Talk:New Paltz station

Notes for reviewers

I'm putting this at the top of the talk page to easily enable GA and FA reviewers to locate and verify the sources. The news articles used in this article are available at the Haviland-Heidgerd Historical Collection at the Elting Memorial Library. The library maintains a binder containing reproductions of news articles relating to the Wallkill Valley Railroad, as well as microfilm of old issues of the New Paltz Independent/Times. The master negatives for the New Paltz Independent/Times are also available at the New York Public Library. See New Paltz (village), New York#Newspapers for information about New Paltz newspapers.
--Gyrobo (talk) 15:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Citations

Just a heads up, citations like "New Paltz Independent (New Paltz, NY). 1869-11-11." are not complete. I would suggest including page numbers, titles, authors, etc, else someone may come by and quick-fail the article for incomplete citations. --Admrboltz (talk) 23:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Most of those articles were just untitled one-paragraph blurbs without mention of any author, and the issues themselves were fairly brief, but I'll try to get all that from the microfilm the next time I'm at the library. But while it would be preferable to have more data on each citation, and I will try to get such data, the info that exists is enough to verify; someone trying to check this article's sources would most likely use the binder the Elting Memorial Library maintains, containing reproductions of all articles related to the Wallkill Valley Railroad sorted by date and paper.
--Gyrobo (talk) 00:00, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Article name discussion 1

Here is another commercial article masquerading as an encyclopedic entry...the intro

La Stazione is a restaurant and former train station in New Paltz, New York. Originally built in 1870, it was rebuilt after a 1907 fire and closed as a station in 1958.

Within three words after the name of the business we learn this is a restaurant that was once a railway station. If this had any justifiability aside from being a puff piece regarding the aforementioned establishment called La Stazione the article would have had in fact been called New Paltz railroad station.

Its notability lies within the scope of being a former railroad station that had been converted to being a business not that it is now a named restaurant that operates from a former railway station.

A rail enthusiast would not see how "La Stazione is a restaurant " has any bearing on the article being about a railway station. In fact when people search for La Stazione, a restaurant, a search engine will show this article. Not the railway station. I am going to slap a Move tag on this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.56.201 (talk) 20:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I've edited the lede to remove "restaurant" from the first sentence. It's notability is as a former train station and its conversion is mentioned later in the lede anyway. I think it flows better chronologically this way, too. Station1 (talk) 20:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it may look better from a chronological standpoint, but I still don't consider its notability to be solely that it was once a train station. The building had a pretty colorful history after the railroad sold it in 1959, and half of the current structure didn't exist until the modern renovation (I'll have a source for that as soon as the library opens after the holidays).
--Gyrobo (talk) 22:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I've been rereading the lead, and I'm going to add the word "restaurant" back in. It may flow better chronologically to give a summary of the building's history, leading up to what it is now, and that's the purpose of the lead. But the first sentence needs to describe the subject. The building is foremost a current restaurant, with a history of its own, and then a former rail station that closed down in 1958.
--Gyrobo (talk) 02:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If that last sentence were true, then I would agree with the original poster in this section that the article doesn't belong on WP. We don't have articles about run of the mill suburban Italian restaurants. This is noteworthy in my opinion only because of the building, most definitely not because it's currently used as a restaurant. Station1 (talk) 06:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Most of the lead does talk about its history as a station, but the first sentence presents the reader with a single discrete statement about what the building is. It is a former train station, and that's definitely mentioned, but it needs to be immediately presented to the reader that it's also currently a restaurant, or the reader wouldn't know the meaning of the name La Stazione until much later in the lead.
--Gyrobo (talk) 13:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I do wonder about the notability of the article - it's certainly not notable as an article about a restaurant. It may also not be as an article about a railway station. It might be better as part of the rail trail article - perhaps as much as 3 paragraphs worth. As far as the anon goes - yes, I'll call him cynical, but he seems to be asking whether the author has a conflict of interest, see WP:COI. Nobody can force this info out of anybody else, but I think it would be useful for other editors to know the author's particular interest in this. Smallbones (talk) 05:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

There is no conflict of interest. I've never had any dealings with the restaurant or its owners, or even eaten there. The article started out as part of the rail trail article, but as I researched it I found enough material to warrant a separate article. And again, I'm not saying that being a former railroad station isn't what makes it notable – I'm only saying that it should be made immediately known to readers what the building currently is. For roughly half my life, this building has been a restaurant called La Stazione; it's how I've heard people refer to it, how the building would be located on a map, and what it will be called for the foreseeable future. I don't see the value in using an anachronism that was never an official name and isn't even in common use. I think I haven't been explaining myself clearly enough on that point.
--Gyrobo (talk) 05:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Article name discussion 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Macr86 (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

---

La Stazione → New Paltz railroad station — User:86.147.56.201 20:39, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. The structure is referred to in common usage as "La Stazione", not the "New Paltz railroad station" or any variant thereof. Rail enthusiasts looking for this building would be looking for "La Stazione". And I reject the notion that this is a "commercial article masquerading as an encyclopedic entry", it provides a very detailed and comprehensive history of the Wallkill Valley Railroad within New Paltz, devoting very little text to the building as a restaurant.
  --Gyrobo (talk) 20:52, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
• Comment - don't you think you should resolve this before the GA review? Racepacket (talk) 01:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• I don't think it conflicts with the stability criterion, because the outcome of this discussion will have no consequential effect on the page's content; at most, it will alter the first sentence of the lead slightly, but not in a way that changes its meaning.
  --Gyrobo (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• I've reread the requester's comments several times, and I think they're totally without merit. I see no evidence that any attempt was made to read beyond the second sentence – the third sentence clearly places the name of the building in a modern cultural context. No attempt was made to discuss the article's name before the move request was made, either on this talk page or on the talk page of the user indicated as actively maintaining the article (myself). The requester makes several tendentious assumptions about the scope of the article and about the subject's notability. I don't begrudge the requester the right to edit boldly, but I see no reason to delay a review of the article's substance while the clock runs out on a bike shed issue.
  --Gyrobo (talk) 17:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I understand your frustration, but the article is very new and has not had the opportunity to have been around long enough to be "stable." The pending move proposal is evidence of this. Racepacket (talk) 06:25, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

There is a significant backlog of transport GANs, and most of the sources in this article are only available at the Haviland-Heidgerd Historical Collection at the Elting Memorial Library (the master negatives for old issues of the New Paltz Independent/Times are also available at the New York Public Library). It may take more than a week for a reviewer to gain access to the material; given the holiday season (and the free time it can bring), I'd like potential reviewers to know as soon as possible about this article.
--Gyrobo (talk) 15:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

You have every right to nominate it for GA, but I can understand how the proposed move clock will run out before a reviewer will pick it up. Racepacket (talk) 16:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Article name discussion 3

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Racepacket (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

---

New Paltz railroad station → La Stazione— Throughout the last discussion (#Call me cynical...but), many intimations were made about my intentions regarding the naming of this article; claims were made that merely mentioning that the building is currently a restaurant is somehow promotional. At no point did anyone counter my argument that the article's name, per WP:COMMONNAME, is La Stazione. No explanation was given by the editor who moved the page and closed the request. I'd like the article moved back to its original name.
--Gyrobo (talk) 02:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Actually if this move was done without consensus (and that appears to be the fact) you should list this under "uncontroversial" moves to get an admin to reinstate the article to its original place and allow the discussion to proceed properly. --JaGa^talk 04:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

• I really do think the move was made without consensus (given the closer's other recent suspect closures), and so I've moved it back. I didn't want to do so before another editor agreed. --Gyrobo (talk) 14:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

• Likely whether this building is more notable as a restaurant or as a former railway station likely depends on how much each reader is interested in New York area railways and their history, or in restaurants. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

• True, but as I've tried to point out earlier, the notability of a subject is unrelated to its name. --Gyrobo (talk) 14:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Just because few people commented on either move doesn't mean that calling this after the business currently in residence, rather than the building, makes any sense. It's the busienss that is La stazione, not the building. Who gives a hooey about some restaurant? It could change seventeen times and the BUILDING would still be notable. How about going over to see Carol at Elting Memorial Library and see if she agrees that the building's COMMONNAME is the restaurtants? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.37.75 (talk) 05:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I'm a little late (okay, a lot late), but I didn't see your message. I did talk to Carol, she was the one who helped me find the news articles to write this page. She was also the one who convinced the library's board of directors to release four historical images from the library's archives under an open license so they could appear here; the release request she wrote for the images describes the building as "La Stazione Restaurant". I think it's entirely appropriate to use the name that this building has gone by for a dozen years now. And it is the building specifically that's called La Stazione, the guy who owns it has different names for his other restaurants, so it's not really like a chain.
--Gyrobo (talk) 04:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Article name discussion 4

All stations in the same county are named as the historical station name instead of their current use. See National Register of Historic Places listings in Ulster County, New York. I vote YES to rename the article! • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I must say I laughed when I saw that some restaurant in obscure upstate New York was the featured article of the day, no matter how good their calamari is. The building is notable for its historic use not its current use. I'm not active in featured article discussions so it is what it is. But if I'm the owner of La Stazione I'm happy today.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

The national register does not include all former railroad stations in the county, just the ones that are national landmarks. The issue of WP:COMMONNAME I brought up two years ago is still relevant; this building has gone by the same name for over a decade. Though its history as a station may be of more note than its history as a restaurant, people always refer to it as La Stazione and to do otherwise would be confusing. I don't believe there is any official criteria for naming former stations, it's probably a discussion for Wikipedia:WikiProject Stations rather than this one article in particular. --Gyrobo (talk) 20:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

• What people in New Paltz, New York call it is only of small relevance. People call the restaurant by that name, they have no cause to call the building anything separate except when dealing with why the building is notable. But its already a featured article, I'm not advocating any change in a rush.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 21:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I've put in the following under external links - but think it should be incorporated into the article, as I'd guess it is the original source for much of the material

• Olsen, Thomas G. "Landmark Designation Form" (PDF). New Paltz Railroad Station. Village of New Paltz Historic Preservation Commission. Retrieved 9 February 2013.

I'd like to see this redone as a contributing building of the New Paltz Downtown Historic District on the NRHP. I'd guess that there are about 10 other buildings in downtown New Paltz that are just as significant, so I do have to wonder what is all the fuss about this building (as expressed much earlier about 3 paragraphs above) I would be in favor of changing the name - this just isn't notable as a restaurant and the article is 90% about the building. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 02:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

This article was created because I'd already been researching the Wallkill Valley Railroad for the related rail trail articles; whether it was more or less important than the other buildings in the district wasn't something I thought of at the time. I've never seen that designation form before, and it seems to draw from the same sources that I did, though it mentions one or two newspaper articles I haven't seen that might contain useful information. I'll definitely look into incorporating those articles if I can. Again, I'm not disputing whether this building is more notable as a restaurant than as a train station, just that its modern, common name should be respected. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm with the above poster who expressed amusement that this was a featured article. On what grounds is this article so notable that it should be featured? When I saw it, my estimation of the credibility of WP was immediately lowered a few notches. It seemed obvious to me that titling the feature "La Stazione" implied that this article was about the restaurant, not the train station. The first sentence seemed to confirm that. Why has it not been changed? Does WP now advertise eateries?Mccue3g (talk) 21:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll just note that featured articles and "Today's Featured Article" are not selected according to notability, rather only by quality. At the same time, I have to also say that the reaction about this being a "Commercial article" is quite common, and this reaction, if nothing else, does lower Wikipedia's credibility. The author's reaction always is that the title is about WP:Common name. IMHO, the perception of WP:COI and commercialism greatly outweigh Common name in this case. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:45, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The appropriate title of this article was something I considered strongly, and I believe I even discussed the matter with the librarian at the Haviland-Heidgerd Historical Collection who helped get the article's historic photos approved for release under open licenses. This building (taking into account its incarnation which burned in 1907) has been around for 143 years. It's been a station for more than half that time, but it's served many other purposes that add to its documented history. People just don't refer to it today as "the former New Paltz railroad station", and calling it that would, in my eyes, defeat the purpose of COMMONNAME. Its common name is La Stazione; that's what people call it, that's what its landmark designation form says, that's what modern sources refer to it as, and that's what is in the OTRS for the historic photos used in the article. Regarding COI, what I said two years ago is still true today: I've never had any dealings with the owner of this restaurant, or even set foot in the place. This article was not written to promote anything. --Gyrobo (talk) 01:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on La Stazione. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110721220203/http://hudsonvalley.metromix.com/restaurants/italian/la-stazione-new-paltz/1294259/content to http://hudsonvalley.metromix.com/restaurants/italian/la-stazione-new-paltz/1294259/content
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110713010550/http://www.illustratedredlands.com/Individuals/SmileyAHAK.htm to http://www.illustratedredlands.com/Individuals/SmileyAHAK.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:32, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on La Stazione. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.villageofnewpaltz.org/filemgmt_data/files/vbmin20011212.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.villageofnewpaltz.org/filemgmt_data/files/Min20020123.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.villageofnewpaltz.org/filemgmt_data/files/Min20020925.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111209093528/http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=102830 to http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=102830
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://hpc.townofnewpaltz.com/images/hpc_data/86.33-2-6.1.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:31, 24 September 2017 (UTC)