This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
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
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
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → New York Pennsylvania Station, No consensus,
5 March 2011
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → Penn Station, Not moved,
24 January 2016
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → Pennsylvania Station (New York), Not moved,
5 November 2016.
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → New York Penn Station, Not moved,
12 September 2019
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → New York Penn Station, Not moved,
19 June 2020.
Requested move 30 May 2023
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Support for the historic station, oppose for the current station. The status quo for the current station, as (NYC), is sufficient and does not need further explanation--the main-topic among these two. But I agree with nom that the old one, while currently not ambiguous, would be more recognizeable as a sub-dab of it (NYC years).
DMacks (
talk)
11:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I think Dmack's suggestion above makes the most sense. The current Penn station doesn't need an additional disambiguation and per
WP:DISAMBIG should be as short as possible. It also more closely matches common practice where dates are only used for the historical properties, e.g. with the Waldorf Astoria and
Waldorf-Astoria (1893–1929).
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchstalk14:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Move
Pennsylvania Station (New York City) to
Pennsylvania Station - Multiple stations in the PRR system were and are known as Penn Station, but these names tend to be used interchangeably, with Pennsylvania Station in Newark being more often referred to as Newark Penn, for example. In addition to this, as trivial as it may be, this was the only station in the PRR system that wasn't renamed to and from Penn Central Station in the 1960s. As such, I also believe that Pennsylvania Station (1910–1963) should stay in place as-is. The modern station is the primary topic between the two articles, as passenger operations continued during demolition of the old station. Cards8466416:53, 30 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The modern station is a decapitated continuation of the old one (plus a recent expansion), so there is no clean division to be made here. If you don't believe me, notice how the proposed moves omit the years between 1963 and 1968, even though the station continued to function during that period.
Einsof (
talk)
01:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Nothing is gained by qualifying this article with dates. This article is about the current station, and serves more purposes than just delineating the history of it. We don't qualify
St. Peter's Basilica or
St. Paul's Cathedral with date, even if they have had predecessors. This is unnecessarily pedantic. The proposal seeks only to serve those interested in the history of the station, but no one researching its history will be surprised or disoriented by the current article title. The other article is of mere historical interest, so don't oppose the second move as it helps clarification.
Walrasiad (
talk)
22:40, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The current station is the more prominent and more sought out article and should not be qualified with dates that will likely prove confusing.
Keystone18 (
talk)
02:00, 3 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose both. For the historic station, the year range is precise enough that the location is not needed; this is similar to
World Trade Center (1973–2001).For the current station, the disambiguator is too long, and I think the wrong year range is being used (it should be 1963-present). However, as has been pointed out above, there is no clean cutoff point for when the old station ceased to exist and when the current station came into existence. It can certainly be argued that the current station, which uses the original platforms, still technically is the station from 1910, even though the station building has been entirely demolished. Hence, the old station is also summarized in this article. I have no opinion on whether the disambiguator for the current station should be dropped entirely (i.e.
Pennsylvania Station), but the Pennsylvania Station page is currently an article of its own, so that really should be fixed first. –
Epicgenius (
talk)
01:08, 4 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
– Following up after my requested move at
Newark Penn Station and the previous requested move where multiple editors suggested moving the article to this title. Pennsylvania Station in New York City is the primary topic for the term "Pennsylvania Station". Of the articles listed at
Pennsylvania Station, only Pennsylvania Station is still currently called "Pennsylvania Station" (with the exception of defunct stations and the NYC Subway stations which are called that because of this station). :3
F4U (
they/it)
06:19, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment. Looking on Google results for "Pennsylvania station" -Wikipedia it's clear that the station in Manhattan is the clear primary topic for "Pennsylvania Station", but it is not clear to me whether that or "Penn Station" is its common name.
Thryduulf (
talk)
12:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
My personal and entirely unqualified experience living in NJ is that Pennsylvania Station is used in official and formal contexts, while Penn Station is used in more vernacular or news contexts. :3
F4U (
they/it)
12:54, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment. "Penn Station" is far more frequently used than "Pennsylvania Station" -- including in subway and train (both NJT and LIRR) announcements, and the name of the subway station at 34th St. It's also used more frequently by the press, including the relatively fusty old
Grey Lady and the Wall Street Journal. A quick unscientific survey of articles from those two suggests that they both consistently use "Pennsylvania" in the first mention in the body of an article, but use "Penn" in subsequent mentions as well as in headlines and image captions. --
Avocado (
talk)
13:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I would weakly support this. However, my preference is for
New York Penn Station, since that would eliminate nearly all confusion (people may still link to "Pennsylvania Station" when referring to Penn Stations in other cities).
Epicgenius (
talk)
14:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Move instead to
New York Penn Station. This is the name seen on official signage and used by all the operators:
Amtrak,
NJ Transit,
MTA Penn Station Reconstruction,
MTA Penn Station Access use Penn Station or New York Penn Station rather than Pennsylvania Station. It's also more common in independent publications and casual conversation; searching "Penn Station" New York -Wikipedia returns ten times as many hits as "Pennsylvania Station" New York -Wikipedia, and interestingly, many of the first-page hits for the latter search refer to the
original station that was demolished in the 1960s. I'm inclined to believe that
New York Penn Station both satisfies
WP:COMMONNAME and distinguishes it from other casual uses of Penn Station. Complex/Rational14:48, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - As a New Yorker, I'd like to be able to support this, but in fact there are numerous "Pennsylvania Stations" across the US, some of which are mentioned above. The one in Manhattan is probably the most well known, but the disambiguator is still necessary. As for "Pennsylvania Station" vs. "Penn Station", the latter is clearly and obviously the most commonly used colloquial name, but an encyclopedia should use something approximating a building's formal name, and the common formal name is "Pennsylvania Station".
Beyond My Ken (
talk)
17:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose-While there is a case for primary topic, given how many other stations use or have used the name, and how many pages start with "Pennsylvania Station", I think it is best to leave the name as is. The disambiguation page
Pennsylvania Station could be edited to indicate that the one in NYC is the most well known. I'd also be in favor of a one year block on new move requests. --
agr (
talk)
18:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose both proposals. I do think the title still needs disambiguation, that is should state that it's about the station in New York City, as there are numerous Penn Stations with that actual name, even if the city is sometimes included to be specific (like Baltimore), so the original proposal is a no go. But I oppose a name that doesn't put "Penn(sylvania) Station" first, as that is the acti common name. People, especially locals, don't say "I'm going to New York Penn Station", they just say "Penn Station", in contrast to Newark where people actually call it "Newark Penn Station". The disambiguation should be parenthetical, whether or not the full "Pennsylvania" is used.
oknazevad (
talk)
20:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Move to
New York Penn Station., disam: Pennsylvania Station should lead readers to navigation/ understanding of all stations that have borne the name. (Incidentally, in local & announcement jargon, often called Penn Station New York or New York Penn.)
Djflem (
talk)
21:10, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose: New York is indeed the primary topic for "Pennsylvania Station", and the article title should reflect this. However, there are multiple Pennsylvania Stations, and "Pennsylvania Station (New York City)" is the least ambiguous while preserving the full name of the station. "New York Penn Station" unnecessarily shortens the name, while not being significantly more common. NYP as the flagship Pennsylvania Station is notable enough that the article title should use the full name. (I would, however, prefer the original nomination of "Pennsylvania Station" over "New York Penn Station". –
Zfish118⋉
talk20:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Support
New York Penn Station alternative move. 2nd choice is original proposal, 3rd choice is the status quo. It's usually called "Penn Station" rather than "Pennsylvania Station" so prefer the NY Penn Station natural disambiguation option.
SnowFire (
talk)
23:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
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
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
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → New York Pennsylvania Station, No consensus,
5 March 2011
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → Penn Station, Not moved,
24 January 2016
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → Pennsylvania Station (New York), Not moved,
5 November 2016.
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → New York Penn Station, Not moved,
12 September 2019
RM, Pennsylvania Station (New York City) → New York Penn Station, Not moved,
19 June 2020.
Requested move 30 May 2023
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Support for the historic station, oppose for the current station. The status quo for the current station, as (NYC), is sufficient and does not need further explanation--the main-topic among these two. But I agree with nom that the old one, while currently not ambiguous, would be more recognizeable as a sub-dab of it (NYC years).
DMacks (
talk)
11:41, 30 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I think Dmack's suggestion above makes the most sense. The current Penn station doesn't need an additional disambiguation and per
WP:DISAMBIG should be as short as possible. It also more closely matches common practice where dates are only used for the historical properties, e.g. with the Waldorf Astoria and
Waldorf-Astoria (1893–1929).
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchstalk14:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Move
Pennsylvania Station (New York City) to
Pennsylvania Station - Multiple stations in the PRR system were and are known as Penn Station, but these names tend to be used interchangeably, with Pennsylvania Station in Newark being more often referred to as Newark Penn, for example. In addition to this, as trivial as it may be, this was the only station in the PRR system that wasn't renamed to and from Penn Central Station in the 1960s. As such, I also believe that Pennsylvania Station (1910–1963) should stay in place as-is. The modern station is the primary topic between the two articles, as passenger operations continued during demolition of the old station. Cards8466416:53, 30 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The modern station is a decapitated continuation of the old one (plus a recent expansion), so there is no clean division to be made here. If you don't believe me, notice how the proposed moves omit the years between 1963 and 1968, even though the station continued to function during that period.
Einsof (
talk)
01:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Nothing is gained by qualifying this article with dates. This article is about the current station, and serves more purposes than just delineating the history of it. We don't qualify
St. Peter's Basilica or
St. Paul's Cathedral with date, even if they have had predecessors. This is unnecessarily pedantic. The proposal seeks only to serve those interested in the history of the station, but no one researching its history will be surprised or disoriented by the current article title. The other article is of mere historical interest, so don't oppose the second move as it helps clarification.
Walrasiad (
talk)
22:40, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. The current station is the more prominent and more sought out article and should not be qualified with dates that will likely prove confusing.
Keystone18 (
talk)
02:00, 3 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose both. For the historic station, the year range is precise enough that the location is not needed; this is similar to
World Trade Center (1973–2001).For the current station, the disambiguator is too long, and I think the wrong year range is being used (it should be 1963-present). However, as has been pointed out above, there is no clean cutoff point for when the old station ceased to exist and when the current station came into existence. It can certainly be argued that the current station, which uses the original platforms, still technically is the station from 1910, even though the station building has been entirely demolished. Hence, the old station is also summarized in this article. I have no opinion on whether the disambiguator for the current station should be dropped entirely (i.e.
Pennsylvania Station), but the Pennsylvania Station page is currently an article of its own, so that really should be fixed first. –
Epicgenius (
talk)
01:08, 4 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
– Following up after my requested move at
Newark Penn Station and the previous requested move where multiple editors suggested moving the article to this title. Pennsylvania Station in New York City is the primary topic for the term "Pennsylvania Station". Of the articles listed at
Pennsylvania Station, only Pennsylvania Station is still currently called "Pennsylvania Station" (with the exception of defunct stations and the NYC Subway stations which are called that because of this station). :3
F4U (
they/it)
06:19, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment. Looking on Google results for "Pennsylvania station" -Wikipedia it's clear that the station in Manhattan is the clear primary topic for "Pennsylvania Station", but it is not clear to me whether that or "Penn Station" is its common name.
Thryduulf (
talk)
12:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
My personal and entirely unqualified experience living in NJ is that Pennsylvania Station is used in official and formal contexts, while Penn Station is used in more vernacular or news contexts. :3
F4U (
they/it)
12:54, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment. "Penn Station" is far more frequently used than "Pennsylvania Station" -- including in subway and train (both NJT and LIRR) announcements, and the name of the subway station at 34th St. It's also used more frequently by the press, including the relatively fusty old
Grey Lady and the Wall Street Journal. A quick unscientific survey of articles from those two suggests that they both consistently use "Pennsylvania" in the first mention in the body of an article, but use "Penn" in subsequent mentions as well as in headlines and image captions. --
Avocado (
talk)
13:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I would weakly support this. However, my preference is for
New York Penn Station, since that would eliminate nearly all confusion (people may still link to "Pennsylvania Station" when referring to Penn Stations in other cities).
Epicgenius (
talk)
14:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Move instead to
New York Penn Station. This is the name seen on official signage and used by all the operators:
Amtrak,
NJ Transit,
MTA Penn Station Reconstruction,
MTA Penn Station Access use Penn Station or New York Penn Station rather than Pennsylvania Station. It's also more common in independent publications and casual conversation; searching "Penn Station" New York -Wikipedia returns ten times as many hits as "Pennsylvania Station" New York -Wikipedia, and interestingly, many of the first-page hits for the latter search refer to the
original station that was demolished in the 1960s. I'm inclined to believe that
New York Penn Station both satisfies
WP:COMMONNAME and distinguishes it from other casual uses of Penn Station. Complex/Rational14:48, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - As a New Yorker, I'd like to be able to support this, but in fact there are numerous "Pennsylvania Stations" across the US, some of which are mentioned above. The one in Manhattan is probably the most well known, but the disambiguator is still necessary. As for "Pennsylvania Station" vs. "Penn Station", the latter is clearly and obviously the most commonly used colloquial name, but an encyclopedia should use something approximating a building's formal name, and the common formal name is "Pennsylvania Station".
Beyond My Ken (
talk)
17:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose-While there is a case for primary topic, given how many other stations use or have used the name, and how many pages start with "Pennsylvania Station", I think it is best to leave the name as is. The disambiguation page
Pennsylvania Station could be edited to indicate that the one in NYC is the most well known. I'd also be in favor of a one year block on new move requests. --
agr (
talk)
18:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose both proposals. I do think the title still needs disambiguation, that is should state that it's about the station in New York City, as there are numerous Penn Stations with that actual name, even if the city is sometimes included to be specific (like Baltimore), so the original proposal is a no go. But I oppose a name that doesn't put "Penn(sylvania) Station" first, as that is the acti common name. People, especially locals, don't say "I'm going to New York Penn Station", they just say "Penn Station", in contrast to Newark where people actually call it "Newark Penn Station". The disambiguation should be parenthetical, whether or not the full "Pennsylvania" is used.
oknazevad (
talk)
20:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Move to
New York Penn Station., disam: Pennsylvania Station should lead readers to navigation/ understanding of all stations that have borne the name. (Incidentally, in local & announcement jargon, often called Penn Station New York or New York Penn.)
Djflem (
talk)
21:10, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose: New York is indeed the primary topic for "Pennsylvania Station", and the article title should reflect this. However, there are multiple Pennsylvania Stations, and "Pennsylvania Station (New York City)" is the least ambiguous while preserving the full name of the station. "New York Penn Station" unnecessarily shortens the name, while not being significantly more common. NYP as the flagship Pennsylvania Station is notable enough that the article title should use the full name. (I would, however, prefer the original nomination of "Pennsylvania Station" over "New York Penn Station". –
Zfish118⋉
talk20:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Support
New York Penn Station alternative move. 2nd choice is original proposal, 3rd choice is the status quo. It's usually called "Penn Station" rather than "Pennsylvania Station" so prefer the NY Penn Station natural disambiguation option.
SnowFire (
talk)
23:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.