Talk:Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center station/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Passed. Kj cheetham (talk) 07:36, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: Kj cheetham (talk · contribs) 09:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review, may take me a few days for a first run through. -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Well written.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
No copyvio issues on Earwig.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Neutrally worded.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Seems stable.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
All images are appropriate, have captions and seem to have appropriate licensing.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Assume sections I don't explicitly comment on are good. :-)

The "Construction" section goes into a lot of background predating this station opening, but for an article this length that's probably okay.

Clarify what "Dual Contracts" actually is. It's wikilinked in the lede, but probably should have a wikilink somewhere in the "Dual Contracts" section too.

Done. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any futures plans for the station that haven't already been implemented? (It does already cover things as recently as Feb 2023.)

Not to my knowledge. The renovation of the station was completed long ago, and there aren't any plans to add new entrances or other infrastructural improvements. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the "Design" section, worth wikilinking "capitals"?

Done. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the Ridership, are there any figures since 2020?

I've added this - 2021 is the last year for which stats are available. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Optional grammar suggestions (I struggled to find many improvement suggestions really!):

Opening - "The stations' opening" to "The station's opening"

Actually, it was the opening of three stations. I've fixed this. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Opening - Should "25 percent" be "25%"?

Yes. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fourth Avenue Line - "tunnel containing the Pacific Street station was completed" to "tunnel containing the Pacific Street station had been completed"

Done. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brighton Line and Eastern Parkway Line extension - should a section start with "Also"?

I've reworded it. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1960s to 1980s - "placed within fare control" to "placed under fare control"

The fare control area is actually a physical area, so I think the current wording is correct. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Renovation - "award a $11 million design contract" to "award an $11 million design contract"

Done. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exits - Should "a stair" be "a staircase", or "are stairs"?

I've changed these consistently. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure could probably add some Oxford commas if need be, but certainly not required for GA status.

Considering https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atlantic_Avenue%E2%80%93Barclays_Center_station&oldid=1172161577 for spot checks of sources. A cursory glance reveals nothing alarming. 215 in total, so picking out 22 at random for a roughly 10% sample:

9 - ok, but the link seems to be set to search for "april 28"?

21 - behind a paywall, but taking as ok on good faith from what I can see

22 - behind a paywall, but taking as ok on good faith from what I can see

36 - don't have access, so looking at 37 instead, which is ok

40 - ok

95 - ok

103 - don't have access, so looking at 102 instead, which seems ok

106 - seems ok

112 - mentions a new free transfer point, and is a good source, though didn't verify about separate for the 3 stations. Is that covered by ref 111?

Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

120 - don't have access, so looking at 119 instead, which does mention Atlantic Avenue and the capital plan, but not explicitly 1980-1984 as far I can see, though the source is dated 1983.

Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

123 - ok

126 - ok

128 - ok

130 - ok

141 - ok

147 - the article says Brighton and Eastern Parkway lines' platforms, the source says "Atlantic Avenue Subway Station (IRT and BMT) (added 2004 - - #04001023) Jct. of Flatbush Ave. at Atlantic and 4th Aves. , Brooklyn". Is this the same thing? I didn't look at the "archives document" the source also links to.

Fixed (see below). Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

159 - ok

173 - ok

179 - ok

186 - ok, but this is a timetable, so might be worth using {{as of}} in the article?

195 - ok

213 - the article says 23 million riders but the source says just over 22 million tickets sold.

Fixed (see below). Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Epicgenius, I've not done my review, please see above. Overall, excellent and very thorough! Just a few little bits to address, so I'll put this on hold in the meantime. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review Kj cheetham. I'll look at these shortly, but a few points:

For ref 112, that's a good point; it's almost synthesis, so I'll remove it. The Brighton-Eastern Parkway transfer at Atlantic Avenue was introduced first, followed by the transfer between the Fourth Avenue Line (Pacific Street) and the other two stations (Atlantic Avenue).
For ref 147, at the time of the nomination, only the BMT Brighton Line and IRT Eastern Parkway Line platform were named "Atlantic Avenue" (the actual nomination specifies this).
For ref 186 (and other timetable refs), I will consider it (though the 2/3/4/5 trains have served the station more-or-less consistently since about 1948).
Good catch for ref 213. I've fixed this.

– Epicgenius (talk) 16:18, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Epicgenius I accept all your points, and thank you for your initial edits already. My comment about ref 186 was just a thought rather than something needed for GA. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:31, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Epicgenius Let me know when you've had chance to look at the other points, and I'll take a look again. Thanks. -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kj cheetham: Thanks again for the review. I've addressed all of your remaining points now. Epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Epicgenius, all good to me though, not ref [9] still includes a "april 28" search term which confused me. But I'm happy to now pass this nonetheless. Keep up the good work! -Kj cheetham (talk) 07:35, 29 August 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.