Talk:Fairfield station (Metro-North)

Merge discussion

It has been proposed by merger tags placed by User:DanTD on this article and on recent article Fairfield Railroad Stations that the two articles be merged.

I started the Fairfield Railroad Stations article yesterday and brought it up to this version last night.

In the process of working on it i was interrupted twice by it being reverted by User:Polaron, an editor who had created a redirect at the NRHP listing name, Fairfield Railroad Stations, in June 2009. I objected to what i consider Polaron's rude behavior in this discussion, ongoing, at Polaron's talk page: User talk:Polaron#back off!.

Some background (my version): There has been dispute between Polaron and me over NRHP historic district articles in Connecticut, and I regard Polaron's interference with me on this article to be an extension of that. In several hundred NRHP HD cases in Connecticut, Polaron has set up redirects from NRHP article names to town/village/hamlet/neighborhood articles, and it has often been proven, by consensus of other editors and many times by Polaron's agreement, that forcing merger of NRHP topics with the other topics was inappropriate. Much edit warring and contention has occurred, IMO, at premature point before info about appropriateness of merger is known. In this case, I initially began starting the article with the idea that it seemed likely "Fairfield Railroad Stations" was a NRHP award covering multiple train stations in Fairfield county. I did know the NRHP would be notable, as it is. Lots of history there, anyhow.

Now, about the current merger proposal? I currently would like to develop the other article's material somewhat more, and then implement a merger myself. Last night i made a good start, i thot, and I was going to try to extend and refine the writing about the architecture and history. I don't particularly care about getting credit in the edit history here, but it still seems wrong for another editor to copy-paste my writing in and take credit himself, and also to interrupt good development that was going on, and was not finished last night, in the other article space. I would be happy to get comments on how the writing is going, from anyone who is actually interested enough to read the NRHP document which i located and included into the article.

A related question is, what name should the merged article take? doncram (talk) 17:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Who's taking credit for your writing? I haven't said it was mine. I used GFDL content in a GFDL-compliant document. The current article is only 7 kB. There is no need for a split due to length. Many well-developed train station articles do discuss the history and architecture of the station buildings. This article does need both so all your content can easily be integrated here. --Polaron | Talk 17:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I'm willing to go with Fairfield (Metro-North station), and redirect Fairfield Railroad Stations to this one. This shouldn't lead to the elimination of any reference to the former title. See Windsor, Connecticut (Amtrak station) and Wellesley Hills (MBTA station) for examples. ----DanTD (talk) 19:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Merge There's no reason to split the building from the station article. As I've said in previous dscssons, the defining characteristic of the station is that it is an active train station. Any NRHP listing is in addition to that main characteristic, which is the reason we have the article in the first place. oknazevad (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

a cow or a bull?

All right. Despite my stating i didn't care, i find myself strangely liking the explicit credit for my writing in this edit which Polaron engineered.  :) Thanks! Of course i don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling about being interrupted, though, and I don't think i'll invest in further development here. I thot what i wrote so far was okay, but it doesn't really explain enough about the differences in architecture between the two station buildings to really inform an interested reader who might be idly browsing wikipedia while at the station. Anyhow, merge accepted. doncram (talk) 20:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fairfield station (Metro-North). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070712022905/http://www.ct.gov/dotinfo/lib/dotinfo/ctgov/FinalParkingReport.pdf to http://www.ct.gov/dotinfo/lib/dotinfo/ctgov/FinalParkingReport.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305082802/http://web.mta.info/mnr/html/serviceupdates.htm?story=641 to http://web.mta.info/mnr/html/serviceupdates.htm?story=641

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) 07:06, 29 December 2016 (UTC)