By the way, I am not denying that 5 trains are sometimes seen on the west side, and that 2 trains are sometimes seen on the East side. I am merely suggesting the standard for when such things are sufficiently notable to belong in the articles.  

Well Marc, you're right about that. I will look around and until I find something about this matter the pages will stay the same. imdanumber1 

Marc: Although 5 trains travel via West Side Express, it doesn't show it so on the online MTA map. Same thing for the 2 operationg East Side Express. Well, for both trains, they sometimes go to New Lots or Utica Avenues, but doesn't say so. Well, the way that the trains run decides what should be put on artcles, don't you think?  

If you look carefully at the MTA map, there is small print in the lower right-hand corner. Under the , it says, "some rush hour trips to/from New Lots Av, Brooklyn." Under the , it says, "some rush hour trips to/from Utica Av or New Lots Av, Brooklyn." There is no such small print indicating that  trains occasionally run on the East side, or that  trains occasionally run on the West Side. The link is .

For the record, I remain opposed to listing the Eastern Parkway Line stations beyond Franklin Avenue as being served by the  and . I think it's confusing, and highly inappropriate for a general purpose encyclopedia. Everywhere else in the MTA literature and signage, those stations are not shown as served by the  or . Since the MTA saw fit to say so only in a footnote, we should do the same. However, I was outvoted, and the MTA map does provide a fig-leaf of support for the majority view. Small print counts as a "citable source," even if only weakly.

But for the point that you're propsing, we don't even have that.  

 5 midday extension 

In the "History" section, the sentence currently reads: "Beginning June 29 2009, 5 trains will be extended to Flatbush Avenue during midday hours as a result of lack of 2 train service along Nostrand Avenue during this time." This sounds as if 2 service will be reduced. If this is not the case, (I haven't heard of a reduction) wouldn't this be a better sentence (after it begins): "On June 29, 2009, 5 trains were extended to Flatbush Avenue during midday hours in order to supplement 2 train service." ?