This is an archive of past discussions with User:Epicgenius. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Subway Station Ridership 1940-1995
Someone shared images of a NYCT Report titled "Annual Subway Registrations 1940 to 1995" published in October 1996. Do you think it makes sense to create ridership graphs like this? I saw them used for transit ridership somewhere on Wikipedia. This report has every station in this time period, included closed stations and removed elevated stops. There are so many interesting goodies, like the very steep ridership drop at Willets Point after the World's Fair. Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 02:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
@Kew Gardens 613: Are you sure you want to do it for every station? Sure, it's possible, but it takes a while to create all these graphs. If you included just the major stations, or only the stations with ridership sections, then this can be feasible. I think it makes sense for major stations or stations with weird ridership trends (like Willets Point or Aqueduct Racetrack) but not for others. epicgenius (talk) 02:54, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Epicgenius/Archive/2019. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
On 9 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kissena Park, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during a grand jury investigation into land-sale fraud at New York City's Kissena Park, Queens borough president Joseph Bermel resigned and fled the U.S. the day before he was scheduled to testify? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kissena Park. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kissena Park), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you for AirTrain JFK, "about the AirTrain, an airport rail link to and from JFK Airport in Queens, New York City. It's short; it only travels between the airport and two nearby railroad/subway stations, where you have to transfer once more to get into Manhattan. The original plans called for the railroad to stretch from Manhattan to JFK Airport, so the transfers were a compromise. The AirTrain's also ridiculously expensive ($5 per trip unless you're riding between two airport terminals, in which case it's free)."! - I have a PR open, btw ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.
We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.
We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.
Saw you added a chunk of text to the article. If you have designs on a GAN, I'd be happy to help sometime. Some stuff I've been meaning to do on that one, and someone else working on it might spur me on. :) — Rhododendritestalk \\ 00:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Rhododendrites, Thanks for the offer. I wasn't initially planning for that to be a GAN, but now that you mention it, that would sound good in the future. I might work on the Carroll Gardens article once I finish adding similar data to other NYC neighborhoods, though. epicgenius (talk) 01:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@Ɱ: Sure. I'll help out when I can. The track map is the easiest part. If this is going to become a new article, we should frame it so people know it is part of the main GCT and not a separate station. I don't have any other major railway station articles I can compare this to, though, so it would be tough.Also, a point regarding the title, it doesn't really follow WP:USSTATION. It should really be Grand Central station (LIRR) or Grand Central Terminal (LIRR). The first one I prefer because it is a standard disambiguator and because that'll be the name of the LIRR station, but then it doesn't fit with the main article's name. The second one sounds like it's a different station, which isn't. But that's a debate for another time... epicgenius (talk) 20:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I've been debating the title too, mostly followed the existing commonscat, but it will be a terminal, not a station. And yeah I can't think of any similar relationship existing between GCT and the Lirr terminal here. I've had similar issues talking about the Briarcliff Manor Public Library, which has an old and new section serving different purposes, built at way different times. As far as how this new terminal is to be addressed, I can't find any official name for it. Concept art just labels it 'Grand Central Terminal', but that might not be MTA-approved. As well, some MTA docs refer to this as a terminal separate from GCT so... I think we should talk about it generically until we have official word? ɱ(talk)21:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
There's also the disparity that Penn Station serves multiple railroads, yet is largely considered one entity, but GCT is considered wholly separate from its adjoining station of Grand Central-42nd Street. By the logic of the latter argument, GCT (LIRR) would be considered wholly separate from the MNR terminal. ɱ(talk)21:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
I know of the separate subway stations! I think they're partially considered separate because their tracks, platforms, and concourse aren't shared, like the MNR-lirr GCT situation and unlike the Penn situation. ɱ(talk)21:34, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Well, the subway stations have completely different turnstiles so they are completely separate .Going back to your original point, I'd see how the Metro-North and LIRR could be considered separate. That's partially because the LIRR platforms are such a deep level. But they are connected within the same station building, so it could technically be one article. If I were to split it, it would mainly be because of the size of the main GCT article.By comparison, London's St Pancras railway station contains several different sections of the station for through Thameslink trains, international high-speed, and terminating commuter trains, which are physically separate. But these are part of the same station and are all covered on one article. On the other hand, the adjacent London King's Cross railway station does have its own article, but that's because it is a completely different building with its own platforms. There's also articles for King's Cross Thameslink railway station (now closed) and King's Cross St Pancras tube station (the metro station serving the two stations). epicgenius (talk) 21:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm now thinking it shouldn't use a proper name because it really hasn't been given one. The more I'm reading now, the more I'm convinced it's being treated as a rather separate entity that links to GCT. The MTA, NYT, and some other papers I've read today seem to just refer to it as a new station/terminal beneath Grand Central, none have so far talked about it as part of GCT or an addition/new connection. I think the separate concourse being built is the biggest key into the idea that it's intended to act and be considered separately. ɱ(talk)23:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, but still, this is more commonly associated with the Grand Central area than anything else. The title should probably reflect that, at least for now. In planning documents the LIRR station is still considered to be "Grand Central Terminal". epicgenius (talk) 23:51, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
I suppose, but I think going with WP:OR and not presuming an official title is more important than making it work with the pipe trick. ɱ(talk)14:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Ɱ, if you have the title as "Grand Central LIRR terminal", wouldn't that also be presuming an official title? I get that we shouldn't have original research, but WP:COMMONNAME is a larger factor. If the station is commonly known by that name, it doesn't really matter what the official title is, because most people will be searching for this article under what it is most closely identified with. Which in this case is "grand central station lirr" or something similar. So either "Grand Central (LIRR terminal)" would be fine as well as "Grand Central LIRR terminal". epicgenius (talk) 14:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
I see "Grand Central LIRR terminal" as reading like "LIRR terminal at Grand Central", which is generic, while readers used to "Forest Hills station (LIRR)" assume the official name is "Forest Hills", and will assume "Grand Central (LIRR terminal)" means "Grand Central" is the official name. ɱ(talk)14:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Ɱ, I see what you mean. I didn't read it that way, I just thought Grand Central (LIRR terminal) would be read exactly like Grand Central LIRR terminal, as in "Grand Central LIRR terminal". Whereas Forest Hills station (LIRR) would be read as "Forest Hills LIRR station", and so on.
Welcome to the sixth newsletter from the Growth team!
The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.
Plans for the next three months
The Growth team has been working on features to increase new editor retention for the last seven months. We have made a lot of progress and learned a lot, and we've just finished planning for our next three months. During the next three months, we're going to focus on iterations of the help panel and the newcomer homepage. We have decided not to start the engagement emails project, because we think that we will be able to do better work by improving the projects we have already started. Specifically, these are our team goals:
Deploy and iterate on newcomer homepage
Continued iteration on help panel
Make the help panel available to more wikis
Add a fourth Wikipedia to our set of target wikis
Publish in-depth quantitative reporting on the data from this year
Assemble a report on what our team has learned so far about newcomers
Newcomer homepage
Mockup of potential design for newcomer homepageThe newcomer homepage is our current major project. We hope that community members can read over the project page, and comment on its discussion page with any ideas, questions, or concerns. You can see in the accompanying mockup how we are thinking about the homepage.
We have recently decided on the specifications for an initial version that we can deploy and iterate on:
Shown in the User space
Desktop only (mobile comes next)
Four modules
Help module: help links and ability to ask help desk questions
Mentorship module: all newcomers assigned a mentor to whom they can ask questions
Impact module: shows the number of pageviews for pages the newcomer edited
Account completion module: gives some very simple recommendations of how to get started (add an email, start your user page)
Layout not yet personalized for each user
We're currently running live user tests on this configuration. Future work will include adapting the homepage for mobile, working on a task recommendation module, and considering how to encourage newcomers to visit their homepage.
Help panel
Screenshot from Vietnamese Wikipedia showing the help panel open on the Community Portal, including the "search" bar.
During the last month, the help panel was deployed on Vietnamese Wikipedia, adding it to Czech and Korean Wikipedias.As of 2019-03-14:
2,425 newcomers have seen the help panel
422 of them have opened it
175 have clicked links
27 have run searches
40 have asked questions
We have been analyzing the data around usage, and we'll be publishing numbers in the coming weeks. At a high level, we see at least some users are being helped by the panel, with many clicking on links, running searches, and asking questions. We do not yet see any problems that have arisen from the help panel. Therefore, we think that the help panel is generally a positive feature – though data is still coming that will allow us to see its numerical impact. If other wikis are interested in using the help panel, please contact us on our team's talk page, in the language of your choice.
Over the past month, we have iterated on the help panel to take into account the usage patterns we are seeing. You can see in the accompanying image how the help panel currently looks.
We added a search capability, in which users can search the Help and Wikipedia namespaces.
The help panel was previously available whenever a newcomer was in "edit" mode. We are now also showing the help panel when a newcomer is in "read" mode on a page in the Help, Wikipedia, or User namespaces.
We want to see whether users find the "search" useful. If so, we may spend time on improving search results. We're also looking forward to learning whether exposing the help panel in "read" mode in more namespaces will increase usage.
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.
We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.
(note this month we will be meeting in Midtown Manhattan, not at Babycastles)
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! This month, optional post-meetup drinks afterward at 9pm!--Wikimedia New York City Team 18:46, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Organized by Asia Art Archive in America]and Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs of the New York Public Library and in collaboration with Asia Art Archive in Hong Kong, the Art+Feminism: Wikipedia Edit-a-thon on Women in Art in Asia helps participants edit Wikipedia to create and improve articles about women artists and practitioners in and from Asia, including architects, designers, filmmakers, curators, and art historians. Books and research materials—as well as refreshments—will be provided.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Radio City Music Hall you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello! This message is from a human being, adding my congrats and repeating that if you decide to take this admirable article further – peer review and then FAC – I shall be happy to contribute to the reviewing if you like to ping me. Tim riley talk12:39, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, thank you and more on Jackson Heights
Hello Epicgenius--
Thank you for your patience with our changes to Jackson Heights. I just wanted to ask for your input moving forward in terms of the order of items/sections to avoid reverts, etc. I was thinking that something along the organization of the article for Corona, Queens could work for Jackson Heights, to wit: History, Structures, Demographics, Culture (or Community), and then the rest. The History section would move from colonial times to the present, so the drug trade then could go under that section. What do you think? Cheers----DrX (talk) 22:10, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Doctorxgc, Thanks for the message. I don't have problems with your proposed layout. I was just fixing some of the incorrectly formatted text that seemed to have been added in these edits. Just curious, though - is this an educational course? If so, I'll try my best not to edit the page as much until the course is over, to avoid edit conflicts. epicgenius (talk) 00:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
You are the best! Feel free to come in and fix whatever is needed whenever it is needed; my students love it actually--they feel you have their back, as they are very apprehensive about "messing up" things. We should be done in a week or so. Thanks again, and see you in cyberspace. --DrX (talk) 14:10, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I feel like that we need to either have an article on the Power of the NYC Subway or a section on the Technology of the NYC Subway system. In my brochure "MTA New York City Transit Facts & Figures 2000" it says that AC is used for signals, station and tunnel lighting, ventilation and miscellaneous line equipment while DC is used for operating trains and auxiliary equipment such as water pumps and emergency lighting."
We have some articles on substations, and we should expand upon it. There are two major events that are not covered in any article: the 1959 sale of power plants to ConEd, which is mentioned in Annual Reports I have, and the 1999 switchover from the older rotary machines to modern technology.
One of the brochures in my collection is for the beginning of OPTO on the 42nd Street Shuttle, Dyre Avenue Shuttle, Rockaway Park Shuttle, Franklin Avenue Shuttle and West End Shuttle on September 1, 1996. I will add this to these articles. A point neglected on subway articles is that most lines used multiple conductors until the 1960s. We would need to do more research on this point, but here is another place where an article might be warranted. I don't know where else this could be put. Thanks.
--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Kew Gardens 613, I suppose we can add it to the existing Signaling article, where there is OPTO for some reason. Though I don't think OPTO is really appropriate for that page, either. epicgenius (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
