Talk:F (New York City Subway service)

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
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
	This article is maintained by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation. High Importance: high within New York City Public Transportation WikiProject.
	This article needs a map. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article. Once the requested map is added, remove the Mapneeded parameter from the {{TrainsWikiProject}} template call on this page to remove this map request.

I don't think this article is needed if there is an F and a V already. CoolGuy 05:35, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

F (New York City Subway service) and V (New York City Subway service) redirect here. --SPUI (talk) 05:55, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 The Culver Express 2 Why merged? 3 Station listing 4 Info Needs Updating 5 Changes To The F and E

[edit] The Culver Express

We all know there's a few F trains that run express on the Culver during the rush. But should we mention it? Pacific Coast Highway ^{(blah • typa-typa)} 16:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I do not think these artices should mention rare service patterns that are not part of the published literature. Marc Shepherd 17:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why merged?

The Station listing is very inconvinient for a regular subway user. It is expected, that the listing shows stations sequense (with some details). However, the F-sequense is interrupted in the middle and continued in the buttom, to be returned into some other part of the table.

I suggest to have separate Station listings for F and V services.

I've noticed this issue too. I think the F and V routes are sufficiently different that this article should be split into two pages. If they are not split, then there should be two tables. I counted 59 stations in the table, of which only 10 are common to both routes. Marc Shepherd 14:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

(The initial suggestion was mine, just forgot to sign). I think, that the merge had been done by a City subway insider, because - yes - F and V trains run on the same line part of the way. Just F runs on express track in the middle and skips a lot of stations, while V (and other local services) runs on the edges. As a frequent F commuter, I know that, but I don't care.

May be for that or other reasons it could be important for professionals to have this article merged. (Though it is not clear for me, why not with G or R as well). Anyway, I would presume that the merge made sense for somebody. As a regular subway user, I just want to have clear tables.

So, I want to separate lists, and I am waiting for objections, if any.

--HenryS 16:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no objections, solely because of the awkwardness of representing the 63rd Street/53rd Street split in the current table. I do not feel that the lines are very different at all. The F and V run along the same route for the greater part of the V's length (the V being the shorter route). They have the same service pattern on the 6th Avenue trunk line and a simple local-express relationship along Queens Boulevard. Frankly, I think it makes perfect sense for the two lines to be merged. The only problem is the table, which cannot easily handle the divergent river crossings. It is because of this issue of practicality that I agree to the division. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 19:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Station listing

Why is the station listing bold for this service? The Legendary Ranger 13:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Larry V prefers bold, and he has been following that format for any of the service pages he edits. There are a handful of others like it, but most are not. If we were having a vote, I would vote for "not bold," but it's not something I feel passionately about, so I haven't pressed the issue. Marc Shepherd 14:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Tables have heading cells for a reason, and I feel that in station listings, the station names are the main set of information. Thus, they should be bold for emphasis, to draw attention. That's just my opinion. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 14:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Then why don't you bold it for all the other subway services.The Legendary Ranger 20:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

When I have the time. It's not a pressing issue, by any stretch of the imagination. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 21:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Info Needs Updating

Quite a bit of the info on the page, especially the stops and transfers, need updating. The current info is before the added construction. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 157.150.192.237 (talk) 18:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Changes To The F and E

According to the NYC Subway Map, the E no longer goes through the 179 street to Suthin Boulevard Stations. I don't know why some of those stations are marked to have transfers to the E, but I think it should be changed to no transfers.

Asiansaxboy101 17:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at the bottom right of the map: "some rush hour trips to/from Jamaica/179 St, Queens". --NE2 23:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)