Talk:Staten Island Ferry Whitehall Terminal

Images in article

I deleted a number of images from the article as "inappropriate", and the article's creator restored them, asking for an explanation. Primarily, my reason was that Wikipedia is not a gallery. Many people interpret this very strictly, but I do not, since I believe a good number of images in an article are helpful to the reader, but in this case, a head shot of the architect who designed the new building, a "moody" shot of the reflection of the "Staten Island Ferry" sign in the water, a picture of passengers in the terminal, an aerial shot that requires a larger presentation to be easily visibile to the reader -- I felt these were all extraneous, and, in any case, could be easily reached through the Commons link in the External Links section. For this reason, I have restored the layout as I left it. I urge the article's creator to read WP:NOTGALLERY and, for good measure WP:OWNERSHIP. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think galleries are forbidden in articles, though they do sometimes get ridiculous: see, for example, Berber_people#Architecture, which has 38 images in it (most of which have been mercifully hidden). Is four, in your view, a hard limit on the number of images? Are there any images in particular that should be added to the current gallery? Jayjg ^(talk) 23:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

No, I don't think there's any hard limit on the number of images in a gallery -- it depends on the subject and the quality of the available images. I do think that, generally speaking, anything more then two or three rows of images may need to be justified, as it starts to be quite a few. I also have an incliation for even rows, just for visual balance.

Your question is an excellent one, and one that I should have asked myself. I'm going to take a look at what's available at the Commons, and if anything strikes me as interesting or valuable, I'll add it in. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:11, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I looked and didn't see anything that jumped out at me -- except for the "South ferry" photos, but I'm not sure these are of the old (old) Whitehall Terminal. What I think is missing from the article in general (and I would think it would go in the body, not the gallery) is any kind of historic images of the old or the old, old terminals, which is why I was drawn to the South Ferry stereocards. I wish I could establish to my satisfaction that they were used for the S.I. Ferry, but some research failed to do that. I also looked through the NYPL Digital Gallery and, again, none of the free images were useful. I'll continue to look, though (maybe the LOC has some, or the MCNY). Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

One of the deleted images is the 1909 dedication plaque for the original municipal terminal that eventually "grew" into the present one. NearTheZoo (talk) 02:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but the text on the plaque is unreadable except at a quite high display size. Without being able to read it in the article, we force the reader to click through to the image. It's fine if the reader decides to click through because they want to see more detail, but we shouldn't be forcing them to do so because we can't present the image at sufficient size for them to read it.

Let me see if I can help that by adjusting the visibility of the plaque image. In the meantime, I found a historic image in the LoC collection and added it to the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:32, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've cropped in the plaque image and adjusted the visibility and added it to the article at 425px, which is about the minimum it can be easily read at. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I am happy this important historic photo is back, and I thank you -- Beyond My Ken -- although I think you are creating rules for photos that neither exist nor (in my mind) are necessary. There is nothing wrong with a photo of the plaque itself, labeled appropriately -- which the reader then simply clicks to read all the writing....

Anyway, I hope you both -- Beyond My Ken and Jayjg -- take a look at some of the other photos that were deleted from the gallery, which certainly do not hurt the article and (again, I think) helped. Two especially: the one showing the electronic sign, which is an important addition to the modernized terminal. (The photo shows a lighter moment, with the message "Have a Nice Day" - but it is an important sign for a great deal of info.) The other is the main lighted "Staten Island Ferry Terminal" sign, reflecting in the water -- a design plan by the architect that adds to the beauty of the new terminal. I like all the photos I originally included (although perhaps the photo of the architect should have been in the body of the article, where he is mentioned), but I do think these two photos I mentioned are especially important. Anyway, I checked wikipedia rules and they say that an article should not "merely be a gallery," but do not say anywhere that galleries in actual articles are either prohibited or should be avoided. I'll bow out as the creator (although, Beyond My Ken -- I do appreciate what you wrote on your user page about the "right" of article creators who put in a lot of work to take some pride of authorship!) -- but I do think at least a few of the photos should be reconsidered for the gallery. I am happy there is a discussion here, because I did not want a revert war, and I am especially happy that the discussion is so civil and positive. I hope both of you have a great day! NearTheZoo (talk) 12:26, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

NearTheZoo: I am not "creating rules", as there is only one rule I live by: images should enhance the article in the best possible way. I'm out the door at the moment, so I'll respond to your other points a little later today. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I do indeed believe that Wikipedia should in some formal way recognize that people who create and nurture articles have a natural sense of stewardshoip about them, but I also realize that sometimes article creators can get too close to their creations, and it's helpful to have an outside eye to rely on -- hence "stewardship" vs. "ownership".

As for specifics about the remaining photos I removed:

• It's very rare that a picture of the architect is used in an article about a building, and when it does happen, it's usually a very famous building and a very famous architect. Even then, considering that Woolworth Building has no picture of Cass Gilbert, Eiffel Tower has no picture of Gustave Eiffel, and St. Paul's Cathedral has no picture of Sir Christopher Wren, a picture of the notable but not particularly famous architect of a very good but not great building seems gratuitous to me -- although, admittedly, it's the one of the removed photos that "worked" best at gallery size.
• The reflections image is really just a beauty shot, it doesn't particularly add anything to the article. If there was sourced text in the article which referred to the architect's intent about the sign reflecting in the water, it would be better justified, but it would still be fundamentally there for its visual image and not to convey information.
• Finally, the moving sign -- this just seemed trite to me. There's nothing particularly new or interesting about a zipper sign, and "Have A Nice Day" is such a cliche. It did work OK at gallery size, so if you're intent on having it and want to replace one of the slip images in the gallery with it, it would make the gallery more diverse, so I wouldn't object. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 04:57, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

---

Staten Island Ferry Whitehall Terminal → Whitehall Terminal – It doesn't have to be specific in the title, saying it's the Staten Island Ferry Whitehall Terminal. This may be the only Whitehall Terminal, so change it to Whitehall Terminal itself. 68.44.51.49 (talk) 22:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - The current name is precisely descriptive and there is no need to change it. I see no benefit to this suggested move. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - per Beyond My Ken. ----DanTD (talk) 16:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose -- agree that name is precisely descriptive. Besides, "Whitehall Terminal" already redirects to this article, so nothing is gained.NearTheZoo (talk) 21:05, 6 July 2012 (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.

Using NYC Subway stop infobox

The Staten Island Ferry Whitehall Terminal is no more a New York City subway stop than is any other building which sits next to a subway station. Therefore, the NYCS stop infobox is not appropriate to add to the article. Please do not do so again. BMK (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

The actual subway stop outside the terminal building has its own article, South Ferry – Whitehall Street (New York City Subway). BMK (talk) 17:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

The NYCS infobox has been replaced by another one that I have no objection to. If anyone else does, please comment here. BMK (talk) 20:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

{{Infobox station}} seems fine, since technically this is a ferry station (although that template usually applies to subway and bus transport). Epic Genius (talk) 02:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Reverted move

An editor moved the article to "Whitehall Terminal (Staten Island Ferry terminal)". Since there was no discussion, I reverted the move. The editor should get a consensus for such a move before making it. BMK (talk) 23:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Coordinates are off by one block

Who here can fix the coordinates for this terminal? Because I was ready to add the geotag to the commons category, until I realized the coordinates are about one block off to the northeast. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 13:43, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I put in the coordinates for the entrance. Just curious: why weren't you able to do it? Google Maps provides coords with "What's here?" Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:16, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Just to be precise, I specified the {{coord}} template for much closer dimensions. The coords themselves haven't changed. epicgenius (talk) 00:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Plaza

Seems to me we're saying too much. Jim.henderson (talk)

Yes, would be glad to merge much of this into the new Peter Minuit Plaza article as appropriate.Pharos (talk) 03:03, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I disagree (Sorry, Jim). I think what is here is an appropriate amount. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)