Talk:B67 and B69 buses
(Redirected from Talk:B67 (New York City bus))
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Epicgenius in topic Merging the B67 and B69 pages
 | The contents of the B69 (New York City bus) page were merged into B67 and B69 buses on 4 October 2024. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Routings:
- 1874: didn't exist yet
- 1898: Fulton Ferry or South Ferry to 9th? and 20th via Water, Washington, Concord, Adams, Fulton, Boerum, Atlantic, 5th, Flatbush, 7th, 20th
- 1906: Park Row or Fulton Ferry to 9th and 20th via Fulton, Flatbush, 7th, 20th; South Ferry to 7th and 20th via Atlantic, Flatbush, 7th
- 1916: Park Row to 7th? and 20th via Sands, Adams, Boerum, Atlantic, Flatbush, 7th; South Ferry to 7th? and 20th (rush hours only) via Atlantic, Flatbush, 7th
Merging the B67 and B69 pages
editMy fault for not doing this earlier, but I want to propose merging the B67 and B69 pages. They share around half of their route together, and have interlined frequencies and share a timetable with each other, and considering that other route groups that share this share a page, I was thinking the same could happen for the B67 and B69. Ex696 (talk) 01:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Ex696: support; sounds very reasonable. Klbrain (talk) 19:36, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 13:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius: Sigh. This is on me-I had mentioned opposition to this elsewhere, but with school kept forgetting to get back to this. I feel that the routes (and their streetcar histories) are distinct enough to warrant separate articles. The merge was somewhat sloppily done, and does not distinguish the two separate lines. If the merge is kept (and there is a valid argument for it), another name would be needed-it doesn't specify the B69 route (and it seems like we would need to add clarification that they would be NY routes). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Kew Gardens 613, I agree regarding the merge. The way it is now, the B69 takes a metaphorical backseat to the B67, when in reality these should be described on equal footing, similarly to the other combo articles like B61 and B62 buses. If there's no opposition to retaining this merge, I'll move the page to B67 and B69 buses, too, while we think about a permanent name. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius: Sigh. This is on me-I had mentioned opposition to this elsewhere, but with school kept forgetting to get back to this. I feel that the routes (and their streetcar histories) are distinct enough to warrant separate articles. The merge was somewhat sloppily done, and does not distinguish the two separate lines. If the merge is kept (and there is a valid argument for it), another name would be needed-it doesn't specify the B69 route (and it seems like we would need to add clarification that they would be NY routes). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
