Talk:Via Princessa station

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

restroom times[edit]

i don't think this is strictly relevant to the understanding of the station or its history and operations. -MJDestroyerOfWorlds (talk) 21:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Also, it would need to be cited and the information regularly monitored for updates. --RickyCourtney (talk) 22:23, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it could be helpful to people. If you're waiting a long time for a train, a restroom is one of the most important things to have. The sign should be enough for such uncontroversial information. Keeping information updated is always a concern on Wikipedia, but the mere possibility that information will become outdated doesn't preclude inclusion in the first place. Benjamin (talk) 23:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a travel guide. That information is better suited for a travel guide or Metrolink's website, not an encyclopedia article. --RickyCourtney (talk) 23:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's fine here. It's not a subjective opinion, or about a faraway place. It's a true fact about the subject of the article. Benjamin (talk) 23:57, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]