This template 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.
This template 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
This template is within the scope of the Greater Boston Public Transit WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of public transportation in the Greater Boston metropolitan area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Greater Boston Public TransitWikipedia:WikiProject Greater Boston Public TransitTemplate:WikiProject Greater Boston Public TransitGreater Boston Public Transit articles
Neither the Lynn nor West Lynn stations were ever considered interchange stations - the B&M and the BRB&L operated separate stations, were bitter rivals, and did absolutely nothing to encourage transfers. Although they were geographically close, I don't believe there's any need to show the B&M lines at all, and especially not to make it look like they used common stations. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Still, rivals or no, the fact remains that the stations were physically in quite close proximity, and riders could thus fairly conveniently switch between the two. It's a bit (though not entirely) like how Template:MBTA Green Line shows Reservoir and Cleveland Circle as connected, even though they're physically separate and the MBTA has done nothing to encourage transfers between the two. Whoop whoop pull upBitching Betty | Averted crashes20:55, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what RDTs are for - they are to show important characteristics of a route or service, not other routes that happen to be nearby. Connections (either by combined station icons or hubs) of non-physically-connected stations should only be used in RDTs if the stations are listed together in official literature, or if there is verifiable evidence that transfers were commonly made. RDTs are subject to the same standards of verifiability as article content, and the Lynn connections mark here fail verification.
The Lynn stations were actually more than 1600 feet apart and they served different ridership bases; the idea of passengers transferring between them is imaginary and there's no evidence it was ever done. The West Lynn stations were slightly closer, but even less likely to have been used for connections. If it is desired to show that the lines were relatively close for a short distance, File:Lynn stations map.svg should be used as a geographic illustration rather than adding it to the symbol-based RDT.
The C/D connection is between two routes of the same line, operated by the same company, in a situation where transfers might be plausible. And it's the absolute limit of what should plausibly be marked on an RDT - it's an 1100-foot walk between the two stations, and the number of passengers actually transferring between the two is vanishingly small except for service disruptions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
