Talk:Taxicabs of the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] DC meter suspension
"The zone system was instituted shortly after World War II when meters were first authorized, when a temporary suspension of the meter system was imposed." I don't get it. Were they authorized or suspended? --Gbleem 12:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gypsy Cab in New York
I'm watching a rerun of CSI NY and they have a dead gypsy cab driver. What about gypsy cabs in NY,NY? --Gbleem 12:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
There was a gypsy cab that was featured in the 1979 movie Going in Style. It was used for a plan to rob a bank in the Manhattan area. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.118.108.222 (talk) 20:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] New York City
I have merged in the separate article to eliminate a huge overlap. The entire US article is within recommended size limits so there is no need to splinter the information. 'Semi-formal' is not suitable to the article and has been moved back. TerriersFan 17:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merged taxi articles
Hi Terriers Fan - I agree with your assessment that the NYC taxicab article shared a lot of overlap with the US taxicab article. However, the New York City taxi is something of an icon in its own right. Taxis in Singapore and Hong Kong have specific articles about them. Given the high degree of regulation and uniqueness of NYC taxis, and their status in NYC's transportation mix, it makes sense that NYC taxis have a specific article covering them, too. Also, after merging the NYC taxi article into the US article the result is too lengthy and cumbersome and begs for breaking down the article in sub-articles again.
The best way to resolve the problem of overlap is to edit the content of the articles. The US article should discuss generalized, national issues, while the NYC taxi article should cover issues specific to NYC (of which there are many).
For these reasons I'd kindly ask you to undo the merge and address your legitimate concerns by editing the texts of the two articles. (I have just spent many hours overhauling the Transportation in New York City article in much the same way; yes, it takes time, but the final result is better quality.) Thanks for your consideration. Momos 19:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing your views and the work that you are doing on the transportation article. Before I started the rationalisation of taxi articles they were splintered all over the place. They now form a coherent structure with most countries being in Taxicabs around the world and individual articles for separate countries where appropriate (Singapore is an independent city-state and Hong Kong was independent and now has special status). If this article gets expanded to a point where it is above the recommended size we can split sections out but we are not there yet, particularly once I have edited doen the NYC section, which it badly needs.
- You say "The US article should discuss generalized, national issues" - I couldn't disagree more. What that would mean would splitting out a series of city articles, for no purpose, and we would be back in the splintered state that I moved us from. Similar considerations apply to London and Taxicabs of the United Kingdom. I would add BTW that the 'Semi-formal' section falls outwith the scope of the taxicabs series.
- There are also two other factors favouring larger, unified articles:
- Readers find it much easier to get what they want from larger, properly indexed articles than having to read across several.
- Splintered articles have serious problems of maintenance to ensure consistency across all versions of the same topic. HTH. TerriersFan 23:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- TerriersFan- Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I've taken the liberty of renewing the NYC taxi article, but inspired by your points I've made a broad effort to frame it as an extension of the Transportation in New York City article rather than the Taxis in US article (to avoid the problem of splintering). You are correct that splitting out a series of city articles on taxis in the US would be entirely inappropriate. This is especially true because the story of taxis in US cities is essentially the same from one place to another, with differences only in fare structure (which are best addressed in one US article, as you rightly argue). New York is an exception, however, and not only because it overwhelms the US taxi article but because it is a genuinely different story: from labor strikes in the 1930s, to immigration and the cabbie workforce, to the racial politics of New York and the highly regulated medallion system, to the pop culture icon of the "yellow cab" -- these are all unique to the New York taxi and are not part of the taxi story elsewhere in the US. To cover this with the proper scope requires a separate article that I hope others will better develop from what currently exists. Also, you are mostly right about the semi-formal section; I've pared it down and don't totally oppose its elimination altogether. The original text for this article was written by someone who sounds like they have a gripe with the nyc taxi industry -- perhaps a cabbie? Momos 05:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, but this article was settling down nicely until you started to carve it about. We edit on here by concensus; if you wish to change the status quo you discuss and obtain concensus first then change later. Other editors can see the arguments - please leave things alone until we have other views and can establish the concensus position.
- TerriersFan- Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I've taken the liberty of renewing the NYC taxi article, but inspired by your points I've made a broad effort to frame it as an extension of the Transportation in New York City article rather than the Taxis in US article (to avoid the problem of splintering). You are correct that splitting out a series of city articles on taxis in the US would be entirely inappropriate. This is especially true because the story of taxis in US cities is essentially the same from one place to another, with differences only in fare structure (which are best addressed in one US article, as you rightly argue). New York is an exception, however, and not only because it overwhelms the US taxi article but because it is a genuinely different story: from labor strikes in the 1930s, to immigration and the cabbie workforce, to the racial politics of New York and the highly regulated medallion system, to the pop culture icon of the "yellow cab" -- these are all unique to the New York taxi and are not part of the taxi story elsewhere in the US. To cover this with the proper scope requires a separate article that I hope others will better develop from what currently exists. Also, you are mostly right about the semi-formal section; I've pared it down and don't totally oppose its elimination altogether. The original text for this article was written by someone who sounds like they have a gripe with the nyc taxi industry -- perhaps a cabbie? Momos 05:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- To show willing, and in an effort to compromise, I have replaced the NYC section with the text from your separate page with the exception of 'Semi-formal' which is more suited to the transportation article. TerriersFan 18:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] NYC - citations
I have marked up some contentious statements with (fact) tags. These need to be sourced rapidly or will be removed - please see WP:CITE. TerriersFan 19:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
