Talk:B Division (New York City Subway)

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

Service names[edit]

Current or recent names are bolded. --NE2 09:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changes in services[edit]

Current
  • A
  • BB → B → moved from Washington Heights to Bedford Park (swapped with C) → moved from West End to Brighton (swapped with D)
  • <CC> → C → moved from Bedford Park to Washington Heights (swapped with B)
  • D → moved from Brighton to West End (swapped with B)
  • E
  • F
  • GG → G
  • HH → merged into and split from A → CC → H → Rockaway Park Shuttle
  • split from F → V
  • split from N → W
Former
  • AA → K → merged into C
  • HH → abandoned (Court)
  • NX → discontinued
  • split from QT, RR → EE → merged into N
  • 3 → T, TT → merged into B
  • 5 → SS → abandoned (Culver)
  • 6 → abandoned (Fifth)
  • 8 → merged into 1, 2
  • 9 → abandoned (Flushing)
  • 11 → MJ → abandoned
  • 12 → abandoned (Lexington)
  • 13 → abandoned (Fulton)
  • 14 → JJ → KK → K → discontinued

Width(s)[edit]

According to the infoboxes that I found in the articles listed in this template, the cars are 10 ft 0 in (3,050 mm) wide. What gives? Peter Horn User talk 19:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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: Not Moved Mike Cline (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


– I was adding the requests page by page, but later I noticed this template. There is no reason to disambiguate these pages, per our guideline "(New York City Subway [car])" is unneeded, as the place to be moved redirect there. Although in some cases this request is unneeded i wanted to search for consensus if necessary. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:09, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. I'll jump on the oppose the B Division bandwagon per the comments below. —  AjaxSmack  00:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "B Division", there are multiple uses (especially in sports, and sometimes in military naming), and I am surprised the disambiguation page was never completed. "Hi-V" and "Lo-V" could probably use disambiguation as well, but those might go at "(disambiguation)". I will note that the meaning of Lo-V and Hi-V are "low voltage" and "high voltage", and these terms are used for things other than subway cars in the same way out in the world, (and also for velocity) ; "AB Standard" is also used in standards so would also need a disambiguation page (probably at "(disambiguation)") -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 06:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • First of all the "oppose" includes all of the pages, which is not the case in your comment, for example Bluebird Compartment Car or Q-type Queens car, both have no other uses. Now, although Hi-V/Lo-V may also refer ti high/low voltage, a hatnote will serve for that purpose, per WP:TWODABS. The suggestion to include the "disambiguation" is for? Please give articles that indicate why the pages "B Division (disambiguation)" or "AB Standard (disambiguation)" should be created, because I searched for articles that could be ambiguous, for example ME-1 (New York City Subway car) and ME-1, and I found none or one or two that can be linked by hatnotes. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, the oppose only applies to the cases I outlined. That is why all !votes require rationales, to explain what cases the initial highlight applies to. I never said I opposed all, since the explaination clearly states what the opposition is to. I don't see how you could have misinterpreted it, since it's how many people write their opinions in such surveys. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 07:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Martyr's Memorial B-Division League which calls the division "B-Division", though the article remains at a fully disambiguated name. Moldovan "B" Division which is also disambiguated with the country demonym, as is Tuvalu B-Division, amongst others. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 07:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any standard established by an Assembly Bill (such as found in state assemblies) can be so referred to as an assembly bill standard, assembly law standard, AB standard. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 07:13, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reminding me of another; "MS Multi-section car" could refer to any type of railroad car. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And thank you by continue giving no reasons and just delaying a community consensus. Will you continue evading my questions and acting as if you were a newbie or you are going to give a real reason? Read WP:TITLE and WP:DABS or otherwise, stop editing here. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support oppose all. We shouldn't unnecessarily disambiguate titles but I'm not convinced that removing the text in parentheses adheres to WP:CRITERIA which states: A good Wikipedia article title has the five following characteristics.... Recognizability – Titles are names or descriptions of the topic that are recognizable to someone familiar with (though not necessarily expert in) the topic. Would a layman reader understand these terms without having an expert knowledge of the NYC subway system? Zarcadia (talk) 23:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think these terms are recognizable, therefore change to oppose. Zarcadia (talk) 21:54, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all. And opppose related multiple move request here. Recognizability is my major concern, how it shows up in a search. (The latter in particular just seem like random collections of letters and numbers, of which I am sure there are plenty of replications in commercial models of different products, roads, etc.) These are highly technical terms, and a disambiguator is very useful. A person who doesn't get an exact name right for the cars (or something else similar sounding), can nonetheless hone in on (or avoid) the article when it shows up in a search list with the "New York City subway car" disambiguator in brackets. Picking and choosing between which titles should or shouldn't have a DAB isn't particularly neat. It would be nice to have a standard title template for New York City subway cars. If people find that too long, I might go for simply "(subway car)" as sufficient. Walrasiad (talk) 16:40, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK we need a break here, I mean, check the opposes they are lame in my opinion. First of all, I requested this in November 4, to date nobody has even take for consideration to create a disambiguation page for B Division, and guess what it still redirected here. Eleven days and nobody has given a real shit about that. And the opposes were because "it may mean multiple things", well, are you going to work on that? The same applies to "Low-V".

Now we have "Deck Roof", "Hi-V", "MS Multi-section car" and "BU cars", and people crying the same: "MS Multi-section car" may refer to "any kind of car". Do we have an article about the French/Mexican/LA, etc. MS Multi-section car, or any other fucking "MS Multi-section car" here? No, if that concept is so ambiguous why it doesn't have a page for other MS Multi-section cars? All those four pages still in red.

We have Bluebird Compartment Car that can be confused (I don't know how) with a company, and now the most stupidiest thing I've heard here "I oppose Q-type Queens car" (D-type Triplex and Flivver Lo-V are included here). The reason? Nobody has given one, especially because I doubt that "Q-type Queens car" may refer to the cars that Elizabeth II and Margrethe II use to travel, rather than a borough. People here apparently cannot understand in simple terms WP:PRECISION and WP:DAB. "The Day After Tomorrow" is not a concept that is about a film, is about a day that will happens in two days; "Price Tag" is not a concept that is about a song, is about a label; "Rumours" and "The Dark Side of the Moon" are not concepts that are about albums, they mean, respectively, "a piece of purportedly true information that circulates without substantiating evidence" and "the far side of the Moon that is permanently turned away from the Earth", but guess how we work in Wikipedia:

As simple as this. We don't work to make other people life easier, we work here for convenience, we have a MOS, and you are ignoring it. Other people have understand this, why you don't? Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:13, 16 November 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:B_Division_(New_York_City_Subway)&oldid=1199266501"