Talk:Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 16, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
September 28, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept
April 19, 2014	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

New Jersey High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City High‑importance

	New York City portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Transport: Maritime

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport 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.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as High-importance).

United States: September 11 High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject September 11, 2001 (assessed as High-importance).

Port district

Does this qualify as a port district? I was suprised to find nothing on wikipedia about governments known as the "Port of ___". Cacophony 05:25, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Hello Cacophony -- The purpose of a port district is to tax within the district to support port financial needs. The PANYNJ has sufficient resources that it does not need to assess or collect taxes to support its operations. Rhadow (talk) 16:52, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion needed

I see no mention of the controversy in the 1950s and 1960s of the increasing powers of the Port Authority. There was significant public debate about the authority, including whether it should be doing things like the World Trade Center real estate deal. This article needs significant expansion IMO. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 22:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA on hold

This article will be put on hold (for 7 days) until these minor adjustments can be made :

1. Well written? OK Pass

2. Factually accurate? Pass

3. Broad in coverage? Pass

4. Neutral point of view? Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images? Pass

Additional comments :

Image:PANYNJ.png doesn't state its fair use rationale.
The lead section isn't big enough.
Words such as currently that persent time-dependancy should be avoided. Same for the Current and future projects section.
is now the fifteenth busiest in the world. on what list?
The size of the project raised ire from the owner of the Empire State Building, which would lose its title of tallest building in the world. should be associated with a citation.

Lincher 02:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think all these issues are addressed. While other featured articles such as Microsoft do include logos, I'm not sure it's needed here. So, I commented it out for now. I think something else symbolic, such as the PA headquarters or some photo that includes a sign would work. As for the "current and future projects" section, I copyedited it and tried to put it in past tense, as much as possible. Though, the section is still called "Current and future projects" - don't know what else to call it and think it's best to keep as is. Being that this is Wikipedia, the section will be updated continuously. --Aude (talk) 22:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice rationale for the choice, it could be Perennial projects or Continuing projects or Ongoing projects which remove almost all time elements.

As for the nomination, it now passes GA. Lincher 02:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Port Authority of New York and New Jersey/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Ruslik (talk) 14:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help on another port

I would like to request a peer review of Port of Albany-Rensselaer from anyone who wishes to help out. Any comments and critique would be useful in attaining GA status. Thanks! Camelbinky (talk) 23:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PANYNJ Buses

Clearly I've paid the price for not living in the Tri-State area for the past 15 years, because I forgot that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey still has it's own bus fleet, as you can see here, here and here. Why hasn't this been covered in any of the related articles? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one cared enough to write an article about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.195.3.64 (talk) 04:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Plus it's a relatively small (about 50^[1]-70^[2] total) and insignificant fleet for the area. They only run around the airport terminals and parking lots. I have found articles about the 2007 models being bought/owned by PANYNJ but not sure about the older generations. They have been looking into new alternate fuel buses too.

References

^ https://www.panynj.gov/business-opportunities/pdf/RFIDOC_45905.pdf. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
^ http://corpinfo.panynj.gov/files/uploads/documents/freedom-of-information/foi-fulfilled-requests/18567-C.pdf. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. 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:

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} 03:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. 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://www.panynj.gov/corporate-information/pdf/Freedom-of-Information-Policy-and-Procedure.pdf

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

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} 11:52, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. 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) 10:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganize Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Port of New York and New Jersey. Eliminate duplication

I was having a discussion with another editor about the Port. I suggest that a full description of anything should appear only once in WP. There is an article on New York New Jersey Rail. No point in having a full description in Port of New York and New Jersey and Port Authority of New York and New Jersey too. The PA a governmental authority that has a broad portfolio. I think a carve out for the description of the harbor, its facilities, and its history is great. There's no reason to duplicate the full description of the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor. By the same token, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey#Seaports should move into Port of New York and New Jersey. Waddaya think? Rhadow (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added the WP:MERGE tag to Port Authority of New York and New Jersey#Seaports. A summary in Port Authority of New York and New Jersey#Seaports could point to Port of New York and New Jersey. Similar MERGE, Summary, and link updates are needed for Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, Port of New York and New Jersey#ExpressRail, Port of New York and New Jersey#Car float and Cross Harbor Tunnel (two separate articles exist). Rhadow (talk)

It is clear that the editor doesn't really understand the port is not the port authority, which is not a government authority, by the way. There is far from any detailed or dulicate description of the Port Authority or Waterfront Commission in the Port of New York and New Jersey article, just brief explanatory sentences and appropriate in-line links. There is also only a summary of the seaports. There is complex arrangement of ownership, lease agreements, regulation do not belong in the PANYNJ article, since the container and cargo ports are also public and privately owned. Better still that information could be expanded in the port article or the individual articles. The use of car floats in the port far proceeds the PANYNJ ownership of the NYNJ rail. Mention of that and the potential freight rail tunnel are essential to understanding of the port and port district and does not contain nearly the detailed information found in the separate articles. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to remove vital information from the Port of New York and Jersey article, also making any merge unnecessary.Djflem (talk) 11:54, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That said, a "trimming" of the seaports section in the PANYNJ as suggested would be OK.Djflem (talk) 13:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Djflem -- My understanding is not the point here. Please criticize my suggestions, not me. The PANYNJ is most certainly a government agency with the authority to issue bonds and sponsor police forces. I agree that trimming Port Authority of New York and New Jersey#Seaports is a good idea. I'll wait for more comments before doing anything. Please think about what would improve the article. Rhadow (talk) 13:57, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) is a body corporate and politic created by compact between the States of New York and New Jersey with the consent of the Congress of the United States. It an entity called a "public benefit corporation". While public benefit corporations are created by the states, they are minimally quasi-governmental organizations (that generally conduct their business under the same rules that government entities are supposed to adere to). The PANYNJ does receive nor is supported by tax revenue, but from "private" sources. The port of NY?NJ is the region in the metropolitan area defined under the same compact, and the shipping, aviation, rail, and other passenger and freight facilites and activities within it. The PANYNJ is one of many organizations operating in the port. One's understanding of the difference between the Port of NY?NJ and the PANYNJ is crucial for making edits.Djflem (talk) 14:46, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Djflem -- We are in violent agreement, then. It's just a matter of discussing changes beforehand, so no one is surprised. Rhadow (talk) 16:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge "seaport" section

It has been suggested that the section Port Authority of New York and New Jersey#Seaports be made more concise and information be merged and or shifted to Port of New York and New Jersey.Djflem (talk) 14:52, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support the terminals while under some jurisdiction of the PANYNJ have different histories with arrangements with other public and private organisations.Djflem (talk) 14:52, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support since it is more appropriate to move details about the area's seaports to the article about the area's maritime activity. 100.12.10.26 (talk) 17:30, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"PANYNJ"?

Living in and reading about New York, I have never seen the Port Authority called "PANYNJ" anywhere except here. That acronym looks like internal bureaucratese. Everyone refers to it in brief as "the Port Authority". Should this article do so? Zaslav (talk) 02:50, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Zaslav, both "PANYNJ" and "Port Authority" are valid shorthand for this organization. It's important to be consistent in the usage of abbreviations, though. Since there are several organizations that are called "Port Authority", I think it should be abbreviated as "PANYNJ" where such confusion may exist, and "Port Authority" in other circumstances. In this case, there may be confusion with other port authorities so I think we should keep "PANYNJ". epicgenius (talk) 03:39, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

epicgenius, thanks for your reply. I disagree with your conclusion about this article. In this article, the PA of NY and NJ is the topic. Any other Port Authority that is mentioned should be named clearly, of course, and if there is a comparison the two should be distinguished. However, although you say "PANYNJ" is valid shorthand, I do not recall once, in a long time's reading about it, seeing that used. I may have forgotten a few cases, but they would have been very few. In conversation it is always called "the Port Authority". Thus, as a New Yorker familiar with normal usage, I think PANYNJ is an unnatural usage for an enclycopedia. This article (and others that mention the PA) would be improved by changing it. Zaslav (talk) 04:26, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zaslav: OK, I must be mistaken. In this case I am fine if you change "PANYNJ" to "Port Authority", and whenever the article discusses other port authorities, we can clarify these instances. epicgenius (talk) 05:00, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your considered agreement! I will get to it soon. Zaslav (talk) 05:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zaslav: I don't see an issue with leaving PANYNJ in the article. It may not be that common in casual usage in the NYC area, but the website is at PANYNJ dot com, and the initials appear all over documents and web pages on the website. It's also fairly common from Google searches. - BilCat (talk) 05:50, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider The New York Times "casual usage". And I wouldn't consider "never" to be "not that common". Zaslav (talk) 08:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other than the lead sentence, PANYNJ is used thrice in the article, two of those being in captions, while "Port Authority" is used over 85 times. Is that really that big of a problem for you that you have to excise it from existence? - BilCat (talk) 09:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the snark in our previous 3 posts, you are right. I had the impression from a different article that it was PANYNJ throughout, and I never got around to checking. I may (or may not) adjust the usage but I would not eliminate the acronym. There is already a redirect from PANYNJ, which is good. Zaslav (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"New Jersey–New York relations" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect New Jersey–New York relations. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 26#New Jersey–New York relations until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lost till bill

I lost my toll bill 72.143.251.86 (talk) 13:52, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.panynj.gov/business-opportunities/pdf/RFIDOC_45905.pdf. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

[2] ttp://corpinfo.panynj.gov/files/uploads/documents/freedom-of-information/foi-fulfilled-requests/18567-C.pdf. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

[1]

[2]