Talk:F (New York City Subway service)

Trains: Rapid transit / in New York City Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	April 4, 2022

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation (assessed as High-importance).

F and V articles

I don't think this article is needed if there is an F and a V already. CoolGuy 05:35, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

F (New York City Subway service) and V (New York City Subway service) redirect here. --SPUI (talk) 05:55, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Culver Express

We all know there's a few F trains that run express on the Culver during the rush. But should we mention it? Pacific Coast Highway ^{(blah • typa-typa)} 16:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think these artices should mention rare service patterns that are not part of the published literature. Marc Shepherd 17:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why merged?

The Station listing is very inconvinient for a regular subway user. It is expected, that the listing shows stations sequense (with some details). However, the F-sequense is interrupted in the middle and continued in the buttom, to be returned into some other part of the table.

I suggest to have separate Station listings for F and V services.

I've noticed this issue too. I think the F and V routes are sufficiently different that this article should be split into two pages. If they are not split, then there should be two tables. I counted 59 stations in the table, of which only 10 are common to both routes. Marc Shepherd 14:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(The initial suggestion was mine, just forgot to sign). I think, that the merge had been done by a City subway insider, because - yes - F and V trains run on the same line part of the way. Just F runs on express track in the middle and skips a lot of stations, while V (and other local services) runs on the edges. As a frequent F commuter, I know that, but I don't care.

May be for that or other reasons it could be important for professionals to have this article merged. (Though it is not clear for me, why not with G or R as well). Anyway, I would presume that the merge made sense for somebody. As a regular subway user, I just want to have clear tables.

So, I want to separate lists, and I am waiting for objections, if any.

--HenryS 16:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objections, solely because of the awkwardness of representing the 63rd Street/53rd Street split in the current table. I do not feel that the lines are very different at all. The F and V run along the same route for the greater part of the V's length (the V being the shorter route). They have the same service pattern on the 6th Avenue trunk line and a simple local-express relationship along Queens Boulevard. Frankly, I think it makes perfect sense for the two lines to be merged. The only problem is the table, which cannot easily handle the divergent river crossings. It is because of this issue of practicality that I agree to the division. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 19:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Station listing

Why is the station listing bold for this service? The Legendary Ranger 13:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Larry V prefers bold, and he has been following that format for any of the service pages he edits. There are a handful of others like it, but most are not. If we were having a vote, I would vote for "not bold," but it's not something I feel passionately about, so I haven't pressed the issue. Marc Shepherd 14:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tables have heading cells for a reason, and I feel that in station listings, the station names are the main set of information. Thus, they should be bold for emphasis, to draw attention. That's just my opinion. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 14:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then why don't you bold it for all the other subway services.The Legendary Ranger 20:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I have the time. It's not a pressing issue, by any stretch of the imagination. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 21:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Info Needs Updating

Quite a bit of the info on the page, especially the stops and transfers, need updating. The current info is before the added construction. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 157.150.192.237 (talk) 18:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Changes To The F and E

According to the NYC Subway Map, the E no longer goes through the 179 street to Suthin Boulevard Stations. I don't know why some of those stations are marked to have transfers to the E, but I think it should be changed to no transfers.

Asiansaxboy101 17:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the bottom right of the map: "some rush hour trips to/from Jamaica/179 St, Queens". --NE2 23:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name

I have renamed the F in the infobox the "Queens Boulevard/Sixth Avenue Express" in keeping with the designation used in the official schedule available on the MTA website.Avman89 (talk) 05:19, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://mta.info/nyct/service/pdf/tfnxt.pdf

Transfer to SBS

Why doesn't the station listing include the transfer to the M15 Select Bus Service at Second Avenue?
~kiddRell_ (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. It was overlooked. I have added it as you requested. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kings Hwy Short Turns

As these are nearly half of the F's during rush hour, I think it IS rather notable. No other short turn in the system is nearly as prevalent as this one. 157.252.99.16 (talk) 22:26, 2 May 2011 (UTC) (98.14.158.206 (talk)on vacation)[reply]

Edit request on 8 August 2012

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

173.68.35.154 (talk) 15:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC) r46 f train[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. RudolfRed (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 30 March 2013

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

100.2.237.204 (talk) 17:26, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Tideflat (talk) 17:34, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on F (New York City Subway service). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160520120823/http://gothamist.com/2016/05/17/f_train_express_returns.php to http://gothamist.com/2016/05/17/f_train_express_returns.php

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 05:08, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Express F service on Queens Blvd Line

This would be on the 6 Av Local go Express on Queens Blvd Drive it with a van (talk) 01:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What?--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 01:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peak direction Culver express

@Kew Gardens 613: Have the two trips become peak express trips again? That would definitely make more sense than reverse-peak express trips. epicgenius (talk) 23:31, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was my mistake. Those were test trips.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 00:34, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

F Express Eliminated?

The MTA published new schedules for the F train today and it appears that the F peak-direction express on the Culver Line has been eliminated? The service diagram at the bottom of the schedule shows the <F> service but every run on the schedule is a local run. I don't know what to make of it, or if there needs to be an update to this article (and related articles). Thoughts? Here's the schedule: https://new.mta.info/document/10366 Herbfur (Eric, He/Him) (talk) 02:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

F*** Train

The F express train is gone! Please take it away. I am agreeing with Herbfur here and wondering why it's still not been updated. I wish that I could eliminate it, but I am not able to create my account. Once again, F*** stands for F express.

Sorry for bringing up something else, but thank you, whoever deleted the "F*** You" topic! It accidentally deleted all my other messages, but that's okay. (My IP address used to be the 69116 one) 199.249.227.26 (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The F express is still present on page 2 of the schedule. Your claims are also unsourced, so no changes need to be made. Cards84664 03:30, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]