• Stovetop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 months ago

    Why not just call it “Stonewall”?

    The T which serves the Boston area has a lot of stops that are very directly named, just 1 or 2 words that are short and to the point. Ashmont, Davis, Porter, Back Bay, Braintree, Alewife, Harvard, etc.

    No one wants to hear “Now arriving at Christopher Street Stonewall National Monument”

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      No one wants to hear “Now arriving at Christopher Street Stonewall National Monument”

      Disagree. Any tourist who doesn’t know about Stonewall will now know that station has a national monument and will want to know why.

      I wish everyone knew about Stonewall, but they don’t.

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        Fair points, though I definitely wouldn’t suggest to a New Yorker that the MTA should cater to the needs of tourists first, haha.

    • catloaf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      And those names work pretty well! Except for things like Arlington (street/station) being nowhere near Arlington (city). Not sure what that’s about.

    • ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Naming transit stops after the street they’re on and/or a nearby landmark is a pretty common practice. I don’t know what you’re on about.