Talk:MAX Green Line/GA1
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion 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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: 1.02 editor (talk · contribs) 10:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi i will be taking this review. 1.02 editor (T/C) 10:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! --Truflip99 (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
General comments
[edit]-Article is well sourced
-Images are good
-Most sections are quite well written and developed.
Detailed
[edit]Lead
[edit]- 'It runs for approximately 211⁄2 hours daily with a headway of fifteen minutes during most of the day.'
maybe it would be better to mention the specific operating hoursi see that it is already mentioned later in the article, so i would suggest removing the 21 1⁄2 hours part in the lead and replacing it with the operating hours, and maximum and minimum headways.- My only concern is the operating hours are subject to change (as it is about to on Sept 1) and that saying 21 1⁄2 hours is more concrete and takes less effort to change. Also, the other GA MAX line articles follow this format already and passed just fine. What do you think?
- Saying 21 1⁄2 hours is quite vague. i think in this case it will be better to omit it from the lead and only mention it later in the service section where it can be further explained.
- I would again point to the Central Link article that does this and is FA. --Truflip99 (talk) 15:39, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Saying 21 1⁄2 hours is quite vague. i think in this case it will be better to omit it from the lead and only mention it later in the service section where it can be further explained.
- My only concern is the operating hours are subject to change (as it is about to on Sept 1) and that saying 21 1⁄2 hours is more concrete and takes less effort to change. Also, the other GA MAX line articles follow this format already and passed just fine. What do you think?
- In the second paragraph it is unclear which line was the one that was constructed. Is it the Green Line or another line?
- Done. Does that suffice?
- I would think that "Construction of the Green Line began in early 2007, and it opened on September 12, 2009." sounds nicer?
- This would technically be incorrect. The I-205 MAX/Portland Transit Mall segments =/= Green Line. The two segments were the ones constructed. I've clarified it to: "Construction of the two segments began in early 2007, and the Green Line opened on September 12, 2009."
- I would think that "Construction of the Green Line began in early 2007, and it opened on September 12, 2009." sounds nicer?
- Done. Does that suffice?
- via the I-205
- Actually, American interstate highways are never preceded with "the".
- I would prefer that the track gauge and electrification be mentioned in prose in the lead also.
- I think this would be more appropriate for the MAX Light Rail article, as the child line/service articles are more heavily focused on service and system extension history.
- For the routemap that is currently in the infobox, would it be better to combine it with the routemap for the proposed extension and put it where the latter isor in the route section?
- I would like to combine them as well, but the proposed extension is not a concrete plan until at least November 2020 and some editors would disagree with its addition to the existing diagram.
- The infobox mentions that there is 30 stations, however i count 29 in the routemap.
- I just counted it myself and counted 30..
- I went to look through it again and it seems that Union Station represents 2 stations. are they both the same station? if yes then it should be counted as 1 station. if not then they should be distinguished.
- Done.
- I went to look through it again and it seems that Union Station represents 2 stations. are they both the same station? if yes then it should be counted as 1 station. if not then they should be distinguished.
- I just counted it myself and counted 30..
- Rolling stock info should be added into the infobox through the |stock= parameter.
- I think this is more appropriate for the MAX Light Rail article as all of the MAX lines share the same five rolling stock types. Would you agree?
- Yes but it would be a blatant oversight if it is not included. given the different nature of the lines in the MAX system from those that i normally see i do not mind if it is not included in prose but it should at least be in the infobox.
- Done.
- Yes but it would be a blatant oversight if it is not included. given the different nature of the lines in the MAX system from those that i normally see i do not mind if it is not included in prose but it should at least be in the infobox.
- I think this is more appropriate for the MAX Light Rail article as all of the MAX lines share the same five rolling stock types. Would you agree?
I-205 history
[edit]- What is the outcome of the dispute mentioned in the first paragraph of the first subsection?
- Done. This is addressed in the first sentence of the second paragraph -- Metro is the regional decider. I added a clarifying fragment.
- In the Construction and Opening subsection, it is mentioned that the line's opening was attended by dignitaries, could you specify who?
- Done. Does that suffice?
- Also, 'End-to-End' sounds a bit weird, maybe replacing it with complete would be better.
- This is actually a common phrase in American English when referring to travel time.
Transit Mall Revitalization
[edit]- How can the first end to end run be in july if the trains only started serving the transit mall in September? Same goes with the rolling stock entering service in august. please clarify these discrepancies
- Clarified that in July, it was a test run. Thank you!
- The split of the tracks between 5th and 6th Avenue should be mentioned here as well.
- I had mentioned it here: "A study subsequently conducted by TriMet proposed stations on either the left, right, or middle lanes of 5th and 6th avenues" Does that not suffice?
- Proposed does not mean that it was actually constructed, and it dosen't mention whether the split was chosen but only the lanes used.
- Done.
- Proposed does not mean that it was actually constructed, and it dosen't mention whether the split was chosen but only the lanes used.
- I had mentioned it here: "A study subsequently conducted by TriMet proposed stations on either the left, right, or middle lanes of 5th and 6th avenues" Does that not suffice?
Proposed Southwest Corridor extension
[edit]- is the whole paragraph on the residents voting system really necessary? in its current state i cant really think of a reason why it should be included
- I think for now it is, as there are changes being suggested at the moment that voters can still strike down. Once the plan is concrete, I have a plan to remove most of it.
- well it is quite unneeded information though, and may violate criteria 3b
- Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 15:32, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- well it is quite unneeded information though, and may violate criteria 3b
- I think for now it is, as there are changes being suggested at the moment that voters can still strike down. Once the plan is concrete, I have a plan to remove most of it.
- routemap- as per above.
- Comment above as well.
Route and Service
[edit]- The geographical map should be moved to the infobox
- This is the format I found in most American light rail articles and I model my formatting after the FA Central Link. As such the existing MAX GA articles (MAX Blue Line, MAX Red Line, MAX Yellow Line) already follow this. So I would prefer to keep it.
- I would suggest that the gallery not be titled 'Stations on the Green Line' if there is only 4 pictures.
- Do you have any suggestions on what to put instead?
- I was thinking of removing the gallery since it is located in such an awkward position or cutting it down to 1 photo.
- The gallery actually serves a purpose by featuring key stations of the line (the termini, an example of the Green Line sharing stations, and an I-205 station)
- I was thinking of removing the gallery since it is located in such an awkward position or cutting it down to 1 photo.
- Do you have any suggestions on what to put instead?
- Is there a more current ridership figure?
- Yes. I would like to update all of the ridership figures next month when TriMet releases it. September was selected because it is the end TriMet's fiscal year.
Others
[edit]- There is very little information (about 1 sentence) on the rolling stock. Try to have a section or subsection dedicated to rolling stock.
- This information is found in MAX Light Rail#Rolling stock. Please note that this is only a line/service article and all MAX lines share the same infrastructure and rolling stock. Think of the Green Line as a mere line extension.
- If so then maybe put a sentence that says the green line can be served by all the different 'types' of rolling stock (type 1- type 5).
- Done.
- If so then maybe put a sentence that says the green line can be served by all the different 'types' of rolling stock (type 1- type 5).
- This information is found in MAX Light Rail#Rolling stock. Please note that this is only a line/service article and all MAX lines share the same infrastructure and rolling stock. Think of the Green Line as a mere line extension.
- I have fixed some obvious typos and grammatical errors.
- Thank you!
Hold
[edit]@Truflip99: I've reviewed the article and have identified some issues that needs to be fixed. You'll have seven days to address these issues. Do inform me if you have any queries or correct me if i have made a mistake. 1.02 editor (T/C) 11:35, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- 1.02 editor Thank you again for taking on this article. I really appreciate it. I have addressed all of your bullet points. Please let me know if you need me to do anything else. --Truflip99 (talk) 15:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Truflip99 I have replied to things that i still have concerns with. 1.02 editor (T/C) 09:08, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- 1.02 editor Addressed. Thank you! --Truflip99 (talk) 15:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Truflip99 Article looks good, all concerns raised have been resolved and there are no major issues left. Do update the article when new information becomes available. Passing. 1.02 editor (T/C) 10:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- 1.02 editor cheers! --Truflip99 (talk) 14:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- Truflip99 Article looks good, all concerns raised have been resolved and there are no major issues left. Do update the article when new information becomes available. Passing. 1.02 editor (T/C) 10:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- 1.02 editor Addressed. Thank you! --Truflip99 (talk) 15:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
- Truflip99 I have replied to things that i still have concerns with. 1.02 editor (T/C) 09:08, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
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.