Talk:J/Z (New York City Subway service)

Removed stuff

This comes from the article and K (Broadway Brooklyn Local):

15 JAMAICA

R1 end rollsign

J NASSAU ST	JJ NASSAU ST
R27 end rollsigns

J	JJ	QJ
1967-1979 bullets (in a circle)

K	KK
1968-1976 bullets (in a circle)

14 BROADWAY

R1 end rollsign

KK NASSAU ST

R27 end rollsign (used even after Chrystie St.[1])

1906 article

The BRT Opens Its New Extension for Through Traffic

The Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company opened for yesterday its new elevated[?] extension to Canarsie Landing, on the shore of Jamaica Bay. A through service between the Williamsburg Bridge and Canarsie by way of Broadway, the East New York Loop, and the Canarsie Elevated was established. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NE2 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 2007 April 21

Name

Since the MTA considers the J a local and the Z an express train (see <http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tjnxt.pdf>), please do not change the name in the infobox to "Nassau Street Express" or "Nassau Street Local". The name should read "Nassau Street Local and Express" in accordance with the designation in MTA's official schedule, in the same way as the 7 is designated Flushing Local and Express.Avman89 (talk) 05:25, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the above (If the service guide says it. it's true). However, somebody keeps changing it. Coasterlover1994 23:47, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Service pattern

Any idea of how to make the Midday table? The J runs express outside of rush hours.--iGeMiNix 15:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

No need for a mid-day column; the weekdays column covers that. Express service ends after the PM rush hour, but I don't see a need for a separate evening column. Is an evening column needed? Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I don't know about the evening column, I mean it does make it more precise but it is just a minor change on the table anyways.--iGeMiNix 19:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Black and white speeding train image

@Yanping Nora Soong:, @Grapple X: While I hope the edit war over this image has calmed down, I have to say that I don't think the picture adds much value to the article, or someone wanting to find out about the subway line. Compare with some pictures on other articles, such as High Line (New York City) or Docklands Light Railway. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

It follows the rules of composition and photography. Also, the J train passes over the Williamsburg Bridge so it is frequently seen (or felt) by pedestrians walking over it, even at night. Most daytime pictures of the J train use a shutter speed that is way too fast to give a sensation of motion. Yanping Nora Soong (talk) 17:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

While that may be true, images need to give something to the reader above and beyond what the text says, and I'm not sure "it's a fast train" is enough. To give an analogous example, consider File:Eurostar on CTRL.jpg which shows a train on High Speed 1, a line with a verifiable top speed of 140mph, yet the image is colourful and unblurred. However, even then that's not a great image; have a look at some of our featured pictures for land transport for some ideas. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I think my image is aesthetically pleasing? It's showing the railway line on the Williamsburg Bridge at night / in the early morning, with high contrast. It actually takes quite a bit of work to photograph a fast-moving train with a shutter speed at 1/6th of a second, without a tripod, damping the vibrations of the train by stabilizing my camera on a padded backpack on the overlooking rail, with the bridge and railway coming out extremely sharp. See Motion blur (which was intentional). This all had to be done successfully while making sure (fast-moving) train was not only still in the frame, but well-composed. The example image you give has low-contrast, not well-composed, is overexposed, and is not aesthetically pleasing. Yanping Nora Soong (talk) 17:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I fully appreciate the technical challenges in photography, and imagine they are similar to music. I'm not trying to pour cold water on your efforts, or disparage your work in any way at all; simply I was wondering if it was suitable for this article. To try and give an analogy, I once heard somebody dismiss fast-playing, technically, flash guitarists with "that's like judging a novel by how quickly it was typed". Anyway, as Grapple X says, there is a consensus for the picture to stay, so let's leave it there. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

As far as I see it, it's free for us to use and doesn't detract from the article, so there's no harm in it. GRAPPLE ^X 17:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

YNS's photo is artistically and aesthetically appealing, though it doesn't go in style with most of the other NYCS service articles, which usually have only one picture of the current rolling stock. (The J and Z have six such pictures, courtesy of JoesphBarbaro (talk · contribs), but they're all packed in a gallery.)

Anyway, a picture of a J train is good enough for most readers. epicgenius (talk) 20:18, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

@Yanping Nora Soong, Grapple X, and Ritchie333: Just as clarification, do any of you have objections to removal of the picture, though? epicgenius (talk) 20:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I was really trying to calm down an edit war more than anything else. As I said, if people think the picture is better left in, I'm happy to go with consensus. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, I guess I will leave it in per consensus. None of the other service articles, however, have more than one image of each type of rolling stock, so I understand why TheManchoMan and his IP were trying to remove the black-and-white image. epicgenius (talk) 14:55, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Rolling Stock Update

The new R179 are now running on the J and Z lines so put that in rolling Stock and how much trains there is. RedProofHill123 (talk) 20:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

One set is in service for 30-day testing. We shouldn't add it yet.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok RedProofHill123 (talk) 21:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Now it’s in service on J And Z now you can update it RedProofHill123 (talk) 20:28, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

The R179s 2 trains entered real service on Jan 12 RedProofHill123 (talk) 17:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Why isn’t the R179 they updated it. RedProofHill123 (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Z having own article

Hello, I am pinging people who edit a ton on the New York Subway to address an idea.

@Epicgenius:@Kew Gardens 613:

I believe the "Z" should have its own article. The Z is an independent subway letter and deserves its own letter. The "B" is mostly always with the "D" (with the Q for a bit) and it got its own article. I believe the Z can benefit from its own article. It is notable enough. It barely gets a mention in this.

I am asking for your opinions and if you approve, can we collaborate to create a "Z" article?

AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:44, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@AmericanAir88: I would strongly oppose. The Z is basically a rush hour variant of the J that operates skip stop with the latter during that time frame only. Both run the same entire route from Parsons/Archer to Broad Street, via the same lines. The B, in contrast, operates via the Brighton Line, as opposed to the D on the Fourth Avenue and West End lines in Brooklyn. So, to answer your question, no. We shouldn't make a separate "Z" article. --Roadrunner3000 (talk) 16:26, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Agreed with Roadrunner3000 as the MTA considers the J/Z as a single service, shown together in one timetable, not to mention contrary to what the discussion starter said, this article already mentions the Z's entire history. Since its creation in 1988, it has always been the J's skip-stop variant and nothing else.

Fair enough. AmericanAir88 (talk) 23:25, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I also agree with Roadrunner3000's reasoning. It is wholly unnecessary to split the Z article, basically because all the content is already covered here, and because it is merely an alternate designation given to six rush-peak J trains in each direction. On the other hand, the B has its own separate history. epicgenius (talk) 04:37, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

R32s are no Longer Assigned to the J/Z Line

R32s are no longer Assigned to the J/Z Line, they are displaced to the C lines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subwayfan1998 (talk • contribs) 07:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)