Talk:BMT Broadway Line/GA1

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

Reviewer: StudiesWorld (talk · contribs) 09:47, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I have been on vacation in Vegas. I am coming tonight. Thank you. AmericanAir88(talk) 20:12, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * All issues except the SPS's fixed. Kewgardens Any input on the erictb.info refs? AmericanAir88(talk) 17:32, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I have added a lot of the information on this page and my goal was to eventually make this a GA., I didn't think it was ready, but wanted to see how you would do on this. There are many issues that remain. References need to be standardized, titles need to be fixed, page numbers added, urls shortened, ISSN, ISBNs and OCLC numbers need to be added, and better sources are needed. We cannot use erictb.info, thejoekorner and nycsubway.org (except for primary source documents or articles hosted there). I put these in initially as placeholder references, and have worked to find better ones. I removed some unneeded erictb.info citations from here, and have some sources I had planned to add concerning the Manhattan Bridge changes. I have never been fond of the bullet pointed routes in the Chrystie Street section. There is more history that needs to be fleshed out, including the changes in 2004, for which I recently got documentation, operations during the 1990s, the gap in history between 1920 and 1967, the lack of information on original service patterns, and the impact of the construction of the line on adjacent neighborhoods, development, and more information on the Dual Contracts.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I should have told you this earlier but was preoccupied by school, and had to cut back on my editing. I am not the reviewer, and cannot be, given my role in editing this article, but cannot just watch this article be passed, even though I want it to, given the issues I have listed. I have had to deal with similar issues, some, in fact, more daunting, to pass, such as the reassessment of the Staten Island Railway article. It is frustrating and requires a lot of work to be done., you should look at the reviews of the Aqueduct Racetrack (IND Rockaway Line) and 75th Avenue (IND Queens Boulevard Line) articles done by . They were very thorough, and I became a better editor from it, and learned how to thoroughly review articles from these two. Don't be discouraged, but use this as a learning experience.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * To sum up, I do not think that this article should be passed until many of the issues I brought up are resolved. While it is possible for this article to pass on this attempt, I think this is unlikely.   I don't want you to be discouraged from working on improving articles in WP:NYCPT and from nominating them to become Good Articles. Having another editor working on improving these articles has been amazing. If you need any assistance in finding sources, on fixing references, or anything else, I will try to help. Keep on doing great work. If you have any questions about what I have just said, let me know.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * - Thanks for the information! I have added the concerns that you raised to the review above. My strongest concerns are those of covering all the major aspects and the self-published sources. Do you think that there are any other concerns that I should be aware of? StudiesWorld (talk) 19:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't really have any other advice other than what said. It might also be worth nominating this article for a copyedit at WP:GOCE/REQ, just to make sure things make sense. epicgenius (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)