Talk:Metropark station

New Jersey Low‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Stations / in New York City Low‑importance

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 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 New York City Public Transportation (assessed as Mid-importance).

It is requested that an image or photograph of the 'Amshack' station building at ground level be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Move to "Metropark (NJT station)"?

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightst a llion (?) 20:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should this page be moved to "Metropark (NJT station)"? Nearly all of the other stations in the "New Jersey Transit Stations" category are "station name (NJT station)", but this one is different (Metropark (NJT station) is a redirect to this page). —LrdChaos 18:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC) (Later: I fully support such a move. —LrdChaos 20:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Agreed. Only problem is that there is a whole mess of redirects, including Metropark (NJT station), which already exists as a redirect to the Metropark (NJ Transit station) page. You can't just do it as a standard move. Alansohn 19:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

History and use

Can anyone provide more detail on the history and use of the Metropark stop? If NJ required Amtrak's Metroliner to stop at least once in NJ, why would Amtrak build a completely new stop in the middle of nowhere? Why not just stop in Trenton or (as they do now) Newark?

On our ride on Acela through NJ, Metropark was one of the more popular stops. At least half of our car got off there. Is it a giant Park and Ride for the entire Eastern Seaboard? What's the big draw? It just seems odd... cluth 22:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One thing the station has going for it is its location. It's right off the Garden State Parkway, so a lot of people will drive to Metropark to take a train (whether it's because they don't want to ride NJT all the way to Newark or New York, don't have train service where they live, or want a better place to park their car).

As far as the requirement that the Metroliner stop there, I'd be very interested to see something to back that up. I don't recall having heard it before, and I couldn't find anything about it in a Google search. —LrdChaos 15:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Pennsylvania Railroad and the State of NJ got interested in park and ride back in the late 1950s and planted a small P-and-R at Jersey Avenue (NJT station) back in 1964, which proved "successful", and so someone thought of planting a bigger one somewhere else (I guess). Someone decided the best spot would be near a crossroads of highways and railroad, and so they picked the Metropark site. Amtrak happened to conveniently come around at about this point in time (once again, I'm guessing). 68.36.214.143 07:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Metropark station is one of the few train stations where there are enough parking spaces. Only at Metropark can one be fairly assured of finding a parking space any time on any day. Virtually all other stations in NJ have parking lots that are woefully undersized; the "daily" parking slots are all full by 8 am. In addition, since the station is on the NE corridor line, it has much more frequent service to NYC than almost any other station. If you are willing to pay a premium, you can take luxurious Amtrak to NYC instead of the plebian NJT trains. For all points south of the Raritan River in NJ, these factors make MetroPark an ideal solution for individuals getting into NYC without a car, where for one person, the train is cheaper than driving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.56.164 (talk) 03:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, "south of the Raritan River in NJ" ends at New Brunswick, not Iselin, and New Brunswick has a train station with a parking deck (and several more in the vicinity) (although all are much more expensive than the barn out at Metropark). Moreover, Amtrak day trains other than the Acela are hardly luxurious, they are merely fast and happen to have carpeting, food service, seat trays, reclining seats, and individual lighting. The legroom aboard day trains is about the same as that aboard NJT; furthermore, while Amtrak has 2x2 seating and NJT has 3x2 on most trains, NJT has a few cars with 2x2 seating (in double-deck trains). There is also a park and ride in East Brunswick where one can park and take the bus up to the city. 68.36.214.143 07:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of unsourced statement

I removed the following line from the article:

The State of New Jersey required Amtrak to have at least one stop in New Jersey, so Amtrak built a stop called Metropark.

In addition to not making sense on its face, it's also unsourced and had been tagged that way for just over two months, with no source added. —LrdChaos 14:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need to research this dispute

It is curious that the station was built. It was not built at a standard community, such as a city center. It was built a century after most stations. So we should account for its creation. The idea that this station is was mandated (by New Jersey) plausible. Many potential riders would be unserved if the train ran from Philadelphia to Newark or New York with no stops. Dogru144 03:47 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Let me chip in a little here

I don't know the story, other than I recall it was pushed by then US Senator from NJ Harrison A. Williams, and in fact the station was originally named the "Harrison A. Williams Metropark." I suppose it was put in Edison (which is actually a large suburban population center surrounded by other suburban townships) due to its "central" location (i.e. political reasons) and also that Newark, New Brunswick and Trenton were very old city-center stations without parking. The station is overwhelming used by NJTransit commuters rather than Amtrak passengers.

In the "never name anything after a living politician" department, Williams later was caught in an investigation called "AbScam", tried and convicted of accepting bribes to influence legislation. The name was changed.

I also believe the station was named Metropark first, and the office/industrial complex followed rather than as the article states. It was probably based on the train name "Metroliner" which was established around the time the project was built as a "park and ride" for Amtrak and NJT, hence "MetroPark." Note that the conductor pronounces it "metroPAAAARK" with the emphasis on Park.

--EdJ of NJ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.201.128 (talk) 18:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can vouch for the development following or occurring along with the station. If you look at Historic Aerials, you can see the Metropark area in 1966 and the same area in 1970 (Metropark is at the corner of the Parkway and SR-27, and is between the Middlesex Turnpike and SR-27. It appears to be in the early stages of construction at the time of this photo; some office developments are more advanced.) Also, see the location in 1972, when the station and its first parking lots were already completed. — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 02:59, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

you may have to zoom out and turn on all-roads overlay to see the roads and their names. Years are on the left; New Jersey is more comprehensively covered by HistoricAerials than most other areas, and it only covers the USA and selected border areas. It's better than nothing, though. — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 03:03, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

25th busiest station

While I'm grateful to Alansohn for providing a source for the statement that Metropark was the 25th busiest station in 2004, according to Amtrak, it wasn't one of the busiest stations in 2005 (though we'll have to wait a few months for the new BTS report, which may differ). Is it worth keeping the statement in, since it's no longer true, and (in my opinion) isn't really something of interest? —LrdChaos 19:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I spent weeks looking for the source and finally found it today. So now that I located the source I'd hate to see it deleted. More seriously, even if it is no longer in the top rankings in 2005, the fact that it was ranked as highly in 2004 is significant and worth retaining. I used the same source for Princeton Junction (NJT station) (10th place) and Pennsylvania Station (New York City) (1st) as well. Given that the as-of year is prsent, is there really any reason to remove it. At worst, ad a statement that as of 2005, Metropark was no longer in the top XX stations. Alansohn 20:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bold removal

I removed this paragraph from the station layout section as being trivia as well as quite snarky editorializing.

There is almost no pedestrian access to the station from the surrounding neighborhoods. There are no sidewalks on Route 27 or other roads that extend to the west. There are many shops (especially Indian-American businesses) about 3/4 mile to the west, and the State Park and memorial devoted to Thomas Edison's famous Menlo Park laboratory is only 1/2 mile to the south, but neither is easily accessible on foot. There are no lockers in the station, and food service and other amenities in the station are minimal.

Baccyak4H (Yak!) 20:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Metropark (NJT station). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080621015058/http://metroparkparking.com:80/ to http://www.metroparkparking.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:42, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Metropark Station" on sign?

I removed the picture that says that the real name of this station is "Metropark Station" with capital "s." First, station signs aren't reliable sources, per WP:USSTATION. Second, neither is Wikimedia Commons, as that's just one step away from self-published sourcing or even original research. epicgenius (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Station signs say all kinds of things and shouldn't be understood literally. The station's called Metropark. Mackensen (talk) 13:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, because if the sign was a reliable source, we'd probably have to move back all the Washington Metro stations again, and probably even have another months-long RFC on what media USSTATION should rely upon. epicgenius (talk) 15:16, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Metropark station. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://media.nj.com/bergen_impact/other/1Q2013.pdf
Added {{dead link}} tag to https://webfiles.berkeley.edu/~lensovet/njtboardingdata.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080621015058/http://metroparkparking.com/ to http://www.metroparkparking.com/

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).

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) 05:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Metropark station. 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).

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) 21:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Harrison Williams' name

I'm having trouble finding proof of what should be a simple fact: that Williams' name was actually officially renamed from the station name. I've added sources to show that it remained until 1984, but the trail goes dead after that. There are some offhand references later ([1]), though some more recent ones ([2]) look dangerously close to WP:CIRCULAR. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:13, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]