Talk:Pomona tram stop

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

Requested move 11 December 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: moved as proposed (and the old title will be redirected to Pomona#Train stations). No one is really arguing that the Manchester station is more important/notable/well known than the California stations, the argument was that, because both California stations are not simply titled "Pomona", they are not ambiguous with this article. This is a reasonable argument to make and the votes were split about 50/50, but this argument (that they are not ambiguous) was debunked by James who showed that plenty of reliable sources refer to either California station as "Pomona Metrolink station" (and to a less extent Iridescent who showed the signage is also ambiguous). As such, I found the arguments in support of the move to be significantly stronger than those in opposition and that there is a consensus to disambiguate this article title. On exactly how this article should be disambiguated there were several good arguments not to follow the frankly counterintuitive naming conventions, but ultimately no consensus on that issue, so we will default to the status quo and use "Pomona (Manchester) Metrolink station". I suppose I should also point out that UK stations are not the only articles to use the odd format of disambiguation 'inside' the title (looking at you, northeastern US townships). I do think that a good case has been made for using "X tram stop" for all stations in the Manchester Metrolink, but to get a consensus for that change a discussion will need to be had either at either Talk:Manchester Metrolink or the wikiproject talk page. A separate RM for Pomona railway station is probably also required to see if that title needs disambiguation (looks like it at a glance). Jenks24 (talk) 05:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Pomona Metrolink station → Pomona (Manchester) Metrolink station – This is an ambiguous title, and we should really decide which is the primary topic for the title Pomona Metrolink station:

I propose that Pomona Metrolink station be made into a disambiguation page to all three articles. epicgenius (talk) 15:21, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Oppose - The current Pomona Metrolink station is the only station with that name. The two stations in the US are not called Pomona Metrolink station, they are "Pomona (North) and "Downtown Pomona" respectively. The current hatnote sufficiently points people to those two stations if they've incorrectly ended up at this page. If there was actually another "Pomona Metrolink station" in the world, I would have no issue in supporting this move, but the fact of the matter is - this is a unique name. Jeni (talk) 15:24, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, until yesterday, the title of Downtown Pomona station was "Pomona (train station)", and it was only moved because I objected to the former title. And look at the "Downtown Pomona station" article – the name of the station is still "Pomona"; it is only called "Downtown Pomona" if it's to be distinguished from Pomona North.. epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Might I also point out that Pomona (Metrolink station) redirects to Pomona (North) station? epicgenius (talk) 15:31, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • A link used on the article (the US Metrolink site) doesn't back that up, nor does this official route map (PDF) Jeni (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Also, you're projected target fails the UK style of disambiguating. Jeni (talk) 15:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Might be nice to make "Pomona Metrolink station", "Pomona (Metrolink station)", and "Pomona (train station)" (also a US Metrolink station) go to the same page. What other title do you suggest? epicgenius (talk) 16:04, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • What you do with "Pomona (train station)" is of no relevance to this Metrolink article, "Pomona (Metrolink station)" isn't a disambiguation style used by UK articles, however I'd argue that should redirect to Pomona Metrolink station (current version) as it's the only one in the world with that name. If "Pomona (Metrolink station)" redirects anywhere else it is confusing to the reader. Jeni (talk) 16:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Fixed the target. epicgenius (talk) 19:00, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support move to unambiguous title Pomona tram stop and redirect of Pomona Metrolink station to Pomona#Train stations. In short, this station in the UK is not the worldwide primary topic. Due to the quirk of having two identically-named systems in different countries, "Pomona Metrolink station" is the name three train stations in different countries are commonly known by. A topic is primary if "if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." In other words, what matters here is not the names of the specific articles, which are determined by internal wiki convention, but the likely topic sought by readers. A review of reliable sources (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) shows that there is no clear global primary topic in regard to usage between the three stations. (If anything, the "Downtown Pomona" station is the primary topic, but the US naming convention allows for a different name.) The UK convention appears to require an ambiguous title for this page, so a common-sense exception must be made. If an ambiguous term has no primary topic, then that term needs to lead to a disambiguation page, and the appropriate disambiguation page here is Pomona#Train stations. I defer to users more familiar with UK style to determine what the new and unambiguous title of this article should be. See Iridescent's comment below.--Regards, James(talk/contribs) 22:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your arguments are all well and good, but there is only one Pomona Metrolink station in the world, and that is the article that is currently at Pomona Metrolink station. There are two stations in California that are named Pomona (North) and Downtown Pomona, (These are the names that are used by the Metrolink CA website officially)[1][2]
    Hell, even in the Google search that you linked to, the card on the right refers solely to the UK Pomona Metrolink Station, so even Google considers that to be the primary topic (Which is reasonable for it to do so, as there is only one in the world, as explained above!). Of the results in that search that are for the US station, you'll notice that the text states "Downtown Pomona Metrolink station". By your logic we should disambiguate York because there is a place that has York in the name, like New York? No, that would be stupid.
    In short, there is no ambiguous term here as there is only one station in the world called Pamona Metrolink Station. Please deal only in verifiable facts. If the US Metrolink doesn't even call it Pamona Metrolink station, then I don't even understand how you could even remotely consider there to be ambiguity here. Jeni (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • In regard to your example, I would not support moving York as there is a clear, usage-based primary topic there. While I do not believe that the Knowledge Graph is a reliable determinant of the primary topic, the card that appears when I search for "Pomona Metrolink station" and remove personalized search is for the "downtown" Pomona station. --Regards, James(talk/contribs) 08:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I have placed a notice of this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (UK stations). --Regards, James(talk/contribs) 23:15, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This would need to be discussed on Talk:Manchester Metrolink rather than here, but I'd strongly support moving all Metrolink articles to the ''Foo'' tram stop format we already use for the stops on every other tram network in the UK (Croydon Tramlink, Midland Metro and Nottingham Express Transit; Blackpool, Edinburgh and Sheffield don't have separate articles for each stop, but use "stop" rather than "station" throughout in the parent articles), and would at a stroke end the problem of disambiguating with the Los Angeles Metrolink. TFGM themselves use the term "tram stop" rather than "station" in Metrolink timetables and press releases (example), so it's not as if moving the articles would be confusing or counter-intuitive. ‑ Iridescent 09:34, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The other stations have different names, so are not directly clashing with Pomona Metrolink station. any possible confusion is already dealt with by the disambiguation header. However, the idea of moving the metrolink stations to the 'X tram stop' format is one worth considering. G-13114 (talk) 18:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The other stations are also named "Pomona." In fact, there are two of them, and they have to be disambiguated from each other; that's why they may seem to have different names from this station. epicgenius (talk) 01:47, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • How do you mean? The operator's own website refers to one station as Pomona (North) Station and the other as Downtown Pomona Station. Neither are called simply 'Pomona', so it's not obvious that there is an ambiguity to be dealt with. If anyone did get confused, then there is already a disambig header at the top of the article, so not sure what would be gained by moving the page. G-13114 (talk) 13:53, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, sort of. The signage at Pomona North and at Downtown Pomona actually says "Pomona" and "Pomona, CA" respectively, regardless of what the official names are, so it's understandable to assume that readers will be looking for them under the name "Pomona". ‑ Iridescent 14:49, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Looks like they need to get their signage sorted out. Not sure it's our job to change articles because they have confusing signage. G-13114 (talk) 15:04, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the consensus at WP:USSTATION was that article titles indeed should not be based on signage. However, what matters here is not the formal names of the station, but what they are referred to as in reliable sources. Here are just a few of many examples of the California stations being referred to as "Pomona Metrolink station", including by Metrolink itself as well as by LA Metro, one of Metrolink's governing agencies: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]--Regards, James(talk/contribs) 21:48, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per G-13114 and Jeni. Lamberhurst (talk) 13:20, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Jeni and G-13114. "Pomona station" is ambiguous, none of the other names are - they each have exactly one correct target. There are hatnotes in place for anyone who is confused. This change would make things more confusing, break links and introduce inconsistencies when there is neither need nor benefit to be gained from doing so. Thryduulf (talk) 14:10, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The "Downtown Pomona Station" is called Pomona Metrolink Station. Evidence that this article is the primary use of the term could be presented, but I don't think either one has that much worldwide coverage. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:03, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a move, as this station is not the "primary" (either, there's no "primary" in this case of these three, or it's the main Pomona station in California (which should itself be moved away from "Downtown Pomona station" – it's not called that anywhere almost anywhere...), but I oppose the proposed name – that's horrible! It should be either Pomona station (Manchester) or Pomona station (Manchester Metrolink). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Meh. I've checked the ridership figures, and Pomona station (California) has the lowest Amtrak ridership of any station in California; in terms of Metrolink (Southern California) ridership, it's probably in the middle of closer to the bottom of pack, with about 550 220 daily boardings. Based on all of this, I doubt there's a "primary" here, so it probably makes the most sense to move this article to Pomona station (Manchester), move "Downtown Pomona Station" to Pomona station (California), and leave Pomona (North) station where it is. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Please, not Pomona station (Manchester), that would not be in keeping with WP:NCUKSTATIONS. If it can't remain as Pomona Metrolink station the only possibility would be Pomona (Manchester) Metrolink station. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Or Pomona tram stop, for consistency not only with Wikipedia's articles on every other tram system in the UK but with what Metrolink themselves actually call the thing. Just saying. ‑ Iridescent 20:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Crickey – so you're saying UKSTATIONS and USSTATIONS have basically diametrically opposite (disambiguation) naming conventions?! That is... less than helpful. [sigh...] Actually, Redrose64, what would be wrong with Pomona Manchester Metrolink station (i.e. no parentheses, as per the "St Peter's Square Metrolink station" example)? ("Pomona tram stop" would obviously be fine too...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:NCUKSTATIONS predates WP:USSTATION by several years; indeed, the original version of USSTATION stated "it is based on the United Kingdom conventions, which in turn were developed originally by WikiProject London", and that text remained substantially unaltered until slightly over a year ago. So I really do not think that UK stations should bow to U.S. conventions. Particularly as it took over four years to get the U.S. one from a first draft to something that others would consider accepting.
    The parentheses should be included because that is how we disambiguate when the extra word (in this case "Manchester") is not part of the station name.
    As for Pomona tram stop, that would be inconsistent with all the other stations on the system, most of which are "Xxx Metrolink station" and a minority (those where Metrolink is not the sole user) are either "Xxx station" or "Xxx Interchange". Look at the members of the subcats of Category:Manchester Metrolink stations by location to see what I mean. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2016 (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.

No consensus[edit]

I don't see any consensus to move this page. Four votes against and four votes for. Can the admin please explain the justification for this move? G-13114 (talk) 13:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

G-13114, see the top of the RM above. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:31, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly can't see any consensus. At best the result of this RM was no consensus. Probably time to start a move review tbh. Jeni (talk) 15:35, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree! I believe this has happened to another page before, can't remember which but it has happened before. If I knew I'd have started a MR already. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 21:37, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give @Jenks24: a chance to review their decision to base it on the actual discussion, rather than their own opinion before going down the move review line. Jeni (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the supposed "edit war" going on at Pomona Metrolink station could lead to a consensus of some sort. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 18:05, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Jenks24 (talk · contribs) should not be making those edits; there was no such consensus. I would be in favour of reopening this move decision. Lamberhurst (talk) 20:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Give it up, folks – a tram stop station is not going to the "primary" article here. You need to think internationally. As neither station article is likely to be considered a "primary", under WP:TWODABS, both articles require disambiguation. Thus the move was correctly based on policy. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that Pomona Metrolink station should instead be redirect back to Pomona#Train stations though, as Jenks24 did, so I'm going to go ahead and do that again. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be less bad if it was actually in Manchester. Mr Stephen (talk) 23:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, FWIW, I tried to deal with that, when I suggested "Pomona station (Manchester Metrolink)" (which, to my mind, would be much better disambiguation title). But something about WP:NCUKSTATIONS apparently precludes it... [shrug] --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:16, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
TBH I'm not sure which side of the border it is and the usual map sites are running very slowly. (Magic is usually good for this but it's not bringing up the border). Mr Stephen (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's in the Metropolitan Borough of Trafford. The Salford/Trafford boundary is the centre of the Manchester Ship Canal. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right. Some distance from Manchester. Mr Stephen (talk) 20:07, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where should Pomona Metrolink station redirect to?[edit]

Now that this article title has been disambiguated, there seems to be a small "edit war" between redirecting the (potentially) ambiguous title between either this page or the disambiguation page. Before any of those editors get blocked, how about we use the space below to decide where that page should redirect to and should be left to redirect to? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 17:09, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because "Pomoma Metrolink station" could conceivably refer to either the "Pomona" station in California (which is served by Metrolink (Southern California) in addition to Amtrak) or the "Pomona" station in Manchester, UK (Manchester Metrolink), it should redirect to Pomona#Train stations (basically the disambig. page). AFAICT, the people reverting this change are trying to make a WP:POINT about a RM decision they don't agree with, which doesn't serve the international readership of this project at all. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 22:25, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
All of the links going to Pomona Metrolink station were going to the Manchester one, which are now broken. We used to have a perfectly good hatnote at the top of the Pomona Metrolink page, for anyone who might possibly be confused by it. And as nobody seems to know what the Californian stations are actually called (their own operator doesn't seem to know if the above discussion is anything to go by). The Manchester one is the only which unambiguously holds that title. G-13114 (talk) 15:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not true, see Special:WhatLinksHere/Pomona Metrolink station - there are presently twenty inward links, and none are from articles - most of them are from old discussions. All people need do is write {{mls|Pomona}}, which displays as Pomona, and the link is to the correct article. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Metrolink stop renaming proposal[edit]

A proposal has been made to rename all Manchester Metrolink stations from the 'X Metrolink station' format to the 'X tram stop' format. A discussion is being held at Talk:Manchester Metrolink#Metrolink station renaming proposal.. G-13114 (talk) 14:59, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pomona_tram_stop&oldid=1201617201"