Talk:Bx15 and M125 buses/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pi.1415926535 (talk · contribs) 06:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Starting this review. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to respond point-by-point with **. {{done}} and its family preferred when applicable. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:13, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Thank you for taking this up.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Why is the title line repeated in different colors?
- @Pi.1415926535: The blue title line is for local service, while the purple title line is for limited-stop service.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's completely opaque to the vast majority of readers, and needlessly takes up space. Either pick a single color (or none at all), or do a blend like the MBTA articles use. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think we can do something like "Bx15 Limited" for the purple line. A single color would neglect the limited-stop service altogether and a blend of colors wouldn't be correct. epicgenius (talk) 12:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - The purpose of the infobox header is to introduce the infobox, not to precisely match the rollsigns - especially when that precise matching is less useful for actual readers. Using two rows is absolutely ridiculous, and frankly I'm not willing to spend my time on a full GA review if you refuse to fix a blatant MOS violation. The color blending at Downtown Crossing station and its ilk has been very successful and is MOS compliant. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        I have formatted the header to include the text "Limited" for the limited-stop variant. epicgenius (talk) 13:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        The new blend looks great. Sorry to be so picky about it, but as the top of the infobox it's important to get right. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why are two phrases ("Willis Avenue Line" and "125th Street Crosstown") that don't appear in the prose placed atop the infobox?
- @Pi.1415926535: Now they appear in the prose. epicgenius (talk) 03:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Epicgenius: Given that they don't seem to be widely used currently (the schedule doesn't include them) I'd just take it out. Shorter is better for infoboxes. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Pi.1415926535: Kew Gardens 613 has added the actual title to the infobox, and I added that title as a bold term in the lead. epicgenius (talk) 14:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The caption should include the date; I would not include "New Flyer" as the significance is not obvious to most casual readers.
- Done.
There is only one operator of the bus; either choose MaBSTOA or the wikilinked parent operator.
- Chose the latter. epicgenius (talk) 03:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Several key pieces of information - the depot and the bus types - are neither cited nor included in the prose.
- @Epicgenius and Mtattrain: Do you have any idea how to find sources to properly cite the bus types?--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I will look into this. epicgenius (talk) 22:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

>No, I do not Mtattrain (talk) 22:31, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Streetcar" and "trolley" are mixed throughout the article, and it may not be clear that they mean the same thing. I would stick to just "streetcar".
- {{done}}--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's necessary to include both the neighborhood and the stop name for the start and end points.
- @Pi.1415926535: This has been the standard for all bus articles and the lists of bus routes by boroughs, so if this is to be changed, all of them would have to be changed.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think it is helpful to include such information. The intersection or the neighborhood name alone don't give much context. Different bus routes may terminate at different points in the same neighborhood. epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Can it be condensed? The "End" takes up three lines of text. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - Done epicgenius (talk) 15:09, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is any information about daily ridership available? That's vastly easier to understand than annual numbers.
- Yes, it is available. I will add it later. epicgenius (talk) 15:09, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done epicgenius (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks for adding that. Honestly, I would only have the daily ridership in the infobox; daily and annual can go in one line under "Current bus service" rather than a separate section. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Transfers: Yes" needs context.
- Can't find it in the infobox. epicgenius (talk) 03:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lacking a full geographic map, including a KML would be great.
- I will do this when I get home. epicgenius (talk) 22:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I have done this. epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

The hatnote can be in "See also" instead.
- Done
The first sentence is far too wordy. I would suggest something like The Bx15 is a bus route in New York City that operates between Fordham Plaza and West Harlem. The route runs primarily on Third Avenue and Willis Avenue in the South Bronx, and on 125th Street in Harlem.
- Done Rewrote the first paragraph. epicgenius (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No need to mention the Bx41 in the lede - it's only tangentially related to the Bx15.
- Done
The historical section of the lede needs rewritten and expanded (probably into two paragraphs). It should offer an outline of the major points of the route's history; right now, it's missing a fair bit, including most of the streetcar era. One of the bolded titles of the streetcar line isn't even used elsewhere in the article. If that title is important, add it to the main section, with the citation there. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done I had to add a mention of the route's split into the Bx15 and M125 in what is now the third paragraph as well. epicgenius (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Route description and service

This section should stick just to current operations - the streetcar route information should be with the streetcar history. Meanwhile, this section should have a complete (2-4 sentence) description of the current route.
- Done
The Bx55 paragraph is pretty much redundant to what's already in the history section.
- Done Removed. epicgenius (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Move the ridership section into this section.
- I don't feel this is really part of service. Do you want me to move this anyway? epicgenius (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, I think it's the best and most relevant place to put it. It's certainly better here than a two-sentence section. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Add depot and bus type information (especially artics versus non-artics) here, since you have it in the infobox.
- I added the depot information. The bus type information is harder to source, since the fleet is now exclusively articulated. epicgenius (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Add some basic frequency information (something like average headway at peak, midday, overnight, weekend is plenty - no need to get too specific)
- Done

As a streetcar line

Four redlinks in this subsection (one of them repeated). Are these likely articles (especially the first one)?
- Removed the repeated redlink and two of the links. Fort Lee Ferry and the Webster and White Plains Avenues Line links are definitely viable article. epicgenius (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the photo be in the bus subsection?
- Done
Three and four citations after a sentence is generally excessive.
- Agreed with four or more being extensive. Three is the limit, I think, per WP:CITEKILL. I have trimmed these. epicgenius (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like part of the streetcar route that became the Bx15 was in operation by 1864. If so, I'd rather have that date than the 1895 extension in the infobox.
- Done
The line about the Fort Lee Ferry would make more sense in the second paragraph than the third.
- Done

As a bus line

This is a very long section - seven meaty paragraphs. Might be worth subdividing, but that's by no means a requirement.
- Done split into subsections. epicgenius (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some excessive citations here too - one sentence has seven!
- Done
Any information on when 29 became Bx29?
- ~~@Kew Gardens 613: Any ideas? epicgenius (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2020 (UTC)~~ Never mind, I fixed this.[reply]
- @Pi.1415926535: By the way, these numbers don't correspond to current bus routes. The current Bx29 runs from City Island to Pelham Bay, and doesn't run anywhere near the Bx15. Looks like the former Bx29 is now the Bx15 since 1984. epicgenius (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Link Bx6
- Done
The last three sentences of the fourth paragraph can be combined into one or two.
- Done
Move the June 2010 sentence to the end of the fourth paragraph. Slightly out of chronological order, but it fits better there than awkwardly in the middle of SBS discussion.
- Partly done I went with something else. epicgenius (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This section is long enough for at least two images (including the image currently in the streetcar section). Perhaps move the non-artic image from the current service section?
- Done

References

I should be able to get to these individually this weekend and finish up the review. For now, a few comments. All reference numbers based on this version. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the images of multi-page documents, you only need to have the full citation information once. Then just have "(Pages [2] [3] [4])" with links to the pages at the end of the citation.
- Done.
When the publisher and site name are basically the same, drop the latter. (Sources 6 and 38, for example).
- Done.
Flickr (30) and Ward Maps (24) should use the via field - they were not the original publishers.
- Fixed.
Does citation 45 (which has a typo) really need four sources? The sentence also has two additional sources.
- Fixed.
Checklinks looks good.
Citation 20: use via=Internet Archive
- Done.
Lacking a dedicated web page for the route, I'd add this as an EL.
- Done. epicgenius (talk) 02:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

@Kew Gardens 613 and Epicgenius: After a literal month (sorry about that!) I'm done reviewing. All that's left to fix is a handful of infobox items and the citations. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:10, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Thanks for the review. I have addressed all the remaining comments. epicgenius (talk) 02:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Still several regarding the infobox. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:14, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kew Gardens 613 and Epicgenius: All my concerns are taken care of, so passing. Great job! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:24, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]