Talk:Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College station

Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 20, 2018. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Trains: Stations / Rapid transit / in New York City Low‑importance Trains Portal Sel week 24, 2022 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This article is supported by WikiProject Stations. This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit. This article is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation (assessed as Low-importance). New York City: Public Transportation Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation.

• Part about MTA testing 5 trains for full time service <--- needs ref.

--68.175.22.176 (talk) 22:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The previous move cited schedules and line info as the reason for making the change from “Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College” to “Brooklyn College–Flatbush Avenue”. I don’t doubt that was true then, but as of right now, only the following sources still list it as “Brooklyn College–Flatbush Avenue”, as far as I can find:

• 5 train line map
• "Brooklyn bus map" (PDF)., dated January 2011

Meanwhile, the following sources once again label this station as “Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College”:

• Simplified NYCS system map, dated May 2011
• "The Map" (PDF)., dated December 2010
• 2 train line map
• "2 train printed schedule" (PDF)., dated 12 December 2010
• "5 train printed schedule" (PDF)., dated 12 December 2010

I believe The Map alone provides enough reason to move this article back to “Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College”, and I will be doing so shortly. Feel free to let me know if you have any serious objections.

I've wondered why this station name didn't conform to the map; Good move. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:27, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which way is north in the diagram? It appears to be to the left, in which case the platform labels "Door open left/right" are backwards. All trains arrive from the north, thus trains that cross over prior to arriving open their doors on the left, and those that arrive straight in open their doors on the right. 198.228.228.40 (talk) 12:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, each train both enters the station and leaves it, so the arrows should point both to the left and to the right. However, it isn't what Epicgenius, the creator of these diagrams, has chosen to do. He has drawn arrows for departing trains only. So, both tracks are labeled northbound, and the platforms are to the left of the left track and to the right of the right track (looking north). Vcohen (talk) 12:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what the platforms are labeling. They say "Doors OPEN" indicating a train arriving. Thus, the labels are backwards if north is to the left side of the diagram. 198.228.228.41 (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, but it is confusing. We cannot label the platforms in the direction opposite to the arrows. We need to add some explanation to the diagram. Vcohen (talk) 15:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? Can we just keep it consistent with every other diagram and show where the doors open? 198.228.228.37 (talk) 15:54, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because every other diagram has only one direction of trains' movement and doesn't create confusion. Even most other diagrams of terminal stations have one island platform labeled "Doors will open on the left, right", and the reader has the freedom to decide what the left and right are for him. This diagram forces the reader to remember that (and to wonder why) the left and right are NOT for a train moving in the direction of the arrow. Vcohen (talk) 17:14, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Let's revert it to your version, adding the following text: "for trains arriving from the north". Vcohen (talk) 17:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to

this diagram, the direction onto which the trains open their doors depends on which direction the train is departing in. Let's just leave it at that. Epicgenius (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141203073216/http://www.stationreporter.net/2train.htm to http://www.stationreporter.net/2train.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606070952/http://mta.info/mta/aft/permanentart/permart.html?agency=nyct&line=2&station=36&xdev=3981 to http://mta.info/mta/aft/permanentart/permart.html?agency=nyct&line=2&station=36&xdev=3981

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:04, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This review is

Talk:Flatbush Avenue–Brooklyn College (IRT Nostrand Avenue Line)/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 00:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the

   list incorporation

   :

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with

   the layout style guideline

   :

   B. All

   reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines

   :

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it
   neutral
   ?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing

   edit war

   or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are

   copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content

   :

   B. Images are

   suitable captions

   :

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   On hold for 7 days (starting January 15/18) Pass!

• Is there a reason why the "Track Layout" box header needs to have a gradient? I get that those are the colours of the train routes but it seems unnecessary.
  • Removed.
• "...were contracts for the construction and/or rehabilitation..." - The "and/or" can just be changed to "and".
  • Done.
• There is a wiki article for Nostrand Avenue.
  • Done.
• "The IRT Nostrand Avenue Line tunnels continue beyond the bumper blocks at Flatbush Avenue and Nostrand Avenue. They extend for several hundred feet to Avenue H" - Is there a reason why there are "extra" tunnels that can't be accessed by the trains?
  • I don't know. However, no tracks were ever laid, so I added these. epicgenius (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "The 1996 cast bronze relief artwork here is called Flatbush Floogies by Muriel Castanis" - Where is "here"?
  • Fixed.
• The third paragraph in the Station Layout section has no references.
  • I tried to add some. epicgenius (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmmmm. My main concern with the new ref you added is that it doesn't mention which platform that sign is talking about. The image that is already included in the article "U-shaped connection...." is actually OK to support most of this paragraph. However, "When the 5 does not serve the station, 2 trains depart from both tracks" will still need a source or be removed.--Dom497 (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, I will look for a better source. epicgenius (talk) 21:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• The last couple of sentences in the Exit section have no references (including the table).
  • I added references to the table. The last sentence of the second paragraph still does not have a reference, though. Pinging Kew Gardens 613. epicgenius (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Refs #6, #7, #11, #15 doesn't seem reliable. Seems like all the contributors are just enthusiasts.
  • NYCSubway.org is simply transcribing what is said in the actual Dual Contracts. I found the primary sources for all of these. epicgenius (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref #10 appears to be dead.
  • Changed the URL.
• Ref #13, #14, #17, and #21 don't seem reliable.
  • Some of these are images. Other GA's about subway stations (like
    Kew Gardens–Union Turnpike (IND Queens Boulevard Line)) use image refs. I am noting here that I didn't replace all the references yet. Pinging Kew Gardens 613 to see if he can find a replacement. epicgenius (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • I was more questioning the source rather than the image, however, it's been a long time since I wrote my last GA article (over 2 years) and it turns out that I've done the exact same thing. On that note, these references are fine.--Dom497 (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On hold for 7 days.--Dom497 (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Passing!--Dom497 (talk) 14:09, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]