Talk:Port Authority Transit Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Trains Portal 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
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject.

	Port Authority Transit Corporation is part of the WikiProject Philadelphia, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Philadelphia and the Delaware Valley on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	New Jersey Portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Issues in location of Philadelphia stations need to be resolved 2 History question 3 Article title 4 Category for renaming 5 Did a little cleanup 6 Merge

[edit] Issues in location of Philadelphia stations need to be resolved

The map is quite useful. It indicates Philadelphia stops. However, there are serious discrepancies between the map and the chart of stations. The map lists a few Philadelphia stations; yet the chart only indicates one station at Locust Street. Also, the upper portion of the map is cut off. Are other stations obscured by the illustration box's position?

It is misleading to place an intersection with Market Street in connection with the PATCO station at Locust Street. There are six blocks between Locust Street and Market Street. So, it is misleading to suggest that this station is convenient to the regional trains at the Market Street Station. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dogru144 (talk • contribs).

Not sure what version of the chart you're looking at, Dogru, but all five Philly stations are listed in the station list. And the map is complete. --Jfruh (talk) 14:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History question

If I'm reading the history section correctly, up until 1968, the Bridge Line ran from Camden up the Broad Ridge spur and Broad Street lines to Girard, while Broad-Spur Line trains ran down from Girard over the spur and into the Locust Street Subway. Is that true? Were the Bridge Line and the Broad Street Lines operated by the same agency at the time, or did trains from the two agencies run through the same stations? How were fares handled? --Jfruh (talk) 14:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article title

This article is about the the rail line, not the agency itself. Admittedly the rail line seems to be the only thing the agency operates, but still, shouldn't the title of the article be PATCO Speedline or some such? --Jfruh (talk) 14:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category for renaming

[edit] Did a little cleanup

• Seemed strange to have NJT and SEPTA connections listed above the fold while Amtrak was below, so condensed those into a single section and put them below the TOC.

• Clarified the nature of the connection at Walnut-Locust: the underground stations are contiguous.

• Moved the "History" section up: somehow seems more pertinent than which Teamsters local is currently representing the employees

I'm amenible to countersuggestions on any and all of this.

--Dr memory 21:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

I propose all of the station articles are merged here. Each are stubs and only have one or two sentences. Furthermore, it's unlikely that they will be expanded by anyone or even whether it could be expanded more. If that would make this article too long, then perhaps a List of Port Authority Transit Corporation stations could be created, though I don't see the need for all of the stations. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, with the modification that some of the stations link to articles that are NOT exclusively PATCO stations -- e.g. 8th and Market (PATCO Station) which is a redirect to 8th and Market (SEPTA Station), Walter Rand Transportation Center which is a big article of its own, and Lindenwold (PATCO Station) which is a redirect to Lindenwold (NJT STation) Those articles should be left alone. Rpresser 15:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

True, I didn't put the merger on them because they are more than just one little station. Hurricanehink (talk) 16:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

If anywhere, they should be merged into the places that the stations are in, not the line. For instance, Ashland (PATCO station) would be part of Ashland, New Jersey. --NE2 17:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, but what about Philadelphia? 3 articles being merged there wouldn't make much sense. Hurricanehink (talk) 18:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Those are equivalent to subway stations, and they have their history. Maybe a single article on the Locust Street Subway or Locust Street would be a good target, or they can be left alone. --NE2 20:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose merger. There is enough detail available for a (usually) short article on every station, with history of its origins, be that Locust Street Subway, PTC Bridge Line, or Pennsylvania Reading Seashore Lines, along with current station details including facilities, architecture, ridership, and available connections, all of which can be verified and cited. Attempting to merge all of the station articles here or elsewhere would be too irregular and too sticky a process. —CComMack (t–c) 01:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Very true, it could, but generally the station articles haven't been edited for months since they were first created. Based on that, it seems unlikely someone is interested in doing it now. If someone wants to expand them in the future, their page histories will still be there. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I would also oppose, as the articles, while not beautiful, have enough info to stand on their own. American Patriot 1776 03:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)