Talk:Jamaica Center–Parsons/Archer station

Bus connections

The bus connections section takes up more than half of the article space. Is the whole outline of services necessary? Tinlinkin 06:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the current state is a bit ridiculous. I would however list the buses without their routes and destinations. --NE2 15:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, get rid of all the bus information. I makes the article look far bloated, and since Wikipedia isn't a go-to source for bus info, then it should be removed. Same goes for all other articles. (Keep, however, the bus connections to airports.) --Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

No, whe should keep the bus connections. We have articles about many of the bus routes. --NE2 05:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually in this case, the bus connections should go to a chapter on the Jamaica Center Bus Terminal, which I'm working on in one of my sandboxes. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 03:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Station Layout

Aren't all four tracks southbound?
--SkipperRipper (talk) 05:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Of course, they are. Vcohen (talk) 06:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

To the original poster @ SkipperRipper: A talk page is about how to improve (or in some cases why to delete) a page/article/lemma on Wikipedia. Do you have a suggestion on what words or paragraph should be changed ?

To the first responder @ Vcohen: No, you are wrong here, within the context of Wikipedia and this lemma it is not evident that all tracks at this station are southbound. Why did you put your comment on here ?

You could have improved the article to avoid confusion.

You could have expressed why you think that southbend-head is evident.

You did not even try ... to explain your derogative and unsubstantiated answer, against a goodwilling contributor. As for me, i do not think that this is allright. --Paulbe (talk) 23:03, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Upon further investigation, I can find no confirmation that there is a southbound track on this station (none, zero, nil). Why are you, Vcohen saying "Of course there are.", and thus deliberately demeaning SkipperRipper, while you know (or could know) that this is not true ? --Paulbe (talk) 02:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I have no problem with @ Vcohen's answer to my somewhat rhetorical question. In fact, I respect "V" as an editor and I appreciated getting a quick response. And technically, this shouldn't have been on this talk page, a template was used for the station layout and was probably incorrect, leading to me starting this section (in error?). --SkipperRipper (talk) 04:07, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

External links

None of the websites under the header "External links" is official or authoritative (not even a recognized institute or newspaper or formally published book etc). So, they can have their place under additional sources or references, but they do not belong under External links, do they ? --Paulbe (talk) 22:36, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd say Google is a recognized institute, as is MTA. All the other links are for pictures, so I'd say these are authoritative. Any newspaper sources belong in "References", not "External links", so I don't see anything wrong with the current setup. epicgenius (talk) 16:15, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Not ready for GA

@Epicgenius and Happypillsjr: This article is not close to being a GA. The lead is too short, there is no history section, the station layout section is not sourced, some claims in the infrastructure section are not sourced, and more information could be provided in the Jamaica Center Bus Terminal section. I also suggest that more work needs to be done on the BMT Canarsie Line article–especially an expansion of the history section, an expansion of the lead, more sources for the extent and service section, and more information with sourcing in the service patterns and chaining sections. I think that both of these nominations should be pulled until they are ready to be reviewed. --Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:04, 27 June 2018 (UTC)