Jump to content

Talk:High Line/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 17:57, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to review this. My other half used to live in New York State and popped round to have a look at it some years back (of course over that side of "the pond" "popped in" is a five hour drive) and said it was a great way to bring life to the city.

Lead

[edit]

Rail line

[edit]
  • There isn't much telling us why the railway was built in the first place. Was it to connect communities, to alleviate congestion from horse / coach traffic, both or something else? And why was the railway street level - cost or planning problems?
    It was to ship freight. I have added that. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • What exactly was the West Side Improvement Project?
    I have also added info. Thank you for pointing it out. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It cost over $150 million, equating to about $2 billion in 2009 dollars" - you might want to consider using {{inflation}} which will keep the figures up to date
    Added. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This also reduced pilferage" - what do you mean by "pilferage"?
    Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This section still exists as of May 18, 2008" - bit of out date, isn't this?
    That is the most recent date for which I have a source. I will try to find a more recent source. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the 1960s, the southernmost section of the line was demolished." - unless I'm mistaken, the lead says specifically it was demolished in 1960. One of these must be wrong?
    It was specifically 1960. I have corrected that. Thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The last train on the remaining part of the line was operated by Conrail in 1980 with three carloads of frozen turkeys." - why are the frozen turkeys significant?
    They aren't. That's what the source says, though... Anyway, it is now gone. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During the late 1980s, the north end of the High Line was disconnected from the rest of the national railroad system" - although West Side Line has the specifics, I think it would be worth clarifying here how the construction of a station resulted in the disconnection of a line, which to me sounds non-intuitive
    Good point. I have added another reference. It was about to be destroyed the same year the connection was made. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was slated for demolition under the administration of then-mayor Rudy Giuliani." - Do we know when exactly, other than "1990s"?
    There is no exact date, because it actually was slated for demolition during much of that decade. Epicgenius (talk) 19:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Repurposing

[edit]
Is there any way of making that clearer in the citation, I wonder? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:35, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

[edit]
  • "The recycling of the railway into an urban park has bought on the revitalization of Chelsea" - might be worth (using the source supplied) dropping in a brief description of what Chelsea was like before the park was opened
    Done. Epicgenius (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The New York Times' source here says "The High Line has become a tourist-clogged catwalk and a catalyst for some of the most rapid gentrification in the city’s history." That might be worth mentioning as a counter-point to the otherwise positive reception to the line
    Done. Epicgenius (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Crime has been, unusually, extraordinarily low in the park" - Why "unusually? Were people expecting it to be a muggers' paradise?
    Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "despite the Central Park's location in tony Upper Manhattan" - what does "tony" mean here?
    Since I removed the clause, it is resolved. There won't any problems with the removal of the phrase, will there? Epicgenius (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It costs substantially less to redevelop an abandoned urban rail line into a linear park than to demolish it" - the information in the source is subtly different; it says "One group estimates that it would cost less to redevelop the viaduct than to demolish it"
    Done. Epicgenius (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes [www.thequeensway.org] a reliable source?
    I replaced the ref. Epicgenius (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Description

[edit]

Attractions

[edit]
[edit]

See also

[edit]

Images

[edit]
  • I'm concerned about the size of the images. They work okay on this monitor, but they won't necessarily on a mobile or tablet. Have a look at MOS:IMAGES, specifically the bit that says that images should generally not be more than 220 pixels wide.
    Set size is now 220px. Epicgenius (talk) 20:23, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stability

[edit]

Summary

[edit]
  • There's quite a lot of work to do here. Of particular concern are the various dead links (mostly to the Friends of the High Line website) - the dead links tool is down at the moment so I can't do an exhaustive check, but you'll probably want to check all the online citations carefully. That said, the issues are not particularly insurmountable, so I'll leave the review on hold awaiting improvements. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ritchie333: I will find Archive URLs if necessary; but these now-dead links did work when I nominated the article for GA status, so I must have overlooked them. Anyway, I have completed all of the requested changes; feel free to point out any more issues.

    Thank you for your thorough review. On a unrelated matter, is there anything like this across the pond? I haven't been there for a long time.... – Epicgenius (talk) 20:23, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing directly comparable - obviously the Royal Parks of London are culturally and historically significant, and there are things like the Meon Valley Trail which are old rural railways converted to cycle paths, but I can't think of any urban railways that have had this treatment. Some people want the Westway to be downgraded to a park and cycle way, but I can't see it happening. Anyway, everything looks to be in order - I'll give it a final check in the morning when I'm not so tired and probably make a decision on passing then. Would be nice for BMK to poke his head in as he's been a major contributor to the article in the past. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. I can see why people don't want to downgrade the Westway. Congestion, huh? Or do people have other means of transport?

Anyway, BMK hasn't been very active for a month. I'll leave a message for him. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:24, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned about the new "View of the High Line" section. As previously noted, just having images in and of themselves isn't particularly useful - they need to be able to relate some way to the prose and enhance the readers' understanding of the subject. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:36, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: I have removed the gallery. Epicgenius (talk) 00:32, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry about the delay (been offline generally), but I think was the last remaining concern, so I can now pass the review. I knew I was going to be away, I just didn't expect the actions to be completed so quickly. Well done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:18, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Thanks for your great review. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]