Talk:Mets–Willets Point station (IRT Flushing Line)/GA1

GA Review

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.

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

Reviewer: John M Wolfson (talk · contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

The 1910 Dual Contracts called for extending the lines of the Interborough Rapid Transit Company (IRT) and Brooklyn–Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT) to Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. Didn't the BMT already have service in Brooklyn?
- Yes, and the IRT also had lines in the Bronx. However, both companies built additional lines in these boroughs, or they extended their existing lines. (the BMT only had lines in Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens, but this isn't important to the article). I have clarified this now. Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the "Willets Point" in the station's name was derived from the boulevard, which in turn was named after the Willets Point peninsula at Fort Totten, three miles (4.8 km) northeast. Should be in the 1920s, not with the Shea Stadium reopening.
- I put this sentence here because the station's original name was "Willets Point Boulevard". Since the station is at Willets Point Boulevard, it would be redundant to explain that the station is named after the boulevard. Confusion only arose when the station was renamed "Willets Point–Shea Stadium", since Willets Point originally referred to something completely different. Unlike Chicago, NYC doesn't typically drop street suffixes from station names. Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, I see; the "Boulevard" part is the important factor here. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:50, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe clarify which platforms/tracks are Manhattan-bound, but perhaps northbound and southbound suffice.
- I have clarified this in the prose. Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Breadth checks out. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Sourcing checks out; interesting external links as well. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

Any explanation for the city as to the half-hearted accessibility? Not to "both sides" it here, but Damen station (CTA Blue Line) is still inaccessible because the CTA says it's hard to renovate it due to its heritage, I wonder if this is something similar. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- A few decades ago, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority created a list of 100 key stations that it planned to make ADA-accessible by 2020. The Mets-Willets Point station wasn't on that list, so the MTA typically wouldn't add any elevators or ramps unless it was part of a five-year capital program or unless a developer paid for it. The ramps to the Flushing-bound side platform already existed, so the MTA chose to rehabilitate these ramps and make them ADA-accessible. There are also ramps to the Manhattan-bound platform, but these ramps are extremely steep and aren't accessible. Sadly, unlike the CTA, the MTA really dragged its feet in making subway stations accessible, so this station probably won't receive elevators unless it's rebuilt. Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Licensing checks out; suggest adding alt text where not already. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stability

No edit wars. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise good work! Just a few hiccups here and there. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@John M Wolfson: Thanks for the review. I've addressed your comments now, except for the alt text, which I'll add soon. Epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass Checks out. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:50, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.