Talk:Far Rockaway–Mott Avenue station/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 14:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this over the next few days. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:08, 8 January 2017 (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):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Generally this is fine, but I'd add a line about the recent reconstruction to make it more complete.
- Done. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The Far Rockaway Branch of the Long Island Rail Road had originally been part of a loop that traveled along the existing route..." This would be more useful if it described "the existing route" geographically--the reader is not likely to know what that means otherwise.
- Done, added explanation. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"2nd" and "3rd" would be better as "second" and "third".
- Done. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Frequent fires and maintenance problems, the most notorious of which was a fire in May 1950 between The Raunt and Broad Channel Stations,[14] led the LIRR to abandon the Queens portion of the Rockaway Beach/Far Rockaway route." I'd break this into two sentences, something like "The route was plagued by frequent fires and maintenance problems, the most notorious of which was a fire in May 1950 between The Raunt and Broad Channel Stations.[14] This led the LIRR to abandon the Queens portion of the Rockaway Beach/Far Rockaway route.[citation]"
- Done. I actually split it in 3 sentences to make it even easier to read. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"On June 11, 1952, all trackage west of Mott Avenue was acquired by the city..." It sounds better if you avoid the passive voice here. As in "On June 11, 1952, the city acquired all trackage west of Mott Avenue..."
- Done. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure "Exit" needs to be a separate subsection here. But if you want to keep it, I don't object.
- I split all the "Exit" subsections in all the articles about NYC Subway sections. It seems as though the article reads fine with the "Exit" heading removed, though. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All are licensed correctly.
The images are good, but there are too many of them in the body of the article, which crowds the text badly. I'd move all but one or two of them to a separate gallery at the bottom. If it were up to me, I'd keep File:Far Rockaway IND Platform jeh.JPG and File:Rohlf RW 637T (7178214124).jpg in the main text and move the rest, but that's really up to you.
- Done, moved 3 images to gallery. epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Coemgenus: Thank you for your comprehensive review. I have fixed all the problems listed above. Regards, epicgenius (talk) 16:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: this all looks good to me. I'm happy to promote this fine article. Nice working with you. --Coemgenus (talk) 20:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]