Talk:Broadway Junction station

Broadway Junction station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 6, 2018	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 31, 2018.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that New York City's Broadway Junction station sees 100,000 daily riders, the vast majority using it to make transfers?

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

	Trains Portal
Sel	week 23, 2018

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

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 Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New York City Public Transportation (assessed as Mid-importance).

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Broadway Junction (New York City Subway). 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 true or failed 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:46, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:163rd Street–Amsterdam Avenue (IND Eighth Avenue Line) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Broadway Junction (New York City Subway)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bob1960evens (talk · contribs) 10:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. I will work through the article, making notes as I go, and return to the lead at the end. Can I suggest that you mark any issues fixed with comments or maybe the Done template. I am not in favour of using strikethrough, as it makes the text difficult to read at a later date, and it is an important record of the GA process. Bob1960evens (talk) 10:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History

Introduction. The article text relies on the lead for context, and should be self-contained. So it needs something about "a New York City Subway station complex shared by the elevated BMT Canarsie Line and BMT Jamaica Line, and the underground IND Fulton Street Line."

Done

What is now Broadway Junction sits atop the historical Jamaica Pass, the junction of the modern Broadway, Fulton Street, and Jamaica Avenue. It is unclear exactly what this is saying, since the wikilink to Jamaica Pass suggests that Jamaica Pass refers to roads that passed through a chain of hills, whereas the second clause suggests it is above a particular road junction. Suggest expanding a little for clarity.

Done I added additional references and expanded it for clarity.

...which started construction in 1836 and was complete by at least 1843. "at least" does not appear correct here. It suggests 1843 or maybe later, but the reference says 1843 or maybe earlier.

Done Context and source provided/

...due to the crossing of the LIRR's Manhattan Beach Division. LIRR has not been properly introduced. It is named in full earlier, but should include the abbreviation, so "Long Island Rail Road's Atlantic Branch at East New York station" would be better as "the Atlantic Branch of the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) at East New York station" or similar. Reordering prevents the abbreviation following a possessive case.

Done

A station on the Fulton Street Elevated at Sackman Street opened... Suggest "Fulton Street Elevated railroad" for clarity.

Done

A two-track, one-half-block elevated connection was built along on the east side of Vesta Avenue. Only one of "along on" is required.

Done

...equipped with third rail, Suggest "equipped with a third rail to supply electric power," or similar.

Done

During the Dual Contracts in the 1910s, Suggest "Dual Contracts" needs a bit of context rather than relying on the wikilink. So, "During the Dual Contracts in the 1910s, when the City of New York worked with the Interborough Rapid Transit Company and the Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company to improve the New York subway system," or similar.

Done

Fulton and Broadway Els, while the current Broadway El station... Suggest Els and El should be expanded to "Elevated railroad" and "Elevated" to avoid the use of abbreviations.

Done

Paragraph beginning: By 1936, the IND Fulton Street Line had been extended... uses the abbreviations BMT and IND without any proper introduction. They should be spelled out in full on first occurrence, so "Brooklyn–Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT)" and "Independent Subway System (IND)" either here or possibly earlier in the section.

Done

The Fulton Street El again should be The Fulton Street Elevated, which is what the wikilink points to.

Done

Eastern Parkway (later Broadway–Eastern Parkway) (BMT Jamaica Line), Broadway Junction (BMT Canarsie Line), and Broadway–East New York (IND Fulton Street Line). There are far too many brackets for easy reading. Suggest "Broadway Junction on the BMT Canarsie Line" etc to remove three sets, and "the original Eastern Parkway, which was subsequently renamed Broadway–Eastern Parkway, on the BMT Jamaica Line," would improve the flow for readers.

Done

Station layout

...from that same station house via newly replaced escalators... In order to understand "newly", the reader needs to know when that bit of the article was written. Suggest "...from that same station house via escalators which were replaced in 2017..." or whenever it was.
Done This came from an old source, and has been corrected.

BMT Canarsie Line platforms

southbound service (similar to the configuration of the Bowling Green station on the IRT Lexington Avenue Line). However, unlike Bowling Green, the latter can use the island platform if necessary. Suggest removing brackets, so "southbound service, similar to..." Also, "the latter" does not work well with an intervening clause, so suggest replacing with "southbound trains" or similar.

Done

A new diamond crossover has been installed here. Suggest the diamond crossover and the tunnel portals could usefully be added to the track diagram, to aid understanding.
@Epicgenius: Could you help out here? Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done epicgenius (talk) 14:19, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The south end of the northbound platform divides into two "legs." It is unclear why "legs" needs to be quoted in this way. Suggest "The south end of the northbound platform divides into two, with a central gap between the two legs." The second occurrence of "legs" can simly have the quotes removed.

Done

Two normally-unused tracks connect the Canarsie and Jamaica lines. These should also be added to the track diagram.

@Epicgenius: Could you help out here? Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, but this is a really complex junction with the Jamaica Line platforms aligned at a 45-degree angle. Perhaps a note will do. epicgenius (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The new diagram seems to be fine. We don't need the Jamaica Line platforms, just where the tracks leave the Canarsie Line, and your mods show that perfectly. Bob1960evens (talk) 10:11, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have since found Ref 14: Weaving the Broadway Junction tapestry, and am not sure that the East NY Yard track is shown correctly. I have produced a modified map at User:Bob1960evens/MapTrial which you might like to consider. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:06, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that looks good. I added a few modifications to your map at User:Epicgenius/sandbox/1#Maps 2. epicgenius (talk) 18:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...the northbound "flyover" with its severe curve... It is even less clear why "flyover" needs quotes. Either it is a flyover, in which case no quotes are needed, or it is something else, in which case what it is should be explained.

Done

The old-style platform lights were removed and replaced with "loop" fixtures, widely seen elsewhere in the system. Again "loop" suggests the word has not been used in a normal context, and unless the reader is in New York, cannot see them elsewhere. Add a little explanation.

Done I added sources to show pictures. I am not sure if my description fits the image well.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A good solution, referring to images before and after. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 2001 artwork is called Brooklyn, New Morning by Al Loving. This is a single sentence paragraph, and has no connection to anything preceding it. It needs expanding. Suggest mentioning 75 unique glass panels arranged into a series throughout the complex and a seven-by-ten-foot glass mosaic mural wall, and that it was an AMTA Arts for Transit project. There are several refs on the net to support some detail.

Done Moved

BMT Jamaica Line platforms

'The middle express track is used to terminate M trains. Suggest wikilink for M trains.

Done

Trains that run to/from that yard... Use of the slash should be avoided. Suggest "Trains that run to or from that yard..."

Done

The station was originally called Broadway–Eastern Parkway. This is inconsistent with the text above, which stated that it was originally called Eastern Parkway, and was subsequently renamed Broadway–Eastern Parkway. Needs resolving.

Done These two insertions were made by an IP and a user with few contributions to this project, and both are completely unsourced. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Broadway_Junction_(New_York_City_Subway)&diff=prev&oldid=402292782 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Broadway_Junction_%28New_York_City_Subway%29&type=revision&diff=762462420&oldid=759358947 I can't believe that the oldest of the two inaccuracies has been in here since 2010. References were added to the surrounding paragraphs but none referenced this claim. I will remove both.

The ironwork for the old Fulton El trackways... Again, "Fulton Elevated trackways".

Done

...with construction set to begin in October 2017. Do we know if construction actually began in October?

Done Fixed.

IND Fulton Street Line platforms

Work resumed following the war to install the necessary signal and trackwork and complete the escalator to the BMT platforms. This reads like there was just one signal and one escalator. Should either or both be in the plural?
fix Done
Callahan-Kelly Playground was built along with the station, clearing buildings in the area in order to facilitate the station and other utilities. Some details of what Callahan-Kelly Playground is would be helpful, and the rest of the sentence doesn't quite make sense. "facilitate" needs to go with something like "construction of the station" rather than just "the station". Suggest "Callahan-Kelly Playground, details inserted here, was built at the same time as the station, with buildings in the area being cleared to factilitate construction of the station and other utilities." or similar.
Moved and rewritten. Done
It was not a provision for the IND Second System, as were similar structures on other IND lines, but rather date from an earlier plan... Part of this is singular and part is plural. Suggest "They were not a provision..."

Done

...tracks to Lefferts Boulevard (which were eventually connected... Suggest removing brackets, so "...tracks to Lefferts Boulevard, which were eventually connected..."

Done

There is nothing on the model board... Suggest adding a few words to explain model board, since the linked article only makes passing reference to it in an image caption.
Done I can't find a source so it was removed.

That is the text reviewed. I will move on the the refs next. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

Ref 5: Broadway Junction Transportation Study. This is a 94-page pdf and needs page numbers adding.
Done
Ref 15: "www.nycsubway.org". The title should be "BMT Canarsie Line", and not a repeat of the web address.
Done
Ref 21(c): Little Move, but Good. is used to support "The station opened on December 30, 1946." but there is no mention of the date, and there are two other refs for the date. 21(c) should be removed.
Done
Ref 22: Big Escalator To Link Three Lines in E.N.Y. 22(a) is used to support "with the escalator passageway between the IND and BMT completed on July 1, 1948." but was published on 17 Feb 1947, and the dates are quite speculative (four to five months after spring).
Done Rewritten to allow important information from that source to be used.
Ref 23: Report for the three and one-half years ending June 30, 1949. is a 116-page document and needs page numbers.
Done
Ref 27: Sustainable Communities East New York. is a 29-page document and needs page numbers.
Done
Ref 29: Callahan & Kelly Playground: History. It is not clear how this supports any of the text at 29(b), though it could provide some context for the Playground.
Done
Ref 30: Broadway Junction Technical Assistance Panel. is a 30-page document and needs page numbers.
- This already has. Pages 19-20. Done
Ref 32: Eye on the Future - MTA New York City Transit. It is not obvious that this supports the text as written.

Done Made clearer

Ref 33: [1] needs to be properly cited.
Done
Ref 34: Reopening Closed Subway Entrances. is a 15-page document and needs page numbers.
Done
Ref 37: New York's Transit System Getting Six Otis Escalators. does not appear to support the text "while the escalator was completed on July 1, 1948 after supply delays."
Done
Ref 41: Buttons to Speed Travel in Subway. It is not obvious that this supports the text as written.
Done Added sources to beginning of paragraph

I have now completed most of the reference checking, but will re-check those with multiple page documents in due course. Bob1960evens (talk) 12:19, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The lead should introduce the article and summarise its main points. It appears to be a little short for this, since the imformation it contains comes from the History, Station layout and the Ridership sections, with no mention of anything from the three station details sections. Perhaps mention of the connections to the East NY Yard, the stained glass mosaics, and the upcoming improvements would help here.

I added the yard, but I don't think that the mosaics are in the least bit important. This station is important because it is a key junction in the BMT, and because of the various services that have run here over the years. I also don't think adding that some staircases will be added is important. I added some background on the history of the station, which should suffice.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Done[reply]

I think you have made a good job of expanding the lead to summarise the article. Personally, I think stained glass mosaics are really important, because they lift the spirits of people who ride on the system, but it is not an issue on which the GA depends. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:59, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The formal bit

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
See comments above
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
See comments above
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I have now completed the initial review, but will be checking some of the multi-page refs again, once the issues are resolved. I will put the article on hold, and look forword to being able to award it GA status once the issues are addressed. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that have dealt with all issues.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob1960evens: Can you look at the changes when you have a chance. Thanks.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 22:18, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that all of the issues raised have been adequately resolved, and so I am happy to award the article GA status. I note that you have several other articles at the head of the GA queue, so we may meet again. Keep up the good work. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:01, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]