Talk:169th Street station (IND Queens Boulevard Line)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Truflip99 (talk · contribs) 20:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Starting review. --Truflip99 (talk) 20:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

History

 * "As a terminal, 169th Street station was considered inefficient due to being a local station." -- could you clarify on what this means?
 * ✅ and clarified this on other articles as well, like Parsons Boulevard station. epicgenius (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * 169th Street wikilink leads to same article, needs to be omitted
 * Terminal station wikilink needs to be on first instance
 * Omit wikilink to 179th Street
 * "At that time, this station was considered to be the most congested due to the numerous bus lines that either terminated just outside or at the nearby 165th Street Bus Terminal." -- clarify which station
 * "The full-time and part-time booths at the station were switched since over half of the remaining riders using the station lived closer to 169th Street. Before the change, most riders came from the Bus Terminal via the 168th Street entrance. The 168th Street booth was made part-time, and the 169th Street booth was made full-time." -- could you clarify on what any of this means?
 * ✅ It means that the locations of the booths were swapped. The full-time booth at 168th Street was relocated to 169th Street, and vice versa for the part-time booth. epicgenius (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "At that time, this station was considered to be the most congested due to the numerous bus lines that either terminated just outside or at the nearby 165th Street Bus Terminal." -- clarify which station
 * "The full-time and part-time booths at the station were switched since over half of the remaining riders using the station lived closer to 169th Street. Before the change, most riders came from the Bus Terminal via the 168th Street entrance. The 168th Street booth was made part-time, and the 169th Street booth was made full-time." -- could you clarify on what any of this means?
 * ✅ It means that the locations of the booths were swapped. The full-time booth at 168th Street was relocated to 169th Street, and vice versa for the part-time booth. epicgenius (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ It means that the locations of the booths were swapped. The full-time booth at 168th Street was relocated to 169th Street, and vice versa for the part-time booth. epicgenius (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Station layout

 * "There are two fare control areas at either end" -- of what?

Refs

 * Ref 24 needs url or needs to be a different template
 * ✅--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 23:46, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ref 33 is not sufficient to support the sentence

, -- Hi all. Just following up on this GA review. There are a couple more pending items above. And I am gonna add my final thoughts below. --Truflip99 (talk) 20:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Ref 13-15 -- overkill, two refs should suffice. Ref 14 additionally needs to be split.
 * Regarding the combined refs, these should be fine per WP:CITEBUNDLE. epicgenius (talk) 15:18, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Efforts to alleviate train congestion led to plans to extend the Queens Boulevard Line... -- precede this with In (year), efforts...
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 15:18, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * These facilities would allow for the operation of express and local service to the station. -- which stn is being referred to here?
 * ✅--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There are earlier instances of E and F wikilinks in prose
 * ✅--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The opening of the Archer Avenue Line was expected to reduce rush hour ridership at this station from 12,912 to 6,058. -- who expected?
 * ✅--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The locations of the station's full-time and part-time booths were switched, since more than half of the remaining riders lived closer to the 169th Street entrance. -- when?
 * ✅--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

, : Thanks for addressing these. My remaining issue is this reference -- it doesn't sufficiently support the prose it is referencing. Is there no alternative out there for this? --Truflip99 (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I can hide this info for now, since I can't find a ref for this. epicgenius (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Cool, we'll get this one passed :) --Truflip99 (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Technically, I do have a source for this, but I do not think I can use it as a reference without getting someone in big trouble (i.e. someone gave someone else access to an internal document, and the second person gave me access to it, and the document was not supposed to be made public). Hiding it seems like the prudent thing to do. Thanks so much for your help with this GA. I have been very busy with schoolwork. Thank you once again for being an amazing reviewer and for taking this article up.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. Will try get more knocked out in the next few weeks as I am stuck at home with cabin fever. The both of you, please stay safe during these eventful times. --Truflip99 (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2020 (UTC)