![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:NJTransit-Main-infobox. |
I think the lead section of this article should be re-written, specifically, it should state that the Main Line is a railway, before saying anything else. Although it is clear by reading the entire lead that it's a railway, this does not make for easy reading/understanding and is not standard for lead sections. -- Ynhockey ( Talk) 11:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hi, I made a line description template here Template:NJTransit-Main (displayed at right). Please comment and correct as needed before adding to the article. See also Template:NJTransit-Main-Bergen. Thanks. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 13:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Reading the Port Jervis Line article, and keeping in mind the above template made, I am proposing a merger between that article into tjis article. -- AEMoreira042281 16:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I need a full explanation why the images in the article keeps being removed. NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 23:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there any reason the line plan on the main page does not work? It shows coding but doesnt make sense. the map on this page seems fine.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.10.238 ( talk • contribs)
I am having trouble following some of the history. I don't know if is because I am not from the area or what, but is anyone else going through this. There is a sentence that mentions two different things being abandoned that runs on for a while. Leefkrust22 ( talk) 02:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
The Pascack line is an interstate line; it is not split into two articles. Yet an editor attempted to remove material pertaining to part of this route, the historic main line of the Erie Railroad, hence its name. Just because some trains end at Suffern does not mean that all commentary on the route beyond Suffern must be eliminated. Dogru144 ( talk) 07:38, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia deals with history also. This is the repository for this (i.e., this article deals with the Erie Main Line which consists of the present right of way, trackage, bridges and station structures). The present article is not only on the Main Line, but also on the Erie Main Line, which went far beyond Suffern, in fact beyond Fort Jervis to Chicago. The fact that there is an intermediate train yard in the vicinity of Suffern is immaterial. The line goes to Fort Jervis. That is that. You assert that there is a long standing consensus. That is debatable. There is at present another NJ Transit line that is an interstate line: the Pascack Valley Line. Do you insist that that article be two articles too? In about two years there will be the interstate line to the Poconos, Pennsylvania. Will you insist that that be two separate articles also? Metro North has interstate service from Grand Central to New Haven and Danbury. Do you insist that those lines be dealt with in segregated articles? Only when states do not cooperate and run a joint operation (e.g., the separate SEPTA Philadelphia to Trenton and the NJ Transit Trenton to New York Penn Station lines) is it warranted to have separate articles. This is going to an edit war, so this should go to arbitration. Dogru144 ( talk) 00:39, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved, pending the result of a requested move at Talk:New Jersey Transit. epicgenius ( talk) 22:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | It was proposed in this section that
Main Line (NJ Transit) be
renamed and moved to
Main Line (New Jersey Transit).
The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment. Links:
current log •
target log |
Main Line (NJ Transit) → Main Line (New Jersey Transit) – To conform with the main article, New Jersey Transit. Optimally, the disambiguator should be the full name, "New Jersey Transit," or the full abbreviation, "NJT." Another NJT line article, River Line (New Jersey Transit), is at the full name. epicgenius ( talk) 02:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
So I was asked to provide an update on to the proposal to move the main article to NJ Transit. I haven't made such a proposal yet as I've been waiting on what feedback I'd get at this discussion. that is to say, I wanted to see if others might support such a move before formally proposing it. The problem is, I don't see any clear guidance. Epicgenius, the proposer on this move, never commented on my proposal to withdraw the move and have the broader discussion first. Indeed, he just boldly moved West Trenton Line (New Jersey Transit) to that title. So if like to hear further from him. Meanwhile, Cuchullain and IJBall only gave vague mentions that the titles should be consistent, without commenting on the merits. I'd like to hear their opinions as to the actual merit of moving all to "NJ Transit" based on what I mentioned above. oknazevad ( talk) 13:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Main Line (NJ Transit). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
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.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:NJTransit-Main-infobox. |
I think the lead section of this article should be re-written, specifically, it should state that the Main Line is a railway, before saying anything else. Although it is clear by reading the entire lead that it's a railway, this does not make for easy reading/understanding and is not standard for lead sections. -- Ynhockey ( Talk) 11:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hi, I made a line description template here Template:NJTransit-Main (displayed at right). Please comment and correct as needed before adding to the article. See also Template:NJTransit-Main-Bergen. Thanks. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 13:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Reading the Port Jervis Line article, and keeping in mind the above template made, I am proposing a merger between that article into tjis article. -- AEMoreira042281 16:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I need a full explanation why the images in the article keeps being removed. NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 23:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there any reason the line plan on the main page does not work? It shows coding but doesnt make sense. the map on this page seems fine.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.10.238 ( talk • contribs)
I am having trouble following some of the history. I don't know if is because I am not from the area or what, but is anyone else going through this. There is a sentence that mentions two different things being abandoned that runs on for a while. Leefkrust22 ( talk) 02:11, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
The Pascack line is an interstate line; it is not split into two articles. Yet an editor attempted to remove material pertaining to part of this route, the historic main line of the Erie Railroad, hence its name. Just because some trains end at Suffern does not mean that all commentary on the route beyond Suffern must be eliminated. Dogru144 ( talk) 07:38, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia deals with history also. This is the repository for this (i.e., this article deals with the Erie Main Line which consists of the present right of way, trackage, bridges and station structures). The present article is not only on the Main Line, but also on the Erie Main Line, which went far beyond Suffern, in fact beyond Fort Jervis to Chicago. The fact that there is an intermediate train yard in the vicinity of Suffern is immaterial. The line goes to Fort Jervis. That is that. You assert that there is a long standing consensus. That is debatable. There is at present another NJ Transit line that is an interstate line: the Pascack Valley Line. Do you insist that that article be two articles too? In about two years there will be the interstate line to the Poconos, Pennsylvania. Will you insist that that be two separate articles also? Metro North has interstate service from Grand Central to New Haven and Danbury. Do you insist that those lines be dealt with in segregated articles? Only when states do not cooperate and run a joint operation (e.g., the separate SEPTA Philadelphia to Trenton and the NJ Transit Trenton to New York Penn Station lines) is it warranted to have separate articles. This is going to an edit war, so this should go to arbitration. Dogru144 ( talk) 00:39, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved, pending the result of a requested move at Talk:New Jersey Transit. epicgenius ( talk) 22:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | It was proposed in this section that
Main Line (NJ Transit) be
renamed and moved to
Main Line (New Jersey Transit).
The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment. Links:
current log •
target log |
Main Line (NJ Transit) → Main Line (New Jersey Transit) – To conform with the main article, New Jersey Transit. Optimally, the disambiguator should be the full name, "New Jersey Transit," or the full abbreviation, "NJT." Another NJT line article, River Line (New Jersey Transit), is at the full name. epicgenius ( talk) 02:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
So I was asked to provide an update on to the proposal to move the main article to NJ Transit. I haven't made such a proposal yet as I've been waiting on what feedback I'd get at this discussion. that is to say, I wanted to see if others might support such a move before formally proposing it. The problem is, I don't see any clear guidance. Epicgenius, the proposer on this move, never commented on my proposal to withdraw the move and have the broader discussion first. Indeed, he just boldly moved West Trenton Line (New Jersey Transit) to that title. So if like to hear further from him. Meanwhile, Cuchullain and IJBall only gave vague mentions that the titles should be consistent, without commenting on the merits. I'd like to hear their opinions as to the actual merit of moving all to "NJ Transit" based on what I mentioned above. oknazevad ( talk) 13:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Main Line (NJ Transit). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
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.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)