Talk:Gateway Transit Center (TriMet)

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

Map rendering strangely[edit]

Am I the only one who sees the text on the map all over the place? It's fine in the nominal sized version, but as it is in the article, all the text is way off where it should be.Noliver (talk) 06:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pic request[edit]

Add request even though there are a couple pictures, but really need one of the station/tracks. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rename[edit]

@SJ Morg: @Another Believer: @SounderBruce: @HiThereStranger: What are your thoughts on renaming this article to Gateway Transit Center (TriMet) ahead of Gateway North station's opening? I'm from the west side so not sure, but I feel the general station area is more commonly referred to by that name. It will prevent us from having to create a new article for Gateway North, as well as from having to use a longer name like "Gateway/Northeast 99th Avenue Transit Center and Gateway North station". Alternative ideas appreciated. --truflip99 (talk) 15:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like that idea, given the opening of the new, separate Gateway North station (set for next week). Also, this is a transit center, not just a MAX station, and that shorter version has always been used for bus service in most media (i.e. forms of communication; e.g. on destination signs of buses, signs at bus stops, schedules). – SJ Morg (talk) 19:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I agree with SJ Morg with this. It's the commonly used name (by locals, foreigners, and bus routes alike) and would be a good way to consolidate pages and really emphasize the transit center part of it. HiThereStranger (talk) 05:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+ Gateway North is just an extra station within the area of Gateway Transit Center so logically it makes sense too HiThereStranger (talk) 05:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also in agreement. The entire complex should be covered under a single article, and the proposed name makes the most sense under WP:COMMONNAME. I do think the Trains WikiProject as a whole should look at moving away from official names in situations where it just doesn't make as much sense, and this is one of those cases. SounderBruce 06:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is done. Thanks all! --truflip99 (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]