# Talk:Fourth Avenue/Ninth Street station

The article should be at Fourth Avenue-Ninth Street (New York City Subway). That title is used on the current subway map anyways. If no objection is raised, I'll move it tomorrow. Pacific Coast Highway {blah • Spinach crisis '06! • WP:NYCS} 05:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Fourth Avenue–Ninth Street was the originally agreed upon name, so I've just gone ahead and moved it. Marc Shepherd 12:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

This name is used by the MTA: [1] --NE2 11:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I was really wondering about whether this should be considered a complex at all, not than the name. The two stations are rather poorly connected. Larry V (talk | e-mail) 21:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah. I have no opinion on that. --NE2 00:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I am removing, as it seems to have been there a while without action taken.
For the record, I strongly oppose a split. Marc Shepherd 23:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

In the following places, the MTA has taken to referring to this as a single complex, 4 Av–9 St:

"The Map" (PDF).
"F train printed schedule" (PDF).
"G train printed schedule" (PDF).
"R train printed schedule" (PDF).
"D train printed schedule" (PDF).
"N train printed schedule" (PDF).
R train line map
N train line map
It still refers to 4 Av or 9 St individually here:

F train line map
G train line map
Not sure what to make of this one:

D train line map
So I think there are sufficient grounds to move this article to "Fourth Avenue – Ninth Street". Larry V (talk | e-mail) 23:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:163rd Street–Amsterdam Avenue (IND Eighth Avenue Line) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 18:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fourth Avenue/Ninth Street (New York City Subway). 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/20070312211857/http://www.stationreporter.net/4th9th.htm to http://www.stationreporter.net/4th9th.htm
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) 00:12, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fourth Avenue/Ninth Street station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk · contribs) 17:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall: Pass
Pass/Fail: 


### Review
#### Fourth Avenue Line
"As part of negotiations between New York City and the Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company (BRT) and the Interborough Rapid Transit Company" - too many and's. Should say "between New York City, the Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company (BRT), and the Interborough Rapid Transit Compan

Done. epicgenius (talk) 18:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


#### IND Culver Line platforms
Many paragraphs without references
Fixed. epicgenius (talk) 18:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


#### Service patterns
Are 4 citations needed for the sentence "Express service between Bergen and Church ended in 1976 due to budgetary concerns and passenger complaints, and the GG (later renamed the G) was again terminated at the Smith–Ninth Streets station."
Are 3 citations needed for the sentence "The G extension was made permanent in July 2012."
Removed both instances of citation overkill. epicgenius (talk) 18:20, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


#### BMT Fourth Avenue Line platforms
Bottom paragraph needs references
Fixed with the above. epicgenius (talk) 18:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


#### References
References #5, 11, 12, 26, 27, 28, 47 needs an access-date
Citation number 8 appears to be from a group blog (A Progressive Blog About Bay Ridge) which I believe violates WP:SPS.
 Removed
Can citation number 10 be clipped? It currently takes the reader to the whole page and one has to search for the information
 Done
Citation 43, 45 seem unneeded
 Removed
I'm not so sure about the Subwaynut references
@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Thanks for looking it over. I will pass most of the referencing issues to Kew Gardens 613 for him to look over. Subway Nut is used as an image citation (like in other pages about BMT Fourth Avenue Line stations), and it should be OK for basic facts. Regarding over-citations: that is probably a problem, but it is also an issue on other articles about IND Culver Line stations as well. So I will address these soon. epicgenius (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks so much Epicgenius. I'm also going to add that the photo of Northeastern stairs next to the Church of the Holy Family (bottom of the article) is oddly placed and should either be moved or removed. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
HickoryOughtShirt?4, thanks. I have done all of these, except some of the access dates. I was under the assumption that books don't require an access date because the content never changes.epicgenius (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Epicgenius I was just following Template:Cite book and saw it was an option but that seems to be full parameters. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 17:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Epicgenius and KKew Gardens 613 congrats! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:28, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Kew Gardens 613 (fixing ping). HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:28, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The article currently says a fifth exit is at "NW corner of 4th Avenue and 10th Street (in viaduct)". It's not clear what this is referring to - is it somehow referring to - the platform has an internal stairway used for transfers to the Culver line, but I don't think this should count as a separate exit as it goes to the building-style exists on either side of 4th avenue. Likewise, those building exist _both_ have extra doorways going to 10th avenue. This is all further complicated by the fact that the intersection literally has a north, south, east, and west corner - so it's not immediately clear which corner is meant. What am I missing, where is this exit supposed to be? Tduk (talk) 23:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)