Talk:Kissena Creek/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 00:49, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Lead - The historical names are not mentioned elsewhere in the article. If they're important enough to be in the lead, they should also be mentioned elsewhere.

Done.

Headwaters - Maybe I'm just thinking about this too much, but you state that the swamp was drained in 1918, except for the 60 sq ft under the barn. However, you point out (with the support of the NYT), that the swamp persisted until the end of the 20th century. Could you clarify this? Does this indicate that the ground remained seasonally inundated, or that the old swampland remained undeveloped and became unsavory at times?

The second one is correct - it was undeveloped until the beginning of this century, which I found surprising considering Queens' huge population. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the name of "Doughty's Swamp" does not seem to be supported by either of the sources, unless I missed the mention.

Added a source. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does "The original alignment between Kissena and Parsons Boulevards remains as the two-block Aguilar Avenue." really need 4 citations?

I cut it down to 3. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh Meadows - Is there a specific reason for the sudden change of tense in the middle of the paragraph, only to revert back to the present tense?

Fixed - that was a mistake. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kissena Park - The caption identifies the body of water as "Kissena Pond", this should probably be changed to "Kissena Lake" to maintain consistency of name usage.

Done.

"The glacier covered much of Long Island" - What's "the glacier"? Using the word the indicates that a specific glacier is being referred to, but this is the first reference to glaciers in the article.

Fixed to "a glacier". epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"One of these recesses became Kissena Lake.[20][21]" - This sentence should be moved after the sentence following it. It makes more sense to discuss the recesses first, then to mention that one of them became Kissena Lake. That whole middle paragraph just feels out of order to me, I'd recommend you look into trying to arrange the content is a way that makes more sense.

Done.

Kissena Corridor Park - Kissena Corridor Park is notable, right? If it is, the redlinks should be kept. If not, the wikilinks should be removed.

Yes. Tdorante10 has been working on an article for the park for several years. It is definitely one of the most notable redlinks I've seen in a while, but I haven't gotten around to it, either. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The western stretch of Kissena Corridor Park was landfilled in the 1950s from dirt excavated for the construction of the Long Island Expressway." - Are five citations necessary here? This doesn't seem controversial at all, and controversial statements are usually the only ones with that many citations. The Kadinsky reference itself seems sufficient here.

Done.

"On June 8, 1959, Moses announced that additional fill" - Who is Moses? This name isn't mentioned before in the article, and I'm assuming that Moses isn't the intended person.

It's Robert Moses, (in)famous NYC parks commissioner. I thought he was mentioned before. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Queens Botanical Garden - "Otherwise, the water empties into the Flushing River which flows north into Flushing Bay" - So this is where the overflow goes, right?

That is correct.

"Lawrence Street / College Point Boulevard" I think the spaces around the / should probably go.

Done.

Last paragraph has another switch in tense.

Fixed.

General comments - You don't mention much of the covering over, except for that of the swamp. Hillcrest is also mentioned in the lead, but not in the main body of the article. And lastly, what does the creek do now? You mention that it formerly flowed into Flushing Creek, but don't clearly state what it does now? Is it just the sewer line?

Much of the covering-over wasn't mentioned in references of the time, the exceptions being the swamp and Kissena Corridor Park. At the time, the creek was seen as a minor impediment to development, rather than a significant nuisance. There are several other creeks in NYC which do not have articles because of the lack of significant coverage so far.
I fixed the Hillcrest mention.
Yes, everything is now diverted into sewer lines. It still flows into the creek, albeit through the CSO facility. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to the images, references, etc. later, that's it for now. Hog Farm (talk) 02:10, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images and references

Both images are appropriately tagged.

References

Ref 3 (Queens Jewish Link) is a 404 deadlink.
Ref 10 (NY Daily News) is a 503 deadlink (503s may be temporary).
Is ref 15 (Forgotten New York) a reliable source?
Ref 28 (Flushing Bay Facility Report Plan) is unavailable deadlink.
Ref 47 (Combined Sewer Outflow) is a deadlink.

The other refs look good. That's all, pinging nominator. Epicgenius Hog Farm (talk) 14:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: Thanks for the review. I have fixed almost all of these (and removed Forgotten NY and the dead CSO ref). The exception is the Daily News, which is occasionally down. epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Epicgenius: All my concerns have been addressed, passing as a GA now. Hog Farm (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]