Talk:Bay Ridge–95th Street station/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: 1.02 editor (talk · contribs) 10:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i will try to gradually review all the stations on the 4th Ave line. Expect comments soon 1.02 editor (T/C) 10:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kew Gardens 613 is away for Shabbat and Passover, but I will try to answer any queries. epicgenius (talk) 17:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, I dont mind letting the reviews go on for longer, so take your time. 1.02 editor (T/C) 23:32, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Some initial impressions: Lead could be expanded further to include information that is stated in the body (e.g. opening date). A fair amount of references, and also sufficient images. In addition, I feel that there can be some information on the services to the station (e.g. first and last train), if it helps.--ZKang123 (talk) 03:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    ZKang123, thanks for the feedback. Regarding your last comment, there is no first or last train because it is a 24/7 operation (as are all NYC Subway stations) so we don't include that info. epicgenius (talk) 03:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    
    @Epicgenius:. Maybe you can fill in like the headways as well and the type of R service and its destination, when applicable.--ZKang123 (talk) 03:42, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @ZKang123: I think that is more appropriate for the article on the R service. 1.02 editor (T/C) 03:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    
    Also, should there be a station layout section? Maybe put the track layout diagram under station design section or something.--ZKang123 (talk) 06:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. As all NYC subway stations have such a section, this would be consistent with these other sections. I think a timetable would be unnecessary (per WP:NOTGUIDE, as it would be more appropriate for the R train article if there were a consensus to include it), and the station layout already describes the trains' destinations. epicgenius (talk) 20:35, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The problems on this article (and for the rest of the articles about stations on this line) are quite similar. Besides that the article is ok except for a few things, and there is no copyvio

History should be mentioned in the lead.
- Done.
  - Will be more helpful if it was specified what contractor has built the station in the lead.--ZKang123 (talk) 03:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is there even opposite direction transfer in the station since it only goes in one direction?
- Good point. I will remove these later. epicgenius (talk) 13:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What happened to the planned extension to staten island? it should be briefly mentioned in the article.
- Added some context. epicgenius (talk) 13:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
'in preparation of the construction of platform extensions to W. M. Walsh Corporation for $6,585.' I think something is missing here.
- Reworded.
Source needed for the claim that it is the geographical westernmost station.
- Removed.
Maybe the image in station layout could be moved to the right below that track layout
- Done.

Hold

Review completed, will allow it to run for longer so that you have time to make changes. 1.02 editor (T/C) 03:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@1.02 editor: Thanks, I have addressed all of the above. Though I think it would be worth waiting until Kew Gardens comes back to get his feedback. epicgenius (talk) 20:35, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Epicgenius: Ok, I will defer the passing of the article for a while. 1.02 editor (T/C) 00:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @1.02 editor: Due to Passover, I won't be able to do any editing from tonight until Thursday evening at the earliest. I am still committed to addressing your concerns with the article. Thanks for your patience and stay safe. @Epicgenius: Thanks so much for helping out!--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 23:10, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kew Gardens 613, no problem. @1.02 editor: Can I ask that you defer making the decision about whether to promote all the 4th Avenue Line pages until Thursday at the earliest? I would like to nominate these all as part of a single DYK. epicgenius (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Passing. 1.02 editor (T/C) 00:32, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

)

... that a one-stop subway extension from 86th Street to 95th Street was built in advance of the unbuilt Staten Island Tunnel in New York City? Source: NY Times 1922
- ALT1:... that a one-stop subway extension from 86th Street to 95th Street in New York City was constructed in preparation for the unbuilt Staten Island Tunnel? Source: NY Times 1922
- ALT2:... that it took three years to construct a subway line to 86th Street in New York City, and another nine years to extend it one stop to 95th Street? Sources: Electric Railroaders Association, Brooklyn Eagle 1916, Brooklyn Eagle 1925

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/2009 World Cup of Pool, Template:Did you know nominations/Treaty of Lutatius

Improved to Good Article status by Kew Gardens 613 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 01:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

A new hook is probably needed here as well as both hooks appear to have a limited audience and may not interest those who aren't from New York or aren't familiar with infrastructure (disclosure: I also discussed this with the nominator over at Discord, I'm leaving this comment here as well for transparency purposes). Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:30, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the comment. I have proposed an alternate hook. epicgenius (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds better, but unfortunately I may not have the time to be able to review both articles. Hopefully someone else can take a look here. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:05, 21 May 2020 (UTC

Good articles. QPQ done. hook cited. Approving Alt2. --evrik ^(talk) 00:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]