Talk:BMT 63rd Street Line

message: I don't agree that this article should be a stub; given the limited nature of the topic there's very little left about it to say.  Niffweed17 02:00, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The article isn't a stub. The "background" section is a stub. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 02:59, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There's definitely more to say about the background, like the origins of the Broadway Line stubs that it was connected to. --SPUI (talk) 03:18, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub

message: The current edit says that the line....
:runs from a connection with the BMT Broadway Line at 57th Street and 7th Avenue north and east to Lexington Avenue–63rd Street, where it connects to the IND 63rd Street Line and ends.
But further down, it says that there is a station at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street, with transfers available to various other lines. I believe this is incorrect. The BMT half of the station is incomplete, has never opened, and is walled off. A train on the BMT 63rd Street Line cannot stop there. Only trains on IND 63rd Street Line can stop at Lexington Avenue. (There are, however, switches west of the station, so trains on either line can move to the other.)
I've revised it to indicate that trains on the BMT side of the line cannot stop at the station. Marc Shepherd 18:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of clarity about line's definition 

message: I would suggest that this article be merged with IND 63rd Street Line. There is very little to be said about this line on its own. There is currently a  tag on the "Background" section of this article. Were it to be filled in, it would be largely the same background as for the IND 63rd Street Line, since the whole project was constructed at one time.
Moreover, there is now a single page for Archer Avenue Line, even though that line's two levels — unlike the 63rd Street Line — have no interconnection whatsoever. On the edit history for List of New York City Subway lines, Larry V suggested the other day that there should be only one article on Archer Av; there is not enough material to write two legimate articles, one for each division.
Surely if that's true of the Archer Avenue Line, it is true here too, for much the same reason. Marc Shepherd 20:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should not be merged into a single article. The lines have separate origins, and will have separate destintions. They also have different chaining letters. The BMT line is chained BMT G and the IND line is IND T.  All they share in common is a single station. Same deal with Archer Avenue Line. One originates at from the QB line and is chained IND D and the other originates on Jamaica Avenue and is chained BMT J. If they arer ever extended where they're supposed to go they will also take off in two completely different directions. -- Cecropia 21:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's all certainly true, and by no means should the two be considered one line. But surely it wouldn't be difficult to have one article that makes the separation abundantly clear? --Larry V (talk | contribs) 02:01, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I was thinking. Marc Shepherd 03:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with IND 63rd Street Line?

message: What the title says. --Epicgenius  My Epic Contributions/My Genius Talk 19:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with IND 63rd Street Line to become 63rd Street Line?