Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This page is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cities (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject New York City (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject New York (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject New York, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject United States (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

MTA (New York)[edit]

Could members of this project take note that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority in New York is a state agency and not a city one, and also that the proper name for the agency is just plain "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" without any preceding "New York" -- although it's certainly OK to add "New York" if disambiguation is needed, as in "New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority" of "the Metropolitan Transportation Authority of New York".

It looks to me like every NYC Subway station article has at least one example of "New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority" in it. I've fixed a few, but it would be nice if members of this project could fix others when they're editing subway articles. Thanks. BMK (talk) 21:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh, while I'm here: Is there a reason that articles on NYC subway stations are only tagged for WikiProject Trains and not for this project as well? BMK (talk) 21:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
There's a separate sub-project, Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation, which is included in the TWP banner. You might want to drop a line there as well. Best, Mackensen (talk) 22:21, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
OK, I;ll do that. BMK (talk) 22:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC):
Already done. I also added a little more detail to that request. It pertains mostly to ridership references. Epicgenius (talk) 22:43, 28 December 2014 (UTC) (edit conflict on that page; removed) Epicgenius (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Technically, WP:NYCPT is a subproject of NYC as well. However, instead of the wikicode {{WikiProject New York City Public Transportation}}, the wikicode {{TrainsWikiProject|stations=yes|NYPT=yes}} is used rather than the standalone NYCPT banner on the majority of pages. I may be able to fix the NYCPT banners and the MTA references, though, when I'm feeling better. Epicgenius (talk) 22:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
See here for a list of articles to start with. Epicgenius (talk) 23:43, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
There's a problem I've been having with this issue. While the MTA is a state agency, it's an agency meant to deal with mass transit in and around New York City. It's not meant for Albany and the Capital District, or Buffalo and Niagara Falls or Binghampton, or Syracuse, or Rochester, or the Utica-Rome region, or the Adirondacks, etcetera. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
The MTA services 12 counties in New York, which encompass more than half of the state's population. There are 62 counties in the state, so by that measure, the MTA services a fifth. Transportation in other areas of the state is handled by other state agencies, such as the Capital District Transportation Authority, which serves the 4 counties in the Capital District. The Buffalo area is served by another state agency, the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority.

So what's your problem with the MTA? And regardless of your objections to the agency "New York City" is not any part of its name. BMK (talk) 17:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, you said it yourself. The MTA services 12 counties in New York, and those counties include the Five Boroughs, which it centers around. Having said that, if you decide to change them all to "New York" rather than "New York City," I won't object. But if you see a link that says "New York City MTA," you should just redirect it there and keep the redirects that way. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 21:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
No, "New York" is just as incorrect as "New York City", since the name of the agency is just plain "Metropolitan Transportation Agency". Saying "New York City's Metropolitan Transprotation Agency" implies either that it is a city agency or that it only serves NYC, which is not the case (NYC accounts for only 5 or the 12 counties served by the MTA). There are already redirects from "New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority" and "New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority" to the "Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York)" article, and that's fine for people who put in the wrong thing, to send them to the right article, but when identifying the agency in articles, adding either "New York" or "New York City" to the agency's name in just plain incorrect, like adding "Buffalo" to "Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority" or "Albany" to "Capitol District Transportation Authority". It's counterfactual, and that's not what we're about.

In short, I really don't understand your objection. BMK (talk) 21:42, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

That point is correct. It can easily also be "Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York metropolitan area)" since Metro-North serves Connecticut, too. The only other agency with the "MTA" acronym (correction: with that acronym and also named "Metropolitan Transportation Authority") is the Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Boston, which we know now as the MBTA (Massachusetts Bay etc.). I think that "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" will suffice, because New York's MTA is the only MTA that actively uses the name "Metropolitan Transportation Authority". Epicgenius (talk) 23:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, there's also MTA Maryland, but that's neither here nor there. I understand that it's not a city agency, and that it doesn't just cover transit in the city. I was just concerned that it might be misinterpreted as being for the whole state. But if that's not the case, fine. As for the redirects, I'm glad they're there. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 01:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I fixed my comment above. Wasn't what I intended... Epicgenius (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I'm starting on it right now. Epicgenius (talk) 19:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Fixed using WP:AWB. Epicgenius (talk) 03:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Great! Thanks. BMK (talk) 03:31, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Neighborhoods in NRHP listings[edit]

Who else has been correcting the neighborhoods in the various National Register of Historic Places listings articles, besides me? I might've got a few of them wrong, so I'd like to know if anybody else has been fixing them. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:40, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Battery Park City image[edit]

Would someone please go to User talk:WPPilot and tell him that this:

Lower Manhattan Island photo D Ramey Logan.jpg

is not a picture of Battery Park City, that it's a picture of Lower Manhattan including Battery Park and the World Financial Center (or whatever it's called now) and a tiny smidgen of BPC? He doesn't believe me. You might also check to see if he's put it back into the article again. BMK (talk) 07:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

please note that it is next to this photo:
Battery Park City from Hudson River

talk→ WPPilot  07:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, and that photo does not include Battery Park or the general skyline of the tip of the island. BMK (talk) 07:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Once again we know what BMK's insightful objective is, what is requested here is feedback from OTHER EDITORS, not BMK again, but none biased editors that are willing to chime in. Thank you! talk→ WPPilot  07:16, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
How can I be "biased" about what is and isn't Battery Park City? Or where Battery Park is? (Which is not, incidentally, part of Battery Park City). BMK (talk) 07:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_Park_City#mediaviewer/File:Nycmap-batteryparkcity.jpg

you always have to force your perspective in everything. You may have noticed I try to not taint the waters, it does not matter who like what, let others decide and provide a perspective without your guidance for once, ok! talk→ WPPilot  07:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, I know where Battery Park City is, I've been there. BMK (talk) 07:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

request withdrawn, BMK makes me sick and I do not want anything to do with this at all.talk→ WPPilot  09:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC) I would like to reach out to other editors in regard to the question regarding the photo above. It was placed on the page by another user some time ago and a new editor (above) says it does not depict the area it depicts properly. Photo 1, above is the aerial photo, photo 2 is taken from the water. please chime in. Thank you talk→ WPPilot  07:32, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

You're trying to make this about the second image, but, as I pointed out on the thread you started on Talk:Battery Park City, there was never an issue with it. It was never removed from the article, and I never commented on it except my brief mention abouve that, compared to yours, it was focused on Battery Park City. BMK (talk) 07:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
your claim is that the first image does not belong on the site, yet the other image was left on the site and it depicts a portion of with the first pic shows. Lets try this, lets see what the other people/editors here think without your forcing a POV into the issue. I know it will be hard for you but lets just try it this once and see what others think without your "preparation" of softening them up. Let then use there own minds to make the choice, ok.talk→ WPPilot  07:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Please don't misstate my views. My claim is that the first image does not belong on Battery Park City because its subject in not Battery Park City, but the tip of Lower Manhattan, with Battery Park in the foreground. I made no claim about the suitability of the other image, which is a complete red herring introduced into the discussion by you. BMK (talk) 08:04, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
You removed the aerial photo and did not touch the other photo. one that shows a lot less of the same area the aerial photo covers. You are relentless in driving home your POV and are willing to do so not matter what, ha BMK. talk→ WPPilot  08:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
In point of fact, I did not generally edit the article for images, so, no, I did not remove that other image, nor any of the others in the article. Are you really saying that my not removing any of those images means I in some way approve of them? In point of fact, the other photo shows more of BPC than yours does, but if I ever did a general edit of the article, I would probably try to find a better one. Please drop this red herring, it's ridiculous and has no bearing on whether your image should be in the article or not. (In fact, if editors think the second image shouldn't be there either, they should remove it, I could care less.) BMK (talk) 08:23, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I'm quite certain Wikipedia editors can make up their own minds, so there's no particular reason for me to stay away from any of the multiple discussion you've started. Is there any particular reason that when you set up those RfCs you haven't clearly identified one of the disputed images as being yours? BMK (talk) 08:07, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I want a unbiased review. It does not matter who took a picture if we are truly looking for the best photo, right? Do you feel that telling people I took one will dissuade the choice? I thought this was about the best photo, not who took it, but your showing a deep rooted need to inform people that I took one of them, that is really strange to me. talk→ WPPilot  08:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
No, I think that you should have told people in order to be perfectly transparent about everything. You say something like:

"There's a dispute about which of these two images is best for the article. Editor X prefers photo 1, which was the lede image until I replaced it with photo 2, which happens to be one of my own. Regardless of that, I think photo 2 is superior for reason 1, reason 2 and reason 3, while photo 1 is not as good for reason 4, reason 5 and reason 6. Please comment on which image you think is better for the article."

That puts all the cards on the table and allows people to comment knowing precisely what the situation is, instead of denying them the fact that you have a conflict of interest in regard to one of the images. BMK (talk) 08:19, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

You really do make me feel sick. In every since of the word and it has been this way since the first story you dominated a year ago, you make me sick. It is not worth subjecting myself to your dominating personality. I am done here. You just keep on dominating, someday BMK you can be the leader of the whole world if you keep telling yourself that. talk→ WPPilot  08:37, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Members of the project might also want to check out the dispute over a lede image (again, one of them is WPPilot's) at Talk:Manhattan. BMK (talk) 08:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
If you go to the Manhattan discussion, make sure you check to see if the thread has been restored from the damage WPP wrought on it, otherwise you won't get all the discussion or see both the images. BMK (talk) 09:14, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Don't waste your time, BMK is dead set on making sure my photos do not get used, please forget I live and take a long walk on a short pier. talk→ WPPilot  08:43, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
"Damage" never misses a chance to poke his stick at someone. I tried to disengage with BMK but he is so prolific that he demands I continue to be exposed to his redirect. talk→ WPPilot  09:31, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Project tagging for Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City[edit]

I've requested project tagging help from User:Yobot. Currently, WP:NYC encompasses 13,478 articles. According to a recursive search of Category:History of New York City on AWB, the category and its subcategories include 22,363 articles. Category:Geography of New York City contains 57,564 articles. I started using AWB to tag the talk pages, but it's too long and cumbersome to do this through AWB, especially since a bot can automatically give the article its rating from existing project templates. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

St. John's Park[edit]

Input needed here. BMK (talk) 22:39, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Still very much needed. There's a talk page consensus, which one editor refuses to follow. BMK (talk) 02:37, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Some articles to create?[edit]

Project members may be interested in creating articles for some of the following topics, which I encountered during my last trip to NYC but realized they did not have specific Wikipedia articles:

Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:25, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Photo requests in New York City suburbs in Connecticut and New Jersey: Japanese schools[edit]

Hi, guys! I don't know how many of you regularly go to Greenwich, Connecticut; Harrison, New York; or Oakland, New Jersey. If you do, please try to get photos of the entrance signs and/or buildings of the following:

I'm trying to get photos for the article "nihonjin gakko" and having photos of Japanese schools in the US will be very helpful! Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 05:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Somewhere on the Cross Bronx Expressway[edit]

So who can confirm this?

There's an image that's categorized as being an unidentified location in the city, but I'm convinced it's somewhere along the Cross Bronx Expressway judging by the Exit number. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 18:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about that. I've just used Street View on Google Maps along the Cross Bronx and its service road in both directions around exit 5A and I found no building like that with a sign on it - although I certainly could have missed it. The only McDonalds listed near 5A is at Castle Hill Avenue and Waterbury Avenue, which is not very convenient to 5A, which merges into the service road a few blocks farther on, at Olmstead Avenue, with the traffic moving away from Castle Hill Avenue. People who got off there looking for a MacDonald's would have to be directed to it, and I can't see any visible signs point to where it is. BMK (talk) 19:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
@DanTD, Beyond My Ken: That is because that sign no longer exists. Use the Time Machine feature on Google Maps Street View, though, and you will see it. Epic Genius (talk) 20:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Ah! Very good sleuthing! BMK (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Glad you found it. I hope to do more unidentified locations in the future. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 21:37, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect piers[edit]

So who here can fix them?

Speaking of incorrect descriptions of Lower Manhattan, I corrected some image a while back that was incorrectly described as City Pier A, when it was in fact the Whitehall Terminal and Battery Maritime Building. The only thing I didn't correct was the coordinates. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 19:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

  • I had a go at it. BMK (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks a heap. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 21:36, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Small, interesting tidbits from New York City history[edit]

As a lifelong resident of the city I've always maintained a fair amount of interest in the city, and I love discovering humorous and interesting little tidbits of history, like Moving Day (New York City). The last such page, Jacob Little, I liked enough that I brought it up to GAN, and I want to add this page to the to-do list, too, now! Anyone know of any other articles that, in their judgement, are interesting and unknown, like these two? ResMar 04:13, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

As the author of Moving Day (New York City), I hope that you were planning to involve me. BMK (talk) 04:17, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Not to worry, it's hardly a threat to get any work done right now—I have, for instance, intended to finish Shield volcano since late 2012 at least. Still I would put myself down as an interested party. I've intended to dive through some paper NYPL resources for a while now and I think this would be a fun research activity to occupy my time with. Would you consider doing a collaboration on this article?
As an aside, your name is purple-linked on my screen and I recall clicking on it in sometime in the last 30 minutes, as I recall the username, but I don't remember when or in what context. ResMar 04:53, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Sure, I have no problem with collaborating, I'd just like to be involved in some way.

I don't know what you might have linked on, I get around quite a bit. You could take a look at my contribs and see if anything there sparks your memory. BMK (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

How about the History of New York City series? History of New York City (1898–1945) has seen a lot of improvement in recent days, for example. Epic Genius (talk) 15:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Such articles are too large for me to be able to work with them comfortably—they graduate from "side project" to "research project", and from "fun" to "work". I don't trust myself to finish such large articles either anymore. ResMar 16:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, so that's too big. (I was planning on doing that and a couple of other articles just as long, like the Second Avenue Subway.) We can do Flatiron Building, which, having many references and a substantial history section, doesn't need that much work. Epic Genius (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Actually, it really doesn't need much of anything at all. BMK (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Besides some references for the unreferenced paragraphs, I mean. For example, paragraph 2 of the section entitled "The site" is unreferenced, and so is the last sentence of the third paragraph of "Design and construction". But you are right, it doesn't need much at all, and it is easy to GA nom that article. Epic Genius (talk) 23:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Para 2 of "The Site" is sourced. I either forgot to put in the ref, or the ref got separated from the graf - it all comes from the Alexiou book. I've fixed that. BMK (talk) 23:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
The last sentence of the 3rd graf of "Design and construction", the one about the angle, is not mine, but I've sourced it and added a ref. BMK (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, the article looks totally referenced now. It is a good candidate for GAN. Epic Genius (talk) 13:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)