# Talk:JFK/UMass station

The article mentions a renovation, but doesn't say when it happens.  Isn't there also a neat thingy that tells you which track the next inbound train is coming on?  -- Beland 02:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Both are now in the article. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:50, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

A statement is made "It is the only MBTA rapid transit station where trains from different branches of a line arrive on separate platforms; this is because the Ashmont and Braintree branches merge immediately inbound from the station. "
What about N. Station, (Green line level at) Park Street, Kenmore?  The green line maybe considered "light rail" however, is it not treated as Heavy Rail/Rapid Transit while at the fore-mentioned stations?  (Or in the case of N. Station Orange/Green) where they are side by side. (comment from User:CaribDigita)

At Kenmore all branches use the same platforms; instead, they're split inbound/outbound. Same for Park Street. The Orange and Green Lines are separated, so the comment doesn't apply to North Station. The wording (legacy text from before my time) is thus technically correct, if badly phrased. You're welcome to make it clearer. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:35, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I tried to clean up the confusing platforms explanation, and hope I didn't make it worse.  It's the best I could do in between several other things I was working on.  I also noticed an inconsistency between the "South Shore Line" and "Braintree Branch", which are more or less the same thing, but not quite.  I started to clean it up, then realized that we should probably use the official MBTA terminology. I would guess that the South Shore name is more stable, since the terminus of the line changes over time (Quincy Center, then Braintree, then whatever is next).  There's nothing wrong with using an informal or shortcut name, but we should be clear about naming to start with, and reasonably consistent thereafter. Any suggestions?  --Reify-tech (talk) 00:02, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I have access to a couple different track maps of the JFK/UMass area, including a 1986 geographic map (still accurate) and the 2009 Bluebook. I'm tentatively planning to make my free-use map roughly geographic but with the N-S scale compressed (to make the map something other than awkwardly tall). Thoughts? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like an excellent idea, including the vertical compression.  Reify-tech (talk) 18:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Great. I've got some ongoing business - I found the original source for high-res images of South Station, and a trove of SEPTA images to transfer to Commons - but I should be able to rig something up soon. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

For better or for worse, I believe we should use the MBTA's actual descriptions of their bus routes. (I swear I'm not just picking a fight over a random comma, and it general I use the Oxford comma). I have conceded extending abbrevations for the sake of clarity, but the more the route descriptions are altered, the more we risk being off in the realm of original research. I don't think there's an reason to include - much less emphasize - the Oxford comma in the 41 route description; we should attempt to present information as its official sources give it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Without any comma, the official MBTA route description is ambiguous and confusing. I tried using square brackets to indicate minor editing for clarity, but it was immediately removed before many other editors could see it. It admittedly looks a bit ugly, but might be an acceptable compromise between slavish quotation and undisclosed editorial change:
41 Centre & Eliot Street - JFK/UMass Station via Dudley Station, Centre Street[,] & Jackson Square Station
Reify-tech (talk) 23:44, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
That is the ugliest compromise I've ever seen. Why don't you just leave it alone. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, it's ugly, but an edit war would be even uglier. Anybody got a better idea? Reify-tech (talk) 23:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
As WP editors, we are suppose to base our edits on sources, not on our personal judgement of what's ugly.  Leave the comma out, when the MBTA leaves the comma out. — Lentower (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect JFK station. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 28#JFK station until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  feminist (+) 02:38, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535
During the time that I will restrain myself from swapping out images other than my own(I gave myself until 09/07/2025), I have put my focus towards photographing the newest Red Line trains south of Andrew station. As of right now, I have images prepared for Fields Corner and Quincy Adams stations, although I will likely give until 2027 at the latest to swap those images out. However, for JFK/UMass station in particular, I believe that the current infobox image could be improved upon, as I find that there is too much contrast between shaded and open-lit areas. In the row below, the current infobox image is at left, while the other two images are ones of mine that could potentially replace it.

When taking the two more recent photographs, I primarily intended to minimize the contrast between sunlit and shaded areas, but also adjust the positioning of the camera to capture the platforms below in better detail. Please share your thoughts on which image works best. IliketrainsR211T (talk) 03:38, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Also - I had previously heard about the stairs to the southern overpass being closed at JFK/UMass station back in 2022, but as of the time I took the two newer images, those stairs have been reopened. Does anyone know of exactly when this happened, and do we think that the December 2022 image of the the stairs could get swapped out as well? IliketrainsR211T (talk) 11:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
@IliketrainsR211T: Your suggested images are almost identical. You really, really did not need to upload both of them - and a third nearly-identical image as well. If you want to test very-similar images of stations, I recommend using another image-hosting website like flickr, and only uploading the best ones to Commons.
Both your suggested images have the problems of poor late-afternoon lighting with dark sky, lack of contrast between sky and subject, and excessive saturation that make them less than ideal for an infobox image. Minimizing contrast is not always best; it tends to produce flat images that can make details harder to see. I would suggest going with midday lighting, either in sun or bright clouds, which will provide better contrast. I also suggest using more natural color settings to avoid the excessive saturation. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
@Pi.1415926535 I just re-uploaded my first shot at JFK/UMass station without any post-processing. It was taken at 4:10 PM during the day, so the sky is still bright enough for a good infobox image. The contrast between shaded and open-lit areas, however, is naturally not there because the sun is covered behind the clouds. I personally think this would be a more ideal lighting situation for showing the platforms down below in better detail. IliketrainsR211T (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
@Pi.1415926535 Ultimately, the point I'm trying to make for any outdoor overshot images is this: While you may be right that the best time of day to photograph an infobox image is during mid-day, I find it ideal to have the sun covered up in the clouds (especially on a partly cloudy day) to naturally minimize any contrast between shaded and open-lit areas. This way, it is somewhat easier for the viewer to note the details of the platform(s) from above, even if the canopy blocks out the light. That is the main issue that I find with the 2013 image - first of all, the Ashmont branch platform is barely visible behind the dark shadows, and second, the view of the Braintree branch platform is pretty much completely blocked by the platform canopy. The newer image I intend to use is also considerably higher resolution, given that the cameras we use are generally more advanced now than they were over 10 years ago. IliketrainsR211T (talk) 02:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
@Pi.1415926535
In regards to a recent minor edit I made to a caption of a 2022 image of the then-closed south stairs at JFK/UMass station, I did upload a photo of the same staircase from last month to show that it is now reopened for pedestrian access. I did hear from you, however, that a more reliable source is needed. In this case, would it be better to replace the 2022 image with my newer image? I ask this because at this point, the 2022 image and caption are outdated.

Additionally, in regards to the image that I want to use for the infobox(At left), I have reuploaded different versions of this photograph with different levels of post-processing in response to your previous comments, some of which I did refute. In this case, I do hold firm behind using my image for the infobox, because it is noticeably less blurry compared to the 2013 image and because the camera is more precisely positioned to better show both Red Line platforms from above. Please look through my reuploads and you may change the current version to which one you think came out best.
 IliketrainsR211T (talk) 17:55, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
No, the text talks about the closure (with reliable source), so it's best for the accompanying image to show that. The image and caption are not "outdated"; they deliberately show a specific point in time. I will remind you that user-generated sources like self uploads on Commons are not considered reliable sources.
I stand by my previous comments about the infobox photo. The important visual characteristics of an infobox image are how it appears at infobox scale; high resolution and imperfections that are not visible at infobox scale simply do not matter. Once again, please stop insisting that infobox images follow your personal preferences that do not match encyclopedia norms. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:32, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Even if the 2013 infobox image remains in place, it is eventually going to become outdated within the next few years. On some other MBTA infoboxes, particularly Newton Centre and Fields Corner stations, newer images were put into place by @4300streetcar mainly for the higher resolution, so I don't see why I shouldn't be trying to follow suit for the JFK/UMass station in particular. IliketrainsR211T (talk) 23:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)