Talk:Surrey Central station

Requested move

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 to Surrey Central Station. Joelito (talk) 15:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• Surrey Central station → Surrey Central Station … Rationale: Every other SkyTrain station article in Greater Vancouver has "station" capitalized. — Usgnus 00:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support Carson 01:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support I thought that was common practice already. And I thought "Station" was part of the station's name too. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 01:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This happened a long time ago, before there were articles for every SkyTrain station. --Usgnus 02:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support Ckatz^chat_spy 03:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support I was planning to do this yesterday myself :) Also, a quick glance in the history reveals that it was "Station" to begin with but moved to "station" partly because of someone on wheels. _dk 03:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Ah, wouldn't that be grounds for moving it immediately, then? ;) Carson 03:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
    • The strange thing is...he seems to be making useful contributions on Vancouver-related articles before he went ON WHEELS! on everything else. I find that a bit....odd..._dk 05:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I tried to move it, but I can't some admin needs to do it.-- Selmo 20:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• And that's why it's listed here. :-) --Usgnus 21:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support for consistency with other article names. - Hinto 04:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• See Category:SkyTrain. --Usgnus 01:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

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.

Requested move 26 February 2016

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: No consensus to change capitalisation. The secondary proposal, to remove the disambiguator, was unanimously supported and has already been done. However, on the fundamental question, over capitalisation of "Station", I certainly don't see a consensus. Only the nominator supported that, and existing conventions don't seem to back it up, as mentioned in oppose votes. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 10:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

---

Surrey Central station (TransLink) → Surrey Central Station (TransLink) – TransLink lists the station with a Capital S.

As well as it was agreed on back in August 2006 Wolf1098

(talk) 03:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I would also suggest this be done with the other Translink Station Wikipedia pages Wolf1098 (talk) 03:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

References

• Oppose – capitalization is inappropriate, unless it can be shown that "Station" is part of the name. The article currently shows "Surrey Central" as the name, which suggests that the caps are not needed. Similarly on other station names. I realize this is Canada, but my impression from recent discussions elsewhere is that there was not objection to adopting conventions similar to WP:USSTATION, in which the station/Station case distinction is addresses explicitly. Per MOS:CAPS, this shouldn't even be necessary. What is the case for saying that caps are necessary here? In non-heading situations, lowercase is common enough in sources to make it clear that caps are NOT necessary: [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5]. In Wikipedia, it's best to respect the idea that we don't use caps unnessarily. The 2006 "consistency" argument on this one is no longer relevant, as most have been fixed to be consistent with the guidelines of our MOS since then. Dicklyon (talk) 07:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

C'mon You can't rename this article without a discussion, and then accuse others. Just behave yourself! Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

There has been a huge raft of discussions about when to capitalize station, as you know. And one doesn't normally move articles while an RM is open, as that really confuses the processes, so stop doing that. If you have reasons are argue that this one should be capitalized, state your reasons. Dicklyon (talk) 17:44, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

The discussion for these ones is above! You have chosen to ignore it. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I did not ignore the 2006 discussion; I referred to it in my oppose statement. So far, nobody has proposed a reason for caps; the old reason is not applicable, since consistency now argues for lowercase, as does MOS:CAPS. Dicklyon (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Reason:Actually you did miss me proposing a reason. If you check the Translink.ca is a reference linking to the site where they clearly call them "Stations". Just so you can't miss it I will put it here as well: http://www.translink.ca/en/Schedules-and-Maps/SkyTrain/SkyTrain-Station-and-Elevator-Maps.aspx Wolf1098 (talk) 02:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I did see that, but it's not a reason to interpret these as proper names. It is a common style to capitalize all words in things like headings and bullet points, map titles, and such. If you look at their map at [6], it's clear that "Station" is not properly a part of the station names. Just like with WP:USSTATION, we should bring the title of these Canadian stations into line with the recommendations of MOS:CAPS, which suggests that we interpret as a proper name if sources capitalize it consistently; here they do not. The Translink site is also a possible example of WP:SSF; people like to capitalize their own stuff. As I showed above, many sources such as guide books often use lowercase station; that is, caps are not necessary. Dicklyon (talk) 05:10, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Alternate proposal

Secondarywaltz has pointed out to me, on his page page, that I screwed up in lowercasing that one, and that the "(TransLink)" disambiguation is not necessary. The correct title is Surrey Central station, which already redirects here. So I propose we fix it thus:

Surrey Central station (TransLink) → Surrey Central station – Removed unneeded disambiguator. Dicklyon (talk) 00:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

• Support alternative as its creator. Dicklyon (talk) 00:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Comment: I don't believe that it reflects well or is necessary to say you support your own proposal. -Note this isn't relevant but just a tip, Im also curious cause your talk page says ur from Silicon V, when your modifying articles in Canada. I get you want to follow the Wikipedia guidelines but shouldn't people local know more about the aspects of the transit system than a person from California, perhaps leave a msg on my talk page ;D-Wolf1098 (talk) 02:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I am open to input. Is there something special about Canada, or about railway stations in Canada, that I need to know? Anyway, it was User:Secondarywaltz who told me, on his talk page in this edit, that Surrey Central station is the correct title. Not that it's very relevant, but I think he's Canadian. Dicklyon (talk) 03:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with Canada. Your original move was contrary to the discussion above, but if you were to move it to lower case "station", your move was incorrect. That's all folks! Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:54, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. Nothing to do with Canada per se, and my addition of the parenthetical disambiguator was a mistake. Trying to fix... Dicklyon (talk) 19:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

• Support alternative. "Surrey Central" is the station name, for all intents an purposes, and "Surrey Central station" is a natural disambiguation of an innately ambiguous name, so a further disambiguation with "(TransLink)" is not necessary unless it comes to pass that two transit systems have notable stations named "Surrey Central". MOS:CAPS already provides for cases like Grand Central Station in NY, where the overwhelming majority of reliable sources indicate that "Station" is part of the proper name. That's not the case here. Dicklyon is correct that Capitalizing a Whole Lot for Emphasis is just the contextual style of things like transit signage, brochures and timetable posters, and map labels. They do not dictate to WP how it may use the English language. We already have a style guide for that, based on site-wide consensus about how to write encyclopedic English.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  02:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
• Support alternative; there are no other "Surrey Central stations" to disambiguate from.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:37, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
• Note – I filed for a speedy deletion of the redirect in the way, and the admin who did that also this this move, which was unopposed and uncontroversial. I suppose someone should still close this thing. Dicklyon (talk) 03:46, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
• Reply* - I would but the RMnac is for uninvolved users - Wolf1098 (talk) 08:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

---

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.