Talk:Spring Street station (IND Eighth Avenue Line)

Station modification

At the front end of the uptown side of the station, one can clearly see that there was once an entrance/exit at Charlton Street (or near it), now blocked. Can anyone find out some information about when that entrance was sealed off? -- kosboot (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

This blog says, it happened around 1970. But it isn't a reliable source. Vcohen (talk) 19:06, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Hm, I was a junior high school student using the station at the time beginning in fall 1970 - was sealed up by then. -- kosboot (talk) 19:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Image

A couple of points regarding the mosaic image. It should not be sandwiching text, as VCohen has twice edited it to do. And it should not be below the ELs -- it should be to the right of the section text which describes it. These are both quite clear in MOS. Please don't edit war to keep reverting location, in conflict with MOS.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

The image must be somewhere inside the article, not under the infobox that continues after the article has ended. However, there is a kind of bug: if you define it on the right amidst the article, it appears just under the infobox, not where defined ([1]). So, the only way to get it inside the article is to put it on the left. Either at the very end or elsewhere, no matter. Vcohen (talk) 19:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the correct way to address it is to put it under the heading "History and layout". On my screen, it does not continue after the article has ended -- but in any event, it would do that obviously on everyones' screen in your approach.

Lets follow MOS. In short, the MOS says to put it in the section where it is referenced. That is History ... Not "External links." And given that per MOS we are not supposed to sandwich text, putting it on the left of the infobox makes no sense.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

What browser do you use? I checked it with Chrome, FF and IE. Your version consistently shows the image under the infobox.

By the way, look at other articles about NYCS stations. In all of them the image is on the left at the end, because of the same reason. Vcohen (talk) 20:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

See MOS:IMAGELOCATION, "avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other, and between an image and an infobox or similar". Also, My screen resolution is 1024 X 768, and at the moment I am using Mozilla Firefox.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

In the current article layout there is no text between the image and the infobox. What's wrong? Vcohen (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. That comment relates to its prior placement there earlier this week. MOS also goes on to say -- and this relates to its current placement, in the External links section: "An image should generally be placed in the section of the article that is most relevant to the image". EL is not the section of the article as to which the image is most relevant. That section is "History and Layout". --Epeefleche (talk) 17:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Example

Here is an example for you. Where do you see the red point? I see it under the infobox, lower than my signature.

infobox infobox infobox infobox infobox infobox infobox infobox infobox infobox

the image is defined AFTER this line of text

the image is defined BEFORE this line of text

Vcohen (talk) 20:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Under the infobox, lower than you sig.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, so we see the same. It means we cannot define images the way you did because it doesn't work. Can you offer another solution? Vcohen (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Here, we see the same. But in the article the image looks perfect in the section on History -- where per MOS it is supposed to be -- on my screen. Perhaps not on yours.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

If you reduce the font size, is it still perfect? Vcohen (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC)