Wikipedia:Peer review/Pacific Street (BMT Fourth Avenue Line station)/archive1
This isn't a standard peer review candidate; I'm looking for more comments on the infobox. Comments can go here or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Subway#We need a decision on the infobox, and soon!. --SPUI 20:11, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Shouldn't that be in the Template: namespace? - Ta bu shi da yu 00:05, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Depending on what your question means (shouldn't the infobox be using a template, and shouldn't the peer review be for the template), here are my answers:
- It would be if templates could be nested. The service templates are needed to make service changes propagate by just changing a handful of templates (like I did earlier today to reflect restoration of C service tomorrow). These cannot be inside another template, so I have to use subst; that's why I'm putting it through peer review, since it can't be changed once it's decided on.
- If the peer review was for the template, none of the subtleties of use would be apparent, as can be seen by viewing an example. For all practical purposes, the peer review is for the template, but it seems better to have the actual link on the station page (which is linked from the wikiproject discussion as an example, rather than the template itself). --SPUI 01:00, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)