This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
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 articles
Since August 2010, the underground and aboveground Cheongnyangni stations have been directly transferrable through a transfer passageway, contradicting Peterhansen2032's argument. As a rule of thumb, on transferrable stations on the Seoul Subway, the information is combined into one, even for stations with different names (e.g. Isu Station, Cheonan-Asan Station). Rather than having to go through a disambiguation page to access information on one of the stations, it would be much more efficient to integrate it into one page for convenient viewing. I support merging. Sungminkwon (talk) 08:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
According to current Seoul Metropolitan Subway system, this (Cheongnyangni, aboveground) station and C. Underground station should not be merged. As of February 2011, although both of its location is quite near itself with the help of Cheongnyangni Lotte Department Store, however, it cannot transfer directly, so the passenger who use this station strongly demanded more than 10-minute walk across these two stations. Peterhansen2032 (talk) 10:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Cheongnyangni Station. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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.
I have just modified one external link on Cheongnyangni Station. 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:
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.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Individual Seoul Metropolitan Subway stations generally do not include "station" as part of their name, which means that "station" in the title serves as a descriptor, rather than a part of their proper name. However, for major rail transportation hubs like Cheongnyangni Station, the word "Station" is part of the building's proper name. This capitalization is also backed up by ngram which shows that there are no English-language book sources which use the lowercase spelling. :3 F4U (they/it) 07:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:CONSISTENT with all the zillion other station (and transit line, and bus stop, and train route, and etc.) articles that have been moved to lower-case the generic word in the title. It takes little effort to find a news source that use "Cheongnyangni station" lower case [1], and a book doing so [2], and some other material doing likewise (travel writers/sites, businesses that are actually at the station, etc.) [3][4][5][6][7][8], plus some news sources that used both styles in the same article [9][10][11]. One thing I notice in going through this material is that the writers who prefer "Cheongnyangni Station" also tend to capitalize "Station" when mentioning other stations, so they do not support the idea that "Station" is a special style for this particular station (indeed, I found two cases that did the opposite, and lower-cased this one, but capitalized "Yeongju Station", "Gapyeong Station", etc. [12][13]. In short, this seems to be a conflict between [somewhat inconsistently applied] news style and Wikipedia style, and WP is not written in news style as a matter of policy (WP:NOT#NEWS). The vast majority of stations (and lines, and terminals, and ...) are given upper-case treatment in news sources, because such over-capitalization is a newswriting habit, but we don't do it here. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 03:53, 23 July 2023 (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.
