Talk:Metro Center station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

To: Schuminweb Why not distinquish the Metrorail system from the Metrobus system a la the Washington Metro article? AnonUser 19:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking me... could you elaborate some more? Schuminweb 03:52, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. The Washington Metro article states that the overall system includes Metrorail and Metrobus, and that the term Metro usually (but not always) refers to Metrorail. I suggest that we add equivalent language to the Metro Center article to avoid confusion. What do you think? AnonUser 22:23, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it, and be bold. I'll be interested to see what you come up with. Schuminweb 05:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not bad. I've also got some plans to further unify the whole Metro project (including making an overarching Wikiproject), but I'm not there yet. Schuminweb 11:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I look forward to seeing it. 70.109.52.109 15:54, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. AnonUser 15:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Silver line[edit]

Should some mention of future connection to the Silver line be made in the article? It's mentioned in the infobox, but possibly as a parenthetical alongside Red Orange and Blue? Burndownthedisco talk 15:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why. No changes are required to be made to Metro Center when the Silver Line eventually comes, and there's no big change in the station's function. Just another color on the lower level is all. The infobox link is probably sufficient for right now. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Shady Grove (WMATA station) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 July 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. There are several proposed options that received different levels of support, but it seems clear that this discussion won't result in a consensus. It sounds like there's some tweaking to do at WP:USSTATION: there's a disconnect between the guidelines as written and the community consensus, and between local consensus and the community-wide consensus on article titles. It's likely that solving the problem will require a more comprehensive discussion than this individual page move. Cúchullain t/c 14:31, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Metro Center station → Metro Center Station – This discussion covers all the stations of List of Washington Metro stations or Category:Washington Metro. There are currently two types of the word "station", the lowercase titles Greenbelt station and the uppercase titles Potomac Ave Station. What a mess. All the stations of Washington Metro should be moved in one form under the one naming convention. I support this move per evidence File:Metro Center pylon.jpg and commons:Category:Washington Metro station entrance pylons. Refer to Talk:Greenbelt Station#Requested move, Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2014 December, Talk:Greenbelt Station#Requested move 7 February 2015, Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2015 April and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Washington Metro#Question: naming conventions. Sawol (talk) 07:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom, but consistency is more important to me. The current inconsistently is entirely a product of mangled process and does not reflect reality. --BDD (talk) 17:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose – this has already been discussed! (see: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#Summary, etc. at WT:USSTATION) The pylons are not enough of a "reliable source" to be worth anything. The vast majority of U.S. rapid transit and rail stations should use lowercase "s" for "station". Pretty much the only exception are the various "Union Stations", as per the literature. Ergo, nearly all of the Washington Metro stations should be moved to match Greenbelt station, not the other way around! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:41, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to closer – I would suggest closing this as "No consensus" for now. It seems clear to me that there still needs to be further discussion as to exactly what WP:USSTATION means, and exactly how it should be implemented in cases like these... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate name proposal[edit]

So where does this leave WP:USSTATION? Failed experiment? --BDD (talk) 14:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't impact WP:USSTATION!! The consensus to capitalize "Station" is not the issue here. The issue here is simply about giving this article a clear name that avoids the need for a disambiguation page. The name "Metro Center Station" could be anywhere in the world ... this rename is just to make it clear that this is the one in Washington. The preferred use of "Station" over "station" still applies to other US railroad stations. The experiment has not "failed" - Bethayres (talk) 16:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, NO it doesn't! You have completely mis-characterized the "consensus", which was in fact for lowercase "station" for station names. (See the Summary!) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:04, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be dense ... WP:USSTATION clearly states that "... where the word "Station" is part of the proper name, it should be capitalized, which is the case here. Regardless of that, the pertinent point is that the renaming is to avoid a disambig page. Please stay focused on the key issue. Bethayres (talk) 17:20, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Metro Center [S/s]tation" is a "proper name"? According to who? You?... Perhaps you'll understand when I take this claim with a grain of salt (or two)... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Just read the sign! - Bethayres (talk) 18:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for proving that your didn't read the summary of the close of the WP:USSTATION RfC, as I suspected – one of the closing comments there was specifically that the pylons shouldn't be used as "weight" to assign naming, and that preferential weighting should instead be given to the operator's website and other sources... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not talking about capitalization—I'm talking about all of the editors here advocating for the pre-USSTATION parenthetical disambiguation. "Metro Center station" and "Metro Center Station" are both USSTATION-compliant, even if we disagree on which one it is. "Metro Center (Washington Metro)" is not, for the most part, since it omits "[S/s]tation". The relevant part of USSTATION this would roll back—and it's quite a core one—is "Generally, U.S. station articles should be titled by their common name, followed by 'station' if not already part of the name."
If any of these editors want to scrap USSTATION, or at least ignore it here, then that's there prerogative. I just wanted to emphasize that Metro Center (Washington Metro) does that, however. --BDD (talk) 19:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@BDD: just to clarify, is your position that it should correctly be moved to Metro Center station (Washington Metro)? If so, I could live with that. But as "Metro Center station" is not a unique name, the "extra disambiguation" (i.e. the parenthetical) seems necessary here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose it does need further disambiguation. I wish USSTATION prescribed a hierarchy of parenthetical disambiguation options instead of just laying them out. (Washington, D.C.) would probably be my first choice, simply because I like the idea of disambiguating with higher jurisdiction when that's unambiguous. But (Washington Metro) would be fine too. I still prefer uppercase Station, but I can recognize that I'm in the minority there. --BDD (talk) 19:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. Well, I just started a topic on something along those lines at WT:USSTATION. So please feel free to post any thoughts about this over there! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate name #2 proposal and further discussion[edit]

Looking at Category:WikiProject Washington Metro articles, there appear to be more articles that use the suffix "(Washington Metro)" than there are "(WMATA station)". I did see one or two "(Washington Metrorail)".Bethayres (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's because some other editors decided to eliminate the "WMATA station" suffixes from the station names last December, a move that should never have taken place. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 21:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear then, DanTD, you oppose the WP:USSTATION guideline? The WMATA moves were an early attempt to implement it, not some rogue action. --BDD (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I was under the impression that the WP:USSTATION guideline encouraged this naming convention especially for rapid transit systems. It was only in recent months that it seemed to be used to eliminate system-specific standards. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 13:27, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I totally agree with you that for rapid transit and light rail systems, I would absolutely prefer the "named system" parenthetical disambiguation for U.S. station articles (note: in Washington's case, that would seem to need to be "(Washington Metro)" over "(WMATA station)"...). But implementing that would definitely seem to require a "local consensus" at WP:USSTATION that is basically contrary to WP:AT. While I'd certainly be in favor of that, I can certainly understand why most are reticent to take that step and put WP:USSTATION in at least "partial opposition" to WP:AT... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:50, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
USSTATION was proposed for a while, but as far as I can tell, the full Wikipedia:Naming conventions (US stations) only dates back to last June and, from its earliest form, recommended "Foo station" rather than "Foo (System)". Certainly the latter was the practice prior to USSTATION, but I don't think it was ever codified. I could be wrong. --BDD (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it was either. I think it was just long-standing practice to use the parentheticals in the stations names (correctly, it should have been, as you say "Foo station (System)", but often, it was the completely awkward "Foo (System station)", like Alternate #2 proposal is, which is just all kinds of wrong...). OTOH, I'm really not sure a full-on RfC about getting rid of the parentheticals in the station name was ever held either, or if it was I don't think it was widely publicized (I certainly never heard about one...). So I'm wondering if it's worth it to try and hold an RfC to see if there's "local consensus" to stick with the use of the parenthetical "system" designation for stations, or not – based on what happened with Dicklyon's RfCs, I'm guessing there's not actually consensus to keep the parentheticals in opposition to WP:AT like that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think the core of the problem is that in many stations, such as the Washington Metro, the shortest form is really the common name: Metro Center, NoMa–Gallaudet, etc. I think those would really be the best titles in many cases. NoMa–Gallaudet U is unambiguous. There's the argument that it's opaque, but WP:RECOGNIZABILITY means a title needs to be recognizable to "someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area". I wonder if there would be consensus for that, resorting to old-style disambiguation when necessary. The descriptive "station" is a good way to avoid unnecessary parenthetical disambiguation, but it really doesn't have too much else to recommend it. --BDD (talk) 15:34, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Bold 'station' in lede (not title)[edit]

I'm sure someone can fling chapter and verse at me about how bolded 'station' in the lede is Officially Correct, but as a Metro rider it really feels wrong to talk about "Metro Center station" -- much worse than facial equivalents like "Glenmont station” or "Rosslyn station". Maybe the problem is there’s no Metro Center neighborhood, so it's not "the station in Metro Center -> Metro Center station"; maybe the problem is that the first sentence repeats the word "station" so quickly. Either way I'd like to introduce the station as just "Metro Center" without running into Official Policy objections. PixelatedVolume (talk) 01:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you think the panorama should go?[edit]

Do you think that: A: the panorama should go at the top of the article; B: the panorama should go at the bottom, without a section; C: or with a separate section? G13178m (talk) 01:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's no compelling reason for a panorama in the article - it takes up a lot of space and doesn't add much value. The existing Commons link is sufficient. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Metro_Center_station&oldid=1215416610"