Talk:Northfield station (Waterloo)

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

Requested move 9 March 2018[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 to move the articles to the proposed titles at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 17:22, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– It has been pointed out that the stations bear more resemblance to stops. "They are not enclosed and only partially covered, many are roadside or in the right of way, no fare gates". WP:CANSTATION recommends "where sources consistently use the term "stop" instead of "station", use the form "[NAME] stop" instead". Ion's own official website refers to them as stops: "ION stops will share a set of common elements". It would also be more consistent with Toronto's similar surface LRT stops under construction such as Birchmount stop. BLAIXX 22:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree, the 'stop' nomenclature was phased out some time back and the rideion.ca site is now out of date - a better official site would be this part of grt.ca, which clearly uses 'stations'. Radagast (talk) 23:07, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Disagree: Stations generally have notability whereas stops are minor parts of a transit system's infrastructure and all of those articles should be removed. Services stop at stations! Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:38, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this is just a matter of English because to me, station implies some sort of building and not a bus-like shelter on the side of a road (as seen in the Queen station (Kitchener) photo). I am wondering if there is a difference between Ion and Line 5 Eglinton or are the stops in Category:Eglinton Crosstown line stations just named incorrectly? Thanks, BLAIXX 01:24, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Queen (and Kit City Hall and Victoria Park and Central) is unusual in that it's on the side of the road combined with a sidewalk, but that's the unidirectional loop design in Downtown showing its effects. The vast majority of the stations are mid-road with platforms on the two sides serving both directions, as will the surface Eglinton stations. Radagast (talk) 01:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps that was a bad example, Grand River Hospital station on Ion will be just like Birchmount stop on Line 5, yet one is named station and the other stop. The places on Line 5 on wikipedia named station are located underground and have enclosed building associated with them, such as Oakwood station. BLAIXX 02:16, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Well, it appears Eglinton is using two different terms so their riders know what to expect on arrival (a basic surface facility vs a below-grade enclosed tunnel). As ALL of Ion is at-grade, there's only a need for one term; the literature and discussion I'm seeing appears to prefer 'station' to 'stop', particularly recently. Radagast (talk) 17:03, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, official sources tend to use neither word to refer to the specific location (it is always called "Queen", never "Queen station" or "Queen stop"). I have shared this discussion with WP:CANSTATIONS for some additional feedback. BLAIXX 17:57, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Agree: The ION system does not have stations, it has stops. There are no fair gates, no access-controll measures. They are essentially a larger bus stops. Also if Grand River Transit themselves are calling them stops, than they should be called stops. Saboteurest (talk) 22:35, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Agree: as per Saboteurest and Blaixx. If there is no significant infrastructure and they are referred to in official sources as stops, then the article titles should be "<name> stop". As part of a light rail system, they are notable whether they are called stops or stations, but WP:COMMONSENSE helps us differentiate between a station with entrances, exits, significant shelter, etc. and something that is little more than a place to board and alight. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Semantics aside, we should just use what they use on the official page [1]. They list the Ion stops (not stations). In Toronto the crosstown has both stations (physical building) and stops (similar to a fancy bus stop) in their official language so it matches. Mattximus (talk) 13:08, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But then again, [2] calls them stations... so I don't know... Mattximus (talk) 13:09, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is my argument - we should be using the terminology within the system itself. My experience as a resident who's following this closely is that 'station' is what people are using, but I realize anecdotal reports aren't verifiable. Radagast (talk) 15:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have a good source for a common name and the official names do not have a disambiguating suffix. Apart from naming them in the form "Mill (Ion)", we should choose a suffix that best describes what the places are. In may opinion, calling them stations would be slightly misleading. BLAIXX 00:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is not consistent with WP:CANSTATION. "Generally, Canadian stations should take the form of '[NAME] station'...followed by parenthetical disambiguation if required." --Natural RX 19:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, this proposal is a no-go per WP:CANSTATION. It's also worth pointing out that Category:New York City Subway stations in Brooklyn are out of step with WP:USSTATION and will be updated eventually.--Cúchullain t/c 13:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. The condition at WP:CANSTATION for using "Xxx stop" instead of "Xxx station" is that sources consistently use the former. In this case, the system is too new for there to be many sources about it, and they appear to use "station" as or more commonly than "stop".[3][4] There's no firm difference between a transit "station" and a mere "stop"; most of these Ion facilities look pretty indistinguishable from "stations" used by other systems in Canada and elsewhere. This should be revisited once the system is fully established and we can get a better sense of what sources are using.--Cúchullain t/c 13:28, 15 March 2018 (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:Northfield_station_(Waterloo)&oldid=1204337331"