Talk:Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority/Archive 1

message: ;How about we move all the station and line pages from Name (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority) to Name (MBTA), so the title line isn't dominated by the disambiguator?
;—wwoods 20:51, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorter disambuator? 

message: This site
MBTA Resources
is a fantastic collection of Boston transit information, down to station by station histories and photos.  I suggest it be added to the "external links" section of the article. --DeanoNightRider 12:24, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think so, you're welcome to add the link (no need to ask for consensus on an uncontroversial edit -- this is Wikipedia, after all!) jdb ❋ 12:52, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Did it.--DeanoNightRider 00:07, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent Resource 

message: I've started looking at the history of the streetcars - I've written Dorchester Railroad and Cambridge Horse Railroad. User:SPUI/New England streetcar companies is a partial list of the companies; the Railroad History Database was the source of most of these (and has detailed info for some). The NOT FOUND ones were in other sources (mostly a pair of maps (1898-1899) on  http://memory.loc.gov/ ). --SPUI (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Streetcar history

message: I'm not sure i understand what is meant by  prepayment stations being "still in place" under fare collection. There are no free transfers between buses and subway at Harvard, for example, though the old street car tunnels were preserved. --agr 22:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Clarified. -- Beland 14:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prepayment stations 

message: DudeUrSistersHot wrote: "the silver line phase 3 is in no way 'uncertain', and is certainly more certain than most other "active planning" projects" I don't quite agree. There is no funding source identified for Phase 3 and  community groups are advocating for a different approach, with trolley cars on Washington st connecting to existing Green Line tracks via some abandoned tunnels. The later plan could end up cheaper than Phase 3, whose costs have ballooned as the scope of the project increases. By contrast, the T F Green station is just awaiting enactment of the Federal Transportation Bill now before the US Congress. --agr 04:12, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: All of this has been completely changed by the January 1, 2007 fare restructuring, and I have updated the article to account for it. -- Beland 14:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Silver Line Phase 3 status

message: Riding on CT1, CT2, or CT3 does not grant you a free transfer automatically, as the text in this section of the article reads. Similar to Silver Line Washington, users pay 90 cents, $1.25 for a transfer slip (CT3 crosses Riverside which is $1.50 inbound).
Some other free transfers also exist, including to outbound local Route 1 (toward Dudley Square, Roxbury) at Mass Ave Orange Line. Also to Route 39 at Copley. Regardless if transfer machines are more like museum artifacts (in that they are for admiring, not using...)
:All of this has been completely changed by the January 1, 2007 fare restructuring, and I have updated the article to account for it. -- Beland 14:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Free Transfers?

message: I have changed the  template to a new  template (which is identical to the old  template) so that  can be used for , in the same way that  can be used for  —Mets501 (talk) 22:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: <nowiki>{{mb}} to {{MBTABus}}</nowiki>

message: A source for the line colors is called for. As it is, the explanations seem quite apocryphal. --Belg4mit 00:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colors 

message: I think it is interesting that someone removed my previous comment about the reliability of the MBTA.  It is a common fact that many Bostonians feel the MBTA overcharges and underproduces for their services.
66.31.86.195 02:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MBTA reliability 

message: These might be useful to expand the histories of this article or more likely subarticles. -- Beland 00:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for history 

message: This is a little off-topic, but I'm rather surprised nobody's written anything about the BAT, given the proximity and overlapping service area. --Belg4mit 00:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a few private semi-private/public carriers which still exist in Mass.  The BAT for Brockton is one of them....  There's also one for Lexington that comes to mind...  Also one in Worcester and I think Haverhill too also each have one...  The name of another system which doesn't quickly come to mind right now-- I believe that Fitchburg also had one planned a few years ago also. It would be tough to single out the BAT.  The Ferry service by the T- is also a private venture as are the 13 (or-so) private coach lines that partner with the T.  I think it is a slippery slope.  If I were you I would just leave the T article with the tone that the T- is not the only public transportation provider in Mass. As seen here 
CaribDigita 03:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The link I added on the MBTA Advisory Board will show what I mean...  See this page   Those are other Mass. Agencies that are pretty-much on par with the MBTA.  They're missing some though. (Unless they're only focusing on Eastern MA.) CaribDigita 03:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: OT: BAT

message: Pages should probably be updated.
"The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Agency says the transit system recorded an average 1.28 million passenger trips on weekdays in 2008, the highest ridership total ever and a 4.3 percent increase over the previous year. "
Article: http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO103174/
Datadyne007 (talk) 06:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Weekday Ridership All-Time Record 

message: the Capital improvements section is kind of a mess. if anyone is looking at this page meerly to find out information about, say, when the green line is going to be extended they can't eaisly. Im going ot reorganize it into a layout that highlights the plans for each line as oposed to what the funding is coming from for the project. If anyone dissagrees let me know.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capital improvements section 

message: What's the deal with that? Is it still in proposal or will MassTrans replace teh MBTA? More mention of this in the article is needed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.238.158 (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This "MassTrans" or "DOT" proposal (et al) would be a *return* of the MBTA to the state.  The MBTA was a state agency previously. However, after intense pressure from people in western Massachusetts; the MBTA was told to learn how to support itself financially.   Many western Massachusetts residents felt that they shouldn't have to financially support the MBTA with their taxes (since it doesn't really travel out there.)  They had a valid point.  So, reforms by previous governors turned the MBTA and Turnpike into "Quasi-state agencies", as are their official status.  Hence, the fare increases and toll hikes over the years.   The MBTA has since sold-off as much as it could.  All that now remains either: land, air rights, or right-of-way licensing agreements.  Not a great deal is known about the exact structure as of yet. And with the state taking back-over, the legislature will probably have to hammer all that out. And you can bet all of the cities and towns on the T's advisory board will seek to put their $0.02 in too. I know Dan had a contract, but Deval is really going to be hard pressed to reform all of this in an election year (15 months to-go), and with limited state budget.  The other problem the governor will face is since the pension reform plan cut-off last June, many of the MBTA's very knowledgeable top brass (which had enough time-in) retired out of the system.  People that know how the MBTA used to operate going all the way back (to say) the 1980s.  I wish the governor well but, the only person *I* can think of who could get him out of this bind would be perhaps Michael Dukakis?  He knows the state like the back of his hand and is a well known advocate of quality state transportation. Who really knows if Dukakis would ever want to take-on this task for a few years. CaribDigita (talk) 03:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  MassTrans? 

message: I know blogs are generally frowned-upon given a blog can say just about anything. This one however might be one to consider.  The official state blog on transportation transportation.blog.state.ma.us. CaribDigita (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link suggestion(s) 

message: The similarities between the MBTA logo and the "T" marking Stockholm Metro stations (T as in Tunnelbana, subway in Swedish) is obvious and also commented in article. But can anyone explain why MBTA choose to pick up the Stockholm T? T as in Transportation? Luttrad (talk) 23:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stockholm Metro 

message: I have the vague impression that the MBTA Police, the Mass Turnpike Police, MDC Police, and State Police were partially consolidated in some manner by the state government.  Could somebody more knowledgeable about this revise the appropriate articles, with WP:RS ?  Reify-tech (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: See List of defunct law enforcement agencies of Massachusetts. Long story short, the MDC police and a few smaller agencies were merged to create the modern Mass State Police in 1992. The Turnpike had no separate police, and has been patrolled by State Police Troop E for decades, while the MBTA police remain part of the MBTA, separate from the State Police. This may be (speculating here) because they're an example of a railroad police department which have particular jurisdiction over railroad property in federal law, and the MBTA as the owner of its commuter rail lines is obligated to have one, just like any railroad, public or privately owned. oknazevad (talk) 04:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  MBTA Police consolidated? 

message: This article is badly in need of updates in many areas, and I have done a bunch of them, as well as expanding coverage of some system-wide issues such as bicycles and parking.  I have tried to cull out most occurrences of "recently", "currently", and other WP:DATED terms, replacing them with Template:As of or removing them entirely, if appropriate.
The sections on "Projects underway and future plans" have gotten quite out of sync with other Wikipedia MBTA articles, and with reality.  For example, there was no mention of the closure several months ago of Government Center, which is a major hub transfer station.  I propose that the detailed project descriptions in this section be trimmed down to brief summaries, with pointers to the more-detailed articles or sections elsewhere.  Also, I've added a hidden editorial note in a few of the pointed-to articles, reminding editors to update the summary in the main MBTA article here, when making major updates to the subsidiary project sections.  
The too-lengthy "History" section should be trimmed, with detailed material moved to the History of the MBTA, and much overlapping coverage here either removed or consolidated.  For example, the "Kickback scheme" section is notable and well-sourced, but should be moved to the History article, and summarized concisely in a sentence or two here, at most.  Many of the historical details throughout this section, although interesting, do not belong here because they aren't vitally relevant to a system-wide understanding of the MBTA as it is today.
Getting unneeded duplicate or overlapping material out of this main article will make it easier to maintain, and will keep it from getting even longer than it is now.  This main article should focus on giving an overview of the MBTA, including system-wide issues not well-covered in another article, but leave a lot of the details needing constant updating to subsidiary articles.  This is going to be a lot of work, and I'm not proposing to do it alone, without support from other Wikipedia editors.  As it stands, this article is quite far from Good Article quality, and we shouldn't even think of annoying the evaluators until we get our editorial act together.  Reify-tech (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates and trims 

message: In terms of the recent history of the MBTA, both the organization's handling of the winter of 2014-2015 season as well as Bev Scott's resignation seem relevant and worthwhile. Certainly, they seem as worthwhile as mentioning the Boston Marathon bombing. If I am using this page as a source of general information, I am very likely interested in the activity surrounding the leadership. Someone rv'd my changes entirely but did not use the undo feature. I want to appeal here to the community to see if my changes from February 2015 were indeed irrelevant. Thanks so much.  Jpittman (talk) 02:20, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole issue with the winter storms is probably worth including in History of the MBTA, which needs a vast expansion and to have much of the content from MBTA#History moved to it. Bev Scott's resignation will of course be part of that. However, the paragraph that you inserted covered only a very narrow portion of that (a single day), focused on the resignation of an executive rather than the actual service (undue weight - MBTA executives have a very short shelf life these days, hardly qualifying as important), and was not encyclopediac ("inept" is particularly problematic wording). Based on that, I judged that it was not worth including it in the article until it was properly and substantially rewritten. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks very much for the clarification. I agree with the reasoning. In particular, I was not aware of a history page which seems reasonable as a location for this kind of information. Jpittman (talk) 02:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Bev Scott's Resignation Worthwhile content? 

message: I think that it's about time that the numbers are updated from 2008. I'm staring at the 2014 MBTA Blue Book, there's also the NTD profile of the MBTA - we have plenty of information to update and provide improved data should anyone be interested. Any objections? I'll wait a few days before do it.
My second point regards the lede. I had a recent conversation with someone who quoted wikipedia as part of his point that busses carry more people than the rail in Boston. His argument was, according to wikipedia the subway accounts for roughly 550k of 1.3mil trips and his assumption was the non-subway portion was all bus. That obviously is not true, only the RL, OL, and BL are classified as subways. The GL is light rail, and the CR is a common carrier railroad. The reason I think the lede could be improved is that Boston is somewhat unique amongst American cities in its reliance on rail rapid transit. DC and NYC are, I believe the only other cities that also have more rail trips than bus. The reason is because the bus system in Boston is a relic of the old BERy streetcar network - the point of those streetcars was to feed to the rapid transit lines (also owned by BERy) - that's why, today, Boston is one of the few American cities whose bus system is mostly a rapid-transit feeder system. CantabTT (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Significant data updates will be very much appreciated. The entire article still needs some major reworking, as suggested in #Updates and trims above. The lede should then be rewritten to summarize the entire article. I'm not so sure that Boston is so unique in the US for rail vs. bus mix. Places like San Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia have extensive rail systems that resemble Boston's setup. They also have a radial/hub topology to a large extent, with poor crosstown or circumferential connections, mostly via bus. The devil is in the details (e.g. how do you define "Boston" or "San Francisco", or how do you define "subway"). Any exceptional claims must be carefully defined, and thoroughly referenced.  Reify-tech (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2015 Updates/Lede Clarification 

message: Its' been proposed the MBTA had its own WikiProject. It's certainly a big and complex enough topic that it would probably be better served by its own dedicated WikiProject.
Several alternative names have been suggested, with wider geographic coverage.
Please discuss both at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. — Lentower (talk) 22:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not go up a level and have a wider "Mass Department of Transportation?" which the MBTA is a part of?  or a wide "Transportation in Massachusetts" one? The other units of MassDOT the RMV, Turnpike, MassPort, Roads in Massachusetts etc. all need help and I doubt they'll get as much collab. alone. CaribDigita (talk) 00:07, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you click over to the proposal, you'll see there are alredy several wider geographic names being considered.  Be more helpful if you help keep all the discussion in one place. — Lentower (talk) 00:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority 

message: I just did some editing on Roxbury,_Boston#Transportation. Hopefully, one of you can do more editing and wikilinking. — Lentower (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs editing 

message: Is there any reason for the "(MBTA station)" ending on articles about stations with unambiguous names? I see several of them (full list at User:Od Mishehu/MBTA no dab), where the article name without that ending is just a redirect to the article name with it. (To be fair, I did create some of them; however, that was just where the article name without the ending didn't exist.) עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:19, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names for articles about unambiguous MBTA stations 

message: So there was a memorable article in the Boston Globe. On the T, one size doesn’t fit all - By Robin Washington - FEBRUARY 25, 2015  It talks about the dimensions of each train line and why trains on each cannot work on another. CaribDigita (talk) 05:17, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memorable article - Boston Globe 

message: Hello! Thank you for putting up the notice for the subsection. I moved it over here to see if there was any content that other editors think might be useful for the history section of the MBTA article since the article has had an update notice since June 2015. Before we start condensing or splitting, there is some content that I think can easily and should be moved back to the Charlie Baker article. I can do that first. However, upon reading the section was there any content that stood out to you that could easily be moved to other articles or different sections of the MBTA article? Thanks. -- User:Jajhill (talk) 10:06, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charlie Baker administration (2015–Present) subsection downsize 

message: Thewellman (talk) 04:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox

message: Is there an MBTA museum? I did not turn anything up in a brief search, but it seems odd there the oldest system in the country should not have one. Many other major systems, like the SFO cable cars, have museums. Heck, New York even has a museum with some MBTA cars. --Belg4mit 04:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not that I know of, but there are historical cars at Boylston and some explanatory panels at Boylston, Park Street, Downtown Crossing, Davis Square, and perhaps other stations. -- Beland 14:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Library on the second floor of the State Transportation Building keeps some historical info but I don't believe there is an actual museum.  Most of the decommissioned stuff gets pitched, stored in some bus garage, or possibly turned into art if lucky. CaribDigita (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Seashore Trolley Museum in Kennebunk Maine has a lot of old MBTA artifacts including working streetcars and former subway cars and busses.  One of the old trolleys in the Boylston station is owned by this museum. Parcanman (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Museum 

message: I've been doing infobox projects for rapid transit station articles in BART, DART and Miami Metrorail over the past three weeks.  I've expanded into MBTA articles recently.  Since I'm not able to do all the work due to time constraints, any help on adding station infoboxes to the other rapid transit MBTA station articles would be much appreciated.  Examples of these can be found in Boston North Station, Boston South Station, Government Center (MBTA station) and Downtown Crossing (MBTA station).  I prefer the line descripts in the boxes be styled like I have them (color-coded).  Thanks.  Any other info and corrections would help as well.  GETONERD84 13:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Station Infoboxes

message: Why don't you give the overall length of the system?  How in heck can you judge a system without that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.113.60.23 (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Length of system

message: Today, I placed in the infobox at the top of this page what basically amounts to a single photograph (using 9 photos combined into one) showing (or attempting to show) all of the services offered by the MBTA (except for Boat). Similar pictures were placed in the infoboxes for Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) and New Jersey Transit; the common link between these two and the MBTA (and SEPTA, which will have one placed there soon) is that they are all multimodal agencies with at least three modes. But should other images be moved to the Commons instead of being listed, as the infobox picture (a 3072 x 2304 image) shows all of the services---subway lines, bus, BRT, and light rail---except for aforementioned MBTA Boat? --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So I think a problem is that the picture of the Blue Line features the old cars which are no longer used in regular service. Can you swap in a picture with the new cars?165.82.82.22 (talk) 17:48, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other images, keep in this article, or move to Commons?

message: Jan 27 2009: There's no discussion or pointer to the 2008 MIT undergrad's hack of the magstripe used by MBTA. This made it onto the Defcon 2008 DVD, but the students were barred from actually presenting it to the audience by an injunction filed by MBTA. EFF is fighting this right now.
Thanks,
David Small
davetracer@aol.com
67.190.176.98 (talk) 00:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It probably could go in the article CharlieCard. And possibly- in the article of the manufacturer of the CharlieCard. CaribDigita (talk) 02:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Magstripe hack

message: Does anyone else watch Cities of the Underworld on the History Channel?  The reason I ask there was an episode I saw either this month (July '09) or the previous month.  The episode(I think) was either about New York City or secret societies in New York City.  Anyway within one of those episodes in question, they hurl a claim that they found an old bricked over portion of NYC subway that is even older than the London subway?  They say it was a part of the Long Island Railway which had been recessed below Brooklyn. This rail line then terminated just blocks away from the East river. I didn't hear the exact claim, but in any case I think the claim about Boston being the oldest could be in conflict with this. I don't have the DVD-set. Therefore I can't verify the claim right away for verbatim accuracy and for scrutiny against doublespeak. Does anyone else have a copy on hand? or have witnessed this themselves before? According to Tivo the index of upcoming episodes, these two are not in the History Channel line-up for at least the next week or two at least. CaribDigita (talk) 00:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can a tunnel without stations, regardless of antiquity, compete with the Boston or London subways as a subway?  I don't have the answer to that, but you can learn a lot about the Cobble Hill Tunnel from its article on WP (and the included links).  It is undoubtedly the place you heard about.  In fact, the article mentions the History Channel series. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Hertz1888.  I believe that is the tunnel I was referring to.  In the episode they said there was a (possible) single-platform station located at terminus of the subterranean track.  The reason I say possible is a member of the group which found the tunnel stated that the source documents (which told them of the existence of the tunnel), went on to say that the criminal underworld in the past utilized a station in that tunnel. Further, the source says there is supposed to be a locomotive that was bricked-up inside the actual station. As of the episode it was inconclusive since they didn't get past the second brick wall.  Now I know Wikipedia is clear on rumour and speculation WP:Sources and WP:CRYSTAL, so I think the "Oldest Subway in America" is safe at this point. However if the station is proven, do you think it could make this claim by the MBTA questionable? To my mind, I thought maybe the part  about being the oldest subway could be secured by something like" The oldest known subway system in America, which has been in continuous operation." With a second ref. to that Cobble Hill if the second station is proven? Actually, step one perhaps I should look up a few dictionaries to see if there is a basic criteria for being a "subway". e.g. two or more stations or something. As that would stop this dead in its tracks and make this easily a non-starter. CaribDigita (talk) 15:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Greetings, CD.  There are many legends about that tunnel, but I didn't find anything in the article or its sources about one station, let alone two.  Someday, if the closed-off portion is excavated, we may find out whether the locomotive is real, and maybe even one station.  It doesn't strike me as likely to usurp the T's place in history, but we'll see. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cities of the Underworld? Claim about New York subway.