Talk:New York State Route 129

New York State Route 129 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.
Review: December 29, 2014. (Reviewed version).

New York (state): Hudson Valley

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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 (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Hudson Valley (assessed as Low-importance).

U.S. Roads: State highways / New York Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Topics

U.S. state highways

Locations

New York

This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.

This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

Article recognition:

	This article was the Selected article of the New York Roads Portal in January 2015.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York State Route 129/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 13:02, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I like doing transport GAs, and I've got family and step-family living in NY state and Connecticut now that I really should visit at some point, so it seems an appropriate article for me to review.

Lead

New York State Route 9A should be defined on first use. I would also definitely mention it is connects US Route 9 which
Rather than the lede saying "the highway goes here, then it goes here, then here and here....", I think it would be better to have a summary of what communities it connects (ie: it connects the Hudson River to the New Croton reservoir. In other words, state up front here what makes this highway notable. Then go into the specific important places along it.
"the route was realigned off future-NY 129 in favor of NY 9A" - I don't understand what this means, sorry
"NY 129 had an interchange with the Taconic" - what's the Taconic? (first mention in this article)

Done all except the last, which has Taconic with a previous mention in the first paragraph. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, there it is, d'oh. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Route description

As above, I would definitely mention its proximity to US Route 9, a major international route following the Hudson River
"the village of Croton-on-Hudson" - possibly this is my personal bias where I think "a village" is a pub, a church a shop, ten houses and nothing else, but from a quick look at Google Maps it looks more like a town to me

Also, Village (New York). Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would definitely wikilink that in the article, as a reader outside of NY may well misinterpret that. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"At the junction with Grand Street" - worth mentioning where Grand Street goes to (ie: north of Croton-on-Hudson and back to US Route 9)
"the Maple Street moniker ends" - this is confusing wording, how about "the road name changes to an eastern continuation of Grand Street"
"crossing several intersections with Quaker Bridge Road" - how can two roads have "several" intersections, surely there would only be one?
"NY 129 soon changes monikers" - I don't think "moniker" is a good word to use here, "NY129 becomes" should suffice
"NY 129 bends eastward" .... "runs eastward"
I wonder if "Hunters Brook Bridge" should be redlinked, so somebody can create an article about it
There's a lot of mentions of "the reservoir" in this section. I think it would be simpler if at the first point the route reaches New Croton reservoir, we just say "the road stays close to New Croton reservoir for the rest of its course" which would eliminate all the redundant wording

All done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History

I think it would be worth adding a very brief definition of what a legislative route is. Having looked at the article (an unsourced stub), I'm really none the wiser I'm afraid

Done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Was the road built in 1908, or did it pre-date this initial classification? How did anyone access New Croton reservoir when it was first built in 1842?

Route was added on public roads in 1908. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know why the route was assigned in the first place? (Presumably for reservoir access)

That info, if known at all, is lost to history. What we know is what we have. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any information about the history of the bridge halfway along? That would be worth including, particularly if it's been replaced several times.

Not sure if really important. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out I was talking about the Hunters Brook Bridge - I've found a New York Times source that briefly talks about it and the road network near the reservoir, which I think clears things up. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:08, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"to be replaced with a bridge that crosses over the parkway." - i think "that crosses over the parkway" is redundant

Done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"while NY 118 terminating near Croton Lake" - I don't think this is gramatically correct

Done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Major intersections

The source given includes four intersections - the additional one is for Quaker Bridge Road. That would be worth adding.

Not notable.Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 15:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, what do you mean? Notability is for the presence of a standalone article. Do you mean due weight? I don't think that applies here, as the article isn't particularly lengthy to worry about alternative viewpoints. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:09, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The standard for state routes is to add junctions that are former state routes, current state routes, US highways and Interstates. Random junctions is not usually asked for. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 15:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, if there's a previous consensus for this sort of thing then that's okay. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"1.000 mi = 1.609 km; 1.000 km = 0.621 mi" - I don't think this relevant for this article. We have figures for miles and kilometres, let's leave it at that. Plus, typing "1 mile in km" into Google gives me a slightly more accurate 1.609344km

Template's fault, not mine. Take that to USRD. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to know why the template says that, but that's another question for another day. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images

File:NY 129 along reservoir.jpg should mention (and link) New Croton reservoir in its caption

Done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:NY 129 at NY 118.jpg's description could do with a bit more context. As it is it just says "road x meets road y" without any indication where it is at all.

Done. Mitch32^{(I have seen great intolerance shown in support of tolerance)} 14:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

Overall, the issues here are relatively minor and don't look particularly challenging, so I'll put the review on hold pending improvements. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:02, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think everything's been resolved, so I can pass the review now. Looks quite an interesting drive as well, it reminds me a bit of the cross between the roads over Ladybower Reservoir and the Elan Valley. Thanks for such a fast response, and sorry you had to wait for so long for a review. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ramps? We don't need no stinking ramps!

This article says twice, once in the intro and once in the History section, that "ramps" to the Taconic State Parkway were removed in 1969. As can be confirmed from aerial images and topographic maps from that period (and as I know from having been driven on that road at that time), there were no ramps. There were at-grade intersections between Rte 129 and the Parkway at (or very close to) the two points where the two overpasses now exist. There was an overlap of the two roads in between the two intersections. (The Parkway then was an undivided two-way road that followed what was now the southbound lanes north of Rte 129, and what is now the northbound lanes over the reservoir to the south.) --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:08, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]