Jump to content

Talk:Portland Airport station/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 07:42, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I promise that this review won't drag into the next year. Should be a short one given how familiar I am with the format. SounderBruce 07:42, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I actually was not expecting anyone to pick this up for quiiiite a while so you've caught me off-guard. Thanks for doing so! --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • Will you update the passenger count to something annual-based? It's more reliable for comparisons.
Best I could do was average the Spring and Fall data (Thanks, TriMet). --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since the data wouldn't be complete (and combining would be WP:SYNTHESIS), the Fall boardings should be fine. SounderBruce 00:36, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comma needed after United States
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd actually like to see the airport mentioned separately from the Red Line's terminals in the opening sentence.
Please elaborate. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An example: It serves Portland International Airport and is the eastern terminus of the Red Line, which connects to Portland City Center and Beaverton. SounderBruce 02:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention Red Line before Airport MAX; I don't think we should be counting stations based on the project in place of the service
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "section nearest" would sound better as "section approaching"
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Insert a comma between "MAX project" and "which"
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Just south" would be confusing here, so saying "near" is just fine
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opening day sentence fragment could be expanded with some detail from the history section; I suggest mentioning when construction began
Done.--Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Fulfills" should be "Offers"
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
History
  • Any mention of earlier airport transit service (or when Route 12 commenced)?
Any mention of previous services are vague, and there are no attainable records (that I know of) of an airport service start date possibly owing to the drastic jurisdiction changes that took place around that time. Hence my use of "since before". I will keep looking. @SJ Morg: could you possibly assist? You've been around longer :) --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I provided that information in the article about the airport itself, under "Public transportation" (section is currently named "Ground transportation", however), in 2015. SJ Morg (talk) 04:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Added. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Break up the triple reference at 2/3/4
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Early plans" from when?
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "newly-built" from when?
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "address expected passenger growth" or something similar
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "$300-million" does not need a hyphen
I believe it does, as it is an adjective in this case. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm of the opinion that it doesn't, per this example. SounderBruce 02:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done, but here's a university source that states otherwise, not to mention you passed the Red Line article which contains some, which means this will be an endless argument. Hopefully we can get this added to MOS, since the Blue and Red Line articles were put to a different standard, which I now have to revert. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "since 1990" should be replaced with "within four years" to prevent closely-spaced years
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "protested the funding" should specify that the airlines opposed the ticket fee
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "crews of Stacy and Witbeck" should be "Stacy and Witbeck crews"
Done, but unnecessary. I actually think the former sounds better. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first sentence of the third paragraph could be expanded to mention the Red Line service pattern at the time
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "airport was closed" could be "airport itself was closed"
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I doubt that 3,800 riders used the station in the entire month of November; shouldn't it be a weekday average for that month?
Clarified per article. It was Thanksgiving. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SounderBruce 00:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Station details
  • Mention the platform before the single-track (which is beyond the station anyway)
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "notifying travelers of train departure times" could be condensed and neutralized as "with train departure times"
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Art
  • I'd rewrite the first sentence fragment as follows: Pieces of public artwork for the Airport MAX project had a common theme of "flight".
Done, although not a fragment. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • This statement is also not supported by the linked page in the reference section.
Done. The linked page states: "Riders can enjoy numerous artworks related to flight..." --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "funded at a percentage" → "funded by a percentage" (it would also be nice to have an exact figure)
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The description for Time Flies is rather closely paraphrased from the TriMet website.
That is why I put it in quotes, per WP:MOSQUOTE
  • No mention of the bronze rails embedded into the concrete?
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Services
  • Comma needed after "Red Line"
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should "Central" Beaverton warrant capitalization?
mmm... not sure. But I'll change it. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, only use Fall ridership to prevent synthesis, and mention the period of time alongside the season to prevent ambiguity.
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • " the last of three trains..." this section flows rather awkwardly, and I would rewrite it as so: while the final three trips travel eastbound to Ruby Junction... as through services to the Blue Line, the last of which departs at 1:41 am.
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention the 15-minute headways before 30 minutes
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Combine the following sentence fragment about days into the frequency sentence
Done, although not a sentence fragment. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The station is approximately..." would sound better as "Trains from the station take approximately 40 minutes to reach Pioneer Square..."
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "operates the 272-PDX Night Bus"; "in order to supplement hours" could be condensed into "during hours"; and "thus providing" could be "to provide 24-hour service".
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "every hour" should be "once an hour" given the limited timespan
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any significance to the Washington & 80th intersection? Any transfers towards downtown?
Yes, it is the southern terminus. Added the transfer. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
References
  • What are the p.1+ for the Business Journal referring to?
I'm not sure, but that's how they formatted it. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It would be okay to remove them, then, in the name of consistent formatting. SounderBruce 02:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • 19: Unlink The Oregonian
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • 23: Missing accessdate
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • 25: Greater Greater Washington is a blog and can't be used as a reliable source
Replaced. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • 27: "Airport" should not be used in the work parameter
Done. --Truflip99 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That should be it. Putting this on hold while you work on resolving these issues. SounderBruce 04:51, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SounderBruce: Addressed all, thanks! --Truflip99 (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Truflip99: Just a few more comments above (marked with my signature) before I can pass this. SounderBruce 02:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SounderBruce: Sorry about that. I think I've got them all now. --Truflip99 (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Passing, as I've just tidied up that last addition. As for the hyphen debate, I usually follow the regional newspaper's style, but I haven't read enough of The Oregonian to know what they generally prefer. SounderBruce 05:27, 14 January 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Portland_Airport_station/GA1&oldid=1182718203"