Jump to content

Talk:Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External map

[edit]

I love the map from Columbia.edu, but the man who produces it has said he will no longer be updating it, might not it be worth it for some wikipedian to take it over? mbisanz — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBisanz (talk • contribs) 21:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tunnel dwellers

[edit]

something should be said about the people who live underground — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.92.210 (talk) 05:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

There should a mention on how the MTA logo looks like Pac-Man —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.74.165.132 (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For that, they'd really need to add some more letters and adjust the angle of the text shrinking, so it meets up at no more than one point on the other (right) side. However, I have herd the term 'pacman scheme' describing their bus livery. Jason McHuff 05:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MTA museum

[edit]

There should be a link or even an article on the MTA museum: http://www.mta.info/mta/museum/
66.65.95.56 (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

From other articles, it sounds like there might be no difference between a "subsidiary" and an "affiliated agency". Also, various articles refer to the SIRTOA as a subsidiary of the NYCTA. Can anyone verify with a reference? -- Beland (talk) 01:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hopelessly confused with The Bronx

[edit]

I'm sure that there are purely innocent, well-intentioned, good-faith mistakes involved, but this has become hopelessly entangled with an article I've been editing for months on The Bronx. I removed the MTA stuff from the Bronx, but now the MTA article has a Bronx infobox and footnotes. Can somebody research the history and unsnarl this mess? —— Shakescene (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've removed the MTA article from The Bronx and The Bronx from the top of this article. I hope that nothing has been lost in the process. –— Shakescene (talk) 23:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section?

[edit]

Why isn't there one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.82.12.210 (talk) 14:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The incompetence of the MTA is so criminally extensive and such a fundamental characteristic of its nature that an honest article about it should include at least some gesture towards its incomprehensible failures on an hourly basis. You would be hard pressed to find a New Yorker who actually uses the transit system to say "I think the MTA does a good job." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.225.177 (talk) 21:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would start with the MTA board's free EZ passes. http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2008/05/27/2008-05-27_kalikow__mta_cronies_get_passes_for_life.html
Then discuss construction delays. http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/report-faults-mta-for-delays-in-big-construction-projects/
And then fare increases, their unacknowledged regressiveness, and de facto service cuts. http://gawker.com/5409464/new-york-city-just-gives-up-on-subway-service Jewpiterjones (talk) 04:34, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a NYT article on contractor performance [1] and a Post article on signal inspection [2]. MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 17:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orienting map

[edit]

A map at least showing the counties served would be a useful addition. -- Beland (talk) 16:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion 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.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) → Metropolitan Transportation Authority – Looking at MTA (disambiguation), I don't see any other agencies that use this name. Even if it is, NYC is the primary use. LACMTA can be a hatnote. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 14:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose You've also got Maryland, Massachusetts, Erie County, Pennsylvania, and Miami-Dade County, Florida. Additionally, the last line of the Chad Mitchell Trio novelty song "Super Skier" refers to another "MTA."----DanTD (talk) 11:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maryland is "Maryland Transit Administration", not "Transportation". MTA would still be a dabpage. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 18:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I once fiddled around creating disambiguation pages and hatnotes for Metropolitan Transit Authority, Municipal Transit Authority, Metropolitan Transport Authority, Metropolitan Transporation Authority, Municipal Transportation Authority, etc., etc., but someone rather wiser just cut the Gordian Knot and put them all into MTA. The average reader who's always heard and said "MTA" (or even sung it in MTA (song)) often can't remember, or doesn't even know, what the "M" or the "T" stand for anyway; just to make it marginally easier for those New Yorkers who happen to know the full, correct name of their own MTA, you'd be adding a lot of possible doubt, confusion and misdirection for many others. The purpose of article titles is not precision or even accuracy, but (1) to aid navigation and (2) to identify and distinguish articles readily (in an unbiased way) to the non-expert reader. In a parallel case, Metropolitan Transport Corporation used to redirect automatically to the one in Chennai (Madras), India, until I created a disambiguation page for some transit-related MTC's with some very similar names. —— Shakescene (talk) 22:19, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Transit Police

[edit]

The article should mention that the Subway system had its own Transit Police. In the 1980s, the Transit Police was merged into the NYPD. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lamest edit war of the....

[edit]

Epic -- please stop edit warring to hide the FA section under a lower level header. It is one of the more important subjects in the article. Should be at a higher level. That also allows readers who only see the higher level to know the content of that section. "Issues" doesn't do it. And issues/controversy are deprecated anyway as headers ... not that that matters. Frankly, this is one of the silliest and most juvenile and most ILIKEIT edit wars I've seen in a long time. Please cut it out. --Epeefleche (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Epee, why don't you post the issue on my talk page if you have an issue with my editing in particular?
Anyway, they are both issues that are high-profile, so I guessed that the two budget and ads subsections could be placed under one larger issues super-section. Epic Genius (talk) 16:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with MTA Capital Construction

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to not merge

I feel there is not enough information to hold up another article and it would make it easier for the reader to have it on one page RES2773 (talk) 13:09, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i oppose this, since capital construction is a separate department of the MTA, like the LIRR, MetroNorth, and NYC subway is. 156.111.111.81 (talk) 15:19, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Although it may be a separate department, I feel that (a) There is not enough in the article, and (b) If on the main article it may be updated more often. RES2773 (talk) 19:50, 19 July 2015 (UTC)RES2773[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.

Re revert 00:02, 4 August 2015‎ Epicgenius

[edit]

00:02, 4 August 2015‎ Epicgenius (talk | contribs)‎
revert good faith edit, this broke markup and violated WP:MOS.
Change was "Service animals, including service dogs" to "Guide dogs [[3]]".
Reason for my change was Overview of ADA page "Beginning on March 15, 2011, only dogs are recognized as service animals under titles II and III of the ADA."
I dont see a WP:MOS reason why this should be reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley (talk • contribs) 20:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Photo montage should include one subway (underground) pic

[edit]

Such as the nice E train image with new rolling stock on the New York City Subway article. B137 (talk) 21:40, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 September 2016

[edit]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved as follows:

* Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) → Metropolitan Transportation Authority
* Metropolitan Transportation Authority → Metropolitan Transit Authority

 — Amakuru (talk) 10:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


– Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:CONCISE; all of the other entries at the disambiguation page "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" are either named "Metropolitan Transit Authority":

Or "XXX Transit Agency Metropolitan Transportation Authority":

Also, this MTA serves Connecticut too, so the title is inaccurate. The proposed new name is shorter and doesn't have any of the inaccuracy problems associated with it. epicgenius (talk) 00:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support moving this article as proposed, since it's the only one using the exact title (or primary use if you count the L.A. article, but that is more likely to be searched for under its working name, "Metro"). However, the dab page should be moved to Metropolitan Transit Authority rather than the proposed title, because all the other entries use "Transit" in their names, as shown above. Of course, a hatnote must be added to this article. Station1 (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Station1 - clearly the dab page should be split according to the name. Perhaps my only concern is whether we will need to retarget the hundreds - maybe even thousands - of incoming links to the page to avoid double redirects and the such. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 02:20, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support The only ones there that use the word "transportation" are the New York and LA County agencies, true, but the difference between "transit' and 'transportation" is easy to confuse. As Station1 noted, the LACMTA is either referred to as that or just as "Metro", so that one is pretty naturally disambiguated. I agree with him that if there are page moves, the the disambiguation page should be at Metropolitan Transit Authority. (As an aside, I would disagree with calling the current disambiguator inaccurate, though, as the MTA is a public benefit corporation owned by New York state and Connecticut has no governing authority over it. The New Haven Line in Connecticut is operated by Metro-North under contract to the Connecticut Department of Transportation, which owns that portion of the line (the MTA owns nothing in CT) and while it would be exceedingly illogical, it is possible that CDOT could contract with a different operator, leaving Metro-North to operate its own trains on only the Westchester County portion of the line. Incredibly unlikely, but it illustrates that the MTA is a New York state agency, not a Connecticut one.) oknazevad (talk) 02:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, for the reasons stated by oknazevad. Furthermore the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority was once called the Metropolitan Transit Authority. If anything, the only redirect that should take place is Metropolitan Transportation Authority → Metropolitan Transportation Authority (disambiguation). ---------User:DanTD (talk) 03:04, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support MTA (New York) to MTA. The MTA has operations and owns cars and equipment used in New Jersey and Connecticut through Metro-North. It doesn't matter who owns the tracks and stations, so long as the MTA operates in those states. I also support moving Metropolitan Transportation Authority to Metropolitan Transit Authority. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 16:51, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 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) 04:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 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) 00:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On-time rate and budgetary specifics

[edit]

Why doesn't this article include the most basic information associated with public transportation systems, i.e., on-time rates or level of service and budgetary information or tax burden on state ratepayers? On the Hong Kong MTR wikipedia page, the introductory section indicates that the MTR has an on-time rate of 99.9% and is one of the most profitable metro systems in the world. Note that Hong Kong is a city with a similar population, economic system (e.g., is a capitalist financial center of the Asian world that was once a British protectorate), and way of life? Why not allow for easier comparison between a role model of public infrastructure and the MTA? (in before EpicGenius and his protectionist friends intervene...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smellyshirt5 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did some digging for sources of information for my most humble and basic request above, if the ... politburo or whomever monitors this approves of them. A Daily News article says the MTA budget for 2018 is $16.6 billion that burdens taxpayers.[1] There is also the 2015-2019 MTA Capital Program web page here detailing $33.2 billion in capital improvements that tax payers have to contribute to.[2] Lastly, here is the 2018 adopted budget from the MTA website.[3] Here is an article that indicates an on-time rate of 65% during the weekday.[4] Finally, here is another one from the nytimes indicating the same on-time rate of 65 percent.[5] Thanks... er. comrades, for taking the time out of your busy coffee break to review my most humble suggestions on your most glorious infrastructure system.Smellyshirt5 (talk) 19:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Intervened. Here's the problem: you only included the on-time information for one subsidiary agency, the New York City Subway, and you claimed that the MTA's total budget was only the budget of another agency, the Metro-North Railroad. I've moved it to the appropriate articles. If you want to re-add the information, please be aware that edit warring is highly frowned upon. epicgenius (talk) 00:05, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that is fine since most people living in the City of New York associate on-time rates with the subway, not to mention that you guys have 5 different pages on here for all your various organizations. If edit warring is frowned upon, how do you still have an account on wikipedia, being as you seem to want to hide and conceal every single interesting and enlightening fact about the MTA, for whom you seem to act as a political war dog more than anything else. Thanks for your interest in my posts!Smellyshirt5 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Smellyshirt5: I'm going to break down your comment in pieces:
I believe that is fine since most people living in the City of New York associate on-time rates with the subway - This article is about the MTA, an agency encompassing 12 counties in the NYC metro area, not about the New York City Subway. The on-time rates can be found in the article about the NYC Subway. People looking for on-time rates for the NYC Subway can find it there.
not to mention that you guys have 5 different pages on here for all your various organizations - The subsidiaries have to be organized into their own articles because they are notable as well.
If edit warring is frowned upon, how do you still have an account on wikipedia - Anonymous users can also edit-war. Also, you have kept on reverting when your edits are modified, and then you make ad-hominem attacks and bad-faith assumptions when confronted. It's not helpful, so please don't do that.
being as you seem to want to hide and conceal every single interesting and enlightening fact about the MTA - My edit history within the last three years is composed mainly of improving articles about MTA-related topics.
for whom you seem to act as a political war dog more than anything else - That's a mischaracterization of my edits. I'm trying to improve coverage about the MTA while still keeping the content balanced, as per our neutral point of view policy. That's exactly what I was doing when you reverted my edit, while I was still trying to add info about the MTA transit crisis!
I am not trying to antagonize or patronize you, and neither are the other editors. We are trying to point out the mistakes in your edits, so you can improve from this experience. We are telling you why these revisions need to be improved. However, it doesn't seem like you are taking the criticism well. If you don't understand why your edit was revised, please ask why rather than just trying to take an argumentative stance. Any of us would be happy to explain what needs to be improved, so we can make the article better. Thanks. epicgenius (talk) 00:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why did User:Mackensen remove my reply comment (see View history tab). I've posted to many other wikipedia pages besides this Metro-North page, without incident, but whenever I post anything here, it is either removed, hidden, moved to a more difficult to find sub-page or position. All these comments in response to an initial post trying to get people here to provide basic and vital budgetary and infrastructure performance data in an introductory paragraph. Then my profile and user name are berated and patronized with responses that parse my own response in a very lawyerly fashion, with additional statements as to my inexperience on the wikipedia platform, again, a very lawyer-type smear move. Thanks again, for your comments, and I hope this reply is not removed. Your non-lawyer friend,Smellyshirt5 (talk) 16:27, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment made you look foolish, and I thought to spare you the embarrassment. My mistake. Mackensen (talk) 23:40, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-spending/
  2. ^ http://web.mta.info/capital/
  3. ^ http://web.mta.info/mta/budget/pdf/MTA-2018-AdoptedBudgetFebruaryFinancialPlan_2018-21.pdf
  4. ^ https://www.6sqft.com/one-year-and-300m-in-repairs-later-on-time-subway-rates-are-still-awful/
  5. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/23/nyregion/nyc-subway-delays-failure.html

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Rkamal83.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 February 2023

[edit]
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.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Clearly no support for the move. MTA is a fairly common acronym, and refers not only to many transportation agencies, but to names and concepts in numerous fields. Fuzheado | Talk 03:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– Per WP:PRITOP and MOS:ACROTITLE --- Tbf69 P • T 15:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - The MTA in New York is the most notable by far but there are simply too many entries for it to be a primary topic with a disambiguation. Plus, as MOS:ACROTITLE cites the CIA, there are numerous other organizations with common acronyms that are not used such as the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), etc. Estar8806 (talk) 17:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The other reasons cited by above users are reasonable, and the current title is just much more ambiguous, as MTA can mean way too many other things, including other transit agencies. This is basically as ridiculous as making Washington Metro the primary topic for Metro. Fastfoodfanatic (talk) 17:28, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:PRECISE. The MTA is not well-known outside the NYC area. Also, WP:NCA says: One general exception to this rule deals with our strong preference for natural disambiguation. Many acronyms are used for several things; naming a page with the full name helps to avoid clashes. The current title is already naturally disambiguated; there's no need to make it more confusing for non-New Yorkers. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all of the above. MTA isn't speciic. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 01:19, 24 February 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Metropolitan_Transportation_Authority&oldid=1205579916"