Talk:George Washington Bridge Bus Station

Buses: New York Mid‑importance

	Buses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Buses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of buses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusesWikipedia:WikiProject BusesTemplate:WikiProject Busesbus transport
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation (assessed as Mid-importance).

New York City Mid‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Share taxi#Jitney|jitneys]] The anchor (#Jitney) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

why "George Washington Bridge Bus Terminal"?

the facility's home page at Port Authority's website (http://www.panynj.gov/commutingtravel/bus/html/gwb.html) and throughout the facility's section of the site uses "George Washington Bridge Bus Station" as the appellation.

why is article entitled "George Washington Bridge Bus Terminal"?--68.173.2.68 (talk) 07:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't have been. It appears the mover thought that it was the proper name as the signage at the adjacent 175th St subway station uses "terminal", but as is noted here, the name is actually GWB Bus Station. I moved it back, though there may be a few dozen links to the redirect. oknazevad (talk) 18:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on George Washington Bridge Bus Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:40, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on George Washington Bridge Bus Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lede image

On April 11 of this year, the long-term lede image for this article -- inserted in the info box in December 2013 -- was replaced. I restored the previous lede image today, and the editor who made the insertion is now attempting to restore their image.

(1) Long-term lede image, from December 2013

(2) Image replacing it on April 11

In my opinion, the first image adequately represents the building and its rather unique design, whereas the second image shows virtually nothing of the building except the letters over ~~Ft. Washington Avenue~~ Broadway, over which there is only the roadway used by buses, but no building. Further, the second image is canted at an angle, something more usual for "artistic" images rather than the kind of straight-forward illustrative images which are useful in an encyclopedia.

I would like editors here to comment on which of the two images is more appropriate for the article's lede. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind if the image is not the lead photo of this page (which previously was). All I appreciated is if my photo was at least moved somewhere instead of being removed (which was previously lead. I could always grab a better photo angle that represents the renovated GWBT for lead or not. bebo2good1 (talk) 05:27, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We'll see what other editors have to say, but, frankly, I do not think your image is of sufficient quality to be used anywhere in the article. It represents neither the building, nor the renovation, in any way that's helpful to the reader. I can understand your attachment to it because it's your photo, but please try to look at it from an objective point of view. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:30, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This whole building is apart of the GWBBS and is perfectly renovated as shown and I do feel it is sufficient information. Unlike your photo which mostly represents the side of it, long before renovation occurred. I took it this wide to have a better view with it and the Bridge. But I could always get a better photo if this isn't sufficient from your eyes. But I agree, we will let the others judge.bebo2good1 (talk) 06:03, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There was no extensive renovation to the outside of the building, except for replacing windows etc., nothing that makes the 2013 image outdated -- all the real changes took place inside and in the bording area. I could go there tomorrow and take a shot from the same angle and it would essentially look the same. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted an image that I just took about an hour ago from the same vantage point, and cropped to match. It shows that there were no obvious changes made to the exterior of the building during the renovation. Also, a correction: your image shows the roadway over Broadway, not over Ft. Washington Avenue, as I wrote above. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We have a different view of the GWBBS. I chose my view to show some of the outside work that was done of the renovation, and a bit more representation of it along Broadway, rather then just a side view. Even if the station wasn't totally renovated outside. Since I'm not sure if others will input on this, I will settle to not keep my photo as the prime subject for the page and instead offer a different view somewhere along the article.bebo2good1 (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It all depends on the quality of the image, as the article has a fair number of images already -- although we could start a gallery.

I'd also like to suggest that another image I took today:

might be a better lede image. It shows more of the architecture, as well as the "GWB Market | Mercado" lettering. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:48, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted neutral pointers to this discussion on the talk pages of WikiProject New York City and WikiProject Buses. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:55, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Voting for number 4 here as most comprehensive/encyclopedic/useful angle. $ɱ$ (talk) · vbm · coi) 03:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Or number 3, but 2 is distorted and perhaps too HDR, while 1 has too many distracting vehicles.

ɱ

(talk) · vbm · coi) 03:08, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I too like #4 best. It shows more than 1 and 3 l, from a better angle than 2. oknazevad (talk) 14:29, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
!vote (4). Useddenim (talk) 22:36, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the basis of the pretty clear consensus above -- including my own opinion, 4 editors expressed approval of image #4 -- I am going to change the lede image to #4. Beyond My Ken (talk) 10:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]