This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion. See also:
WikiProject Trains to do list and the
Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S.
historic sites listed on the
National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
In my opinion, two articles on the same building should be merged under whatever the current, or most common, name is (which I asume in this case is the Church Street Station). I would mention the second name in the lede to clarify.
Andrew Jameson (
talk) 11:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)reply
I just made the combined infobox and added it to the article. You can merge this away. ----
DanTD (
talk) 13:00, 16 November 2011 (UTC)reply
UPDATE - Since the two articles have been merged for the past two weeks or so, I'm going to close the discussion tonight. I'm surprised
the creator of this article hasn't participated in this debate. ----
DanTD (
talk) 04:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Primary topic
This article appears to be the clear
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the name in terms of page views, use in sources, etc. As such it should occupy the base name.--
Cúchullaint/
c 02:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)reply
The undiscussed reverting back to
Church Street Station (Orlando) has left behind a mess. It leaves the base name
Church Street Station as a redirect to the Orlando development, which defeats the purpose of the parenthetical disambiguation. Additionally,
Church Street Station (disambiguation) has been left unchanged, with the Orlando development as primary topic.
Page views are similar: in the last 90 days, this article got
3238 views, despite the moves, plus
405 in the last month since it was at "Church Street Station". That's more than all other potentially ambiguous articles combined:
Church Street Station (San Francisco) has only
765 views in 90 days, while
Church Street tram stop got
574 views and
90 Church Street got
1098. And that's without accounting for the fact that fewer readers would have found the latter two articles by searching for "Church Street Station".--
Cúchullaint/
c 14:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)reply
Since it looks like there'll be no response, I guess we'd better start a
move request.--
Cúchullaint/
c 13:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)reply
Requested move 14 May 2015
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.
OpposeChurch Street Station (San Francisco) comes immediately to mind to anyone in San Francisco. An area like travel the last thing we want to be doing is hiding the name of the city when people are trying to work out their travel arrangements.
Let me make a Correction here; All of your previous renames should be reverted, but I can live with
Tampa Union Station. ---------
User:DanTD (
talk) 03:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)reply
Oppose per the aboves. The disambiguation page should be primary; REVERT to the situation from 2007 through March 2015, where the disambiguation page was at the base name. --
65.94.43.89 (
talk) 05:30, 15 May 2015 (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.
Requested move 27 February 2020
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved as proposed per consensus. (
non-admin closure) –
Ammarpad (
talk) 09:13, 7 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Support. There is no other article on WP actually titled "Church Street Station". A hatnote to a dab page is more than sufficient.
Station1 (
talk) 07:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)reply
My statement is completely true: There is no other article on WP actually titled "Church Street Station".
Station1 (
talk) 23:01, 3 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Support simply based on Station1. In addition the nom is well put. Move, provide link to disambiguation page. I'd want to see if the editors active in railroading have some standard naming structure. It seems there must be multiple instances of a different stations with the same name. Basic WP policy though is expressed in the nom.
MrBill3 (
talk) 23:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. We can create redirects, like "Church Street Station (U.S. Postal Service)", "Church Street station (Muni Metro)", etc if it's needed.
epicgenius (
talk) 17:01, 4 March 2020 (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.
Stupidity has won
Stupidity on Wikipedia has won, and it's name is
Wikipedia:USSTATION. This is just another
Willis Avenue Station with nothing but the type of letter used to determine whether or not it applies to the former
Willis Avenue (IRT elevated station). There is no distinction anymore. Worse than that, it has spread beyond Wikipedia, such as into Google Maps. I not only dread the direction of Wikipedia, but the internet at large. ---------
User:DanTD (
talk) 13:11, 7 March 2020 (UTC)reply