is why I made it so at the start. I'm just not seeing a clear justification for this move. MJ (talk) 02:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Situations like this are precisely why USSTATIONS exists - to provide standardization when sources are never going to. A single plaque isn't really any indication that "Agnew Depot" was actually the common name, or that it should be used over "Agnew station". Looking at the names that NRHP listings use for stations illustrates this well - historians tend not to be concerned by consistency between "station", "depot", etc. The common name exception is for situations like Saint Paul Union Depot or Grand Central Terminal where there is overwhelming evidence of usage. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Alewife station
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2494 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:00, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

West Redding station
Your recent edits to Redding station (Metro-North) have left the article as a shriveled up stub. Without even a basic 'Station layout' section. I fail to see how this so-called "Cleanup" has helped the article at all. In fact, the article looks even worse than it did in 2006, when it was first created. I'll definitely expand the article, but I just wanted to let you know that I strongly disagree with your edit.__Kieran207 (talk) 01:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * All I did was copyedit and remove extraneous trivia. You are welcome to expand the article with reliable sources, but please do not add trivial details. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

removal of subject matter in Washington Metro station articles
Is there a reason why you are reverting the station articles to remove almost all of the content? I can see cleaning it up, but the extent to which you removed information seems too much.

Jspace727 (talk) 03:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is. Everything I am removing has clear consensus to remove: bolding in the infobox per MOS:BOLD, lists of nearby places per WP:NOTTRAVEL, unneeded galleries per WP:GALLERY, and station layout diagrams per the recent RFC at Wikiproject Trains. I did not remove any cited information that is actually pertinent to the article. Please stop reverting these changes. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:23, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Re: electric
To be fair, this is a thing that predates my additions. The only difference is now I'm adding citations and where they weren't before. Mitch 32 (sail away with me to another world.) 02:39, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I definitely understand. If you don't mind adding a quick sentence to the prose instead, something like the one I added in this edit would be preferable. For the minor NEC stations, that ceremonial express service in January 1935 is pretty irrelevant; the Hagley source (or another newspaper clipping) that mentions when all local service was converted to electric is probably much more important. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Route 128 station
The article Route 128 station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Route 128 station for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 22:02, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

NYNH&H infobox?
Hello, I was wondering if you happened to know if a Infobox station style parameter exists for NYNH&H stations. I recently created the article Wall Street station (New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad) and I would like to give it a NYNH&H-themed infobox. Would you happen to have any information? Thanks. Kieran207 ( talk - Contribs ) 22:56, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It does indeed - you can see a typical example at Blackstone station. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Prides Crossing station
The article Prides Crossing station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Prides Crossing station for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:22, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hastings station (MBTA)
The article Hastings station (MBTA) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hastings station (MBTA) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 03:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Day of pi(e)....
I feel like I have no choice to say happy pi(e) day to you... maybe you know what all the fuss is about... :) Aza24 (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! I can't rattle off digits like when I made the account 15 years ago, but I always do enjoy pi(e). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Short turns in the infobox
Hi Pi, I noticed that the edits I made this morning to Westbrook station, which I had made to provide clarity for the infobox, since edits made to the adjacent stations module for the NY-area systems (and CTRail) last year have made common short turn patterns show in the infobox template. (This is visible on most stations for Babylon Branch stations west of Speonk, and Montauk Branch stations west of Speonk, for example; the infoboxes also note them to be short turn termini on their own pages because of this. The infobox's display at Westbrook, without that edit, reads "Old Saybrook, towards Old Saybrook or New London" because of how the Adjacent Stations module is set up as well; separating it seemed logical if short turns were to be displayed on the infobox page. (That said, I am not certain that displaying Old Saybrook as a common terminus is valid anymore, as only one train now continues to terminate there; unlike how most Shore Line East trains terminated at Old Saybrook in the past).

I'd really appreciate your insight, as I was preparing to begin editing other stations within the LIRR and MNCR systems with similar edits because I felt like it read better. It'd also be helpful because I've been planning on expanding and rewriting the articles for the MARTA rail system recently (as I've relocated from Boston to Atlanta several months ago), and the short turn pattern I wrote into Westbrook was one I had previously used for King Memorial station and other related stations on that system several weeks ago. Pokemonred200 (talk) 03:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

(On a side note; Happy Pi day, in the final half hour of it in my time zone!) Pokemonred200 (talk) 03:26, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * In general, the fewer service variations we show in the adjacent stations navbox, the better. It takes up space, and can be confusing for the reader. In many cases, it's best to simply use it to show adjacent stations when complex skip-stop or short turn service patterns would be difficult to show. The Old Saybrook short turns don't seem to be a separate service pattern – there aren't even different series of train numbers – so at this point I think we can just use New London as the terminus for adjacent stations.


 * For the MARTA stations, it looks like there are three Green Line service patterns (weekday daytime, weekday nights, weekends) – is that correct? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:37, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * That makes sense. I feel like, with CTRail in particular, the choice to separate New London and Old Saybrook as separate termini for Shore Line East is because, at the time, most service did not continue to New London, but now that only one service does not continue over the Old Saybrook-Old Lyme bridge to New London, it might be a good time to show it as the sole terminus of the line. (I'm assuming that the replacement bridge, which will still have movable segments but will be higher when closed, would allow for all trips to continue to New London (or points east) in the future)


 * Regarding MARTA, it's correct that there are three distinct service patterns, as on weekdays, the Green Line runs to Edgewood-Candler Park, on weekends and most holidays, it short turns at King Memorial, and at nights (after 9 PM on both weekdays and weekends, regardless of service patterns) it runs to Vine City as a shuttle. I'm not entirely sure why the line turns at King Memorial on weekends, but it terminating at Edgewood-Candler actually does have interesting history about it, since the station was intended to be where the line branched to the Northeast had the entire line had been built as planned. Pokemonred200 (talk) 11:04, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Those MARTA patterns are certainly difficult, especially with the (currently suspended) limited Avondale service. I think the current state of the adjacent stations is good for now. For the longer station names with slashes, it's useful to allow line breaks at the slashes. I've added one example to the adjacent stations module; note the zero-width space, which only shows up in the editing box. (P.S.: You don't need to ping editors on their own talk page - they automatically get a ping when a message is added.) Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:48, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Silver Hill station
The article Silver Hill station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Silver Hill station for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kendal Green station
The article Kendal Green station you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Kendal Green station for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bobamnertiopsis -- Bobamnertiopsis (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Route 128 station
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Prides Crossing station
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

MUNI icons
Turns out all but one of the remaining transclusions of was via, which I just removed:  (no change in presentation). The sole remainder is at Glen Park station. I looked around but couldn't find another example of a BART/MUNI connection presented in that way. MUNI Legend introduces a div and isn't suitable there. Thoughts? Mackensen (talk) 02:59, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Since it's a single oddball case, I just hard-coded it. I can't think of any similar cases likely to crop up. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Hastings station (MBTA)
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

MBTA
Is Plymouth station closed or suspended?  Cards   84664   13:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I would treat it as closed unless compelling evidence to the contrary is found. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The MBTA uses language stating the station is permanently closed, and current schedules are now referring to the line as simply the Plymouth Line, which is why I made edited the template to reflect the current status.


 * I did want to ask though, Pi, since I did not have time to do so before I left for work this morning; would it be worth it to edit the pages on the line (and the Old Colony Lines article itself) to refer to the line as the Kingston Line as well? While most MBTA pages do say the station will be closed until further notice, I do recall that the MBTA has stated that they intend to use relief funds to restore pre-pandemic service levels, though it does not make it particularly clear if the MBTA intends to reopen the closed stations at Plymouth, Hastings, Plymptonville, Silver Hill, and Pride's Crossing that were cut as part of forging ahead. I do believe the edits I've done thus far were justified as the MBTA has stated that the stations are permanently closed with no known reopening date, and has even officially renamed the Kingston/Plymouth Line to simply the Kingston Line to boot, but I feel like I should ask for your input regardless as you've done most of the major work on the MBTA pages. Pokemonred200 (talk) 00:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I think changing to "Kingston Line" is worthwhile. Do make sure to keep the old name when it's being referred to in the pre-2020 time frame, though. I'm planning to do a full series of edits regarding the April 5 service changes in the coming days. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Silver Hill station
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Coordinates
As you may know, five digits of decimal coordinates exceeds the available precision of civilian GPS and internet mapping services. If one switches between Bing and Google, for instance, one will see the image leap around, typically by 0.1 arcsecs. Five digit decimal coordinates also cannot resolve, as they cannot round to D°M'S". Abductive  (reasoning) 04:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Your claim about precision is verifiably incorrect. Modern smartphones have 1-meter precision, and Google Maps aerial orthoimagery (which I personally use) does as well. (Commercial services that offer aerial imagery in urban areas have been closer to 0.1 meter for years.) WP:COORDPREC recommends the use of 5 digits for objects of a ten-meter scale (such as small train station buildings), and even larger objects near the equator. Edits such as this are both factually wrong and disruptive, and I will continue to treat them as such. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Why were the coordinates originally 42°23′44.25″N 71°18′08.49″W before I got to the article? They pointed to the southern end of a bridge. Then I come along and fix them to point to the station at 42.3957°N 71.3020°W, and you then changed them to 42.39570°N 71.30191°W. Then I round to the correct four digits, but retained your change to 71.3019°W. The station is 100 m long, so WP:COORDPREC recommends D.dddd°. So, I repaired a serious error, followed WP:COORDPREC, and you assert that what I did was disruptive? Abductive  (reasoning) 06:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The station is nowhere close to 100 meters long. The only relevant structure is a 3x4 meter shack. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Aren't we both trying to optimize the value of the articles we edit? Am I disruptive? Please be more forgiving. Abductive  (reasoning) 06:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the shack is not part of the station? Often they aren't. The station had a parking lot, the entrance of which is 30 m away from the shack. There is a boarding area which OSM shows to be 60 m long. Where should the coordinates to train stations point? I feel like the boarding area is the most useful, as it gives flexibility to editors to chose a spot on the boarding area that rounds to their satisfaction (mine being D°M'S", followed by D.dddd° and D°M'S.s").
 * Where did the first coordinates of 42°23′44.25″N 71°18′08.49″W come from? Did your GPS in your phone give those coordinates? Abductive  (reasoning) 06:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Changing to less-precise coordinates, using an edit summary with a verifiably false claim, is disruptive. While I understand that you think you are improving the article, I find it hard to be forgiving when I have repeatedly asked you not to arbitrarily reduce coordinate precision.


 * Three different sentences in the article discuss the shelter, and it is featured in one of the article's images. OSM shows two 30-meter long platforms, which is incorrect - there is a granite edge but no actual platform on the north side, and nothing on the south side. My opinion is that coordinates for train stations should point to the center of the main station building/shelter, or the center of the platform if no structure is present. You must remember that most train station platforms are largely linear features, and the precision must be chosen for the smaller dimension: if a station is 10m wide and 300m long, the precision is no different than a 10x10m object.


 * Those old coordinates date to 2007, four years before I edited the article. I usually check the coordinates when I prep an article for GA; I must have forgotten in this case. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand. You are trying for exactitude, while I value the consistency of the visual appearance of the coordinates in all articles. Abductive  (reasoning) 06:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Kendal Green station
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

MBTA Commuter Rail stations
Please provide a source that indicates the closures are permanent... none of the MBTA resources use that term. As someone who attended a large number of the virtual public meetings in regards to the service changes, I can tell you that even MBTA executives never said the closures were permanent, only long-term temporary/indefinite. 2601:187:4581:7F50:894C:5219:203E:B7D9 (talk) 02:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Writing the articles as though they are active stations is misleading, regardless of what euphemisms the MBTA has chosen this time around. I am fine with using "indefinite" rather than "permanent" until the formal abandonment process is completed, but I will not accept your present-tense phrasing. Note here that the bus routes and ferry routes are "suspended", but the stations are "closed". Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

List of United States commuter rail systems by ridership
I agree with you that we should not use the numbers from 2020 (or 2021) for the ridership figues, due to the ridership disruptions due to COVID.

The problem is that editors have already switched to 2020 figures at some articles like List of United States light rail systems by ridership. I didn't revert at the time, but now I think maybe this should be reverted... Thoughts? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I would go with a revert. Until ridership stabilizes post-COVID, it's changing so fast that numbers are out of date almost as soon as they're released. I've been using Q4 2019 (or February 2020 when available, as with BART) as the latest 'normal' ridership. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Suffolk Downs station
The article Suffolk Downs station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Suffolk Downs station for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Found5dollar -- Found5dollar (talk) 16:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Rail webinar
I saw this webinar and thought it may be of interest to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.248.118 (talk) 13:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Suffolk Downs station
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 86 (MBTA bus)
The article 86 (MBTA bus) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:86 (MBTA bus) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caleb M1 -- Caleb M1 (talk) 06:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)