Talk:Babcock Street station/GA1

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 04:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

While this seems short from a first glance, I'll have a deeper look within the next few days. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 04:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Beginning with the infobox and lead now.

Infobox

 * With no evidence found to the contrary, I can safely assume good faith that File:Inbound train at Babcock Street station, December 2021.JPG is in fact your own work.
 * Unless you tell me otherwise, I'll presume that the 2011 ridership stats are the most recent ones available. However, I keep getting a "403 Forbidden" notice when tryig to access the citation used for them. Is that just some error on my end or did the link maybe expire?
 * ✅ Ugh, the MBTA rearranges its website annoyingly often. I've fixed the link here.

Lead

 * "in the median of Commonwealth Avenue"..... perhaps middle of would work better
 * "Median" specifically indicates separation from traffic, while "middle" doesn't. Given that there are many light rail stations that aren't separated from traffic, I think the more specific word is better.
 * I'm not convinced there should be spaces between the dashes from "Stops were located at Alcorn Street – moved east to Babcock Street around 1975 – and Pleasant Street"
 * See MOS:ENDASH – spaced endashes (my preference) and unspaced emdashes are both allowed.

More to follow in the future. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Station layout

 * Flawless!

Before I dig deeper into "History", one suggestion I have is to give it a subheading for the first half like you do with "Stop consolidation". It could be something like "Origins" or "Early history" or any other fitting title you can think of. SNUGGUMS (talk / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 04:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Streetcar service

 * File:MBTA 3090 inbound at Pleasant Street, August 1968.jpg is A-OK to use
 * Almost every sentence in this subsection begins with "the", which feels way too repetitive, especially when literally every one in the first paragraph opens that way.
 * I've done my best to fix that. There's a lot of sentences that are very difficult to reword.
 * Link to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and spell that out for its first mention outside of lead and infobox.
 * Unless I'm missing something, there's no mention of BERy here, so you'll need another citation to back up the MTA succeeding it in 1947.
 * Unless I'm missing something, there's no mention of BERy here, so you'll need another citation to back up the MTA succeeding it in 1947.

Stop consolidation

 * I see no good reason to doubt that File:Inbound train at Babcock Street station, July 2019.JPG was something you took yourself.
 * The hyphens from "consolidate four stops - Boston University West, St. Paul Street, Pleasant Street, and Babcock Street - located near Boston University's West Campus" should be longer dashes per WP:DASH
 * Sorry to nitpick, but nowhere within this do I see Packard's Corner or the BU Bridge
 * ✅ Added a citation
 * It feels like "Construction was to last from February 2021 to early 2022" is missing something after the "was"; I'd recommend adding "set", "planned", or "scheduled" when this finished before the start of 2022
 * As far as I can tell, construction work wasn't really affected by last July's crash, so perhaps that's not relevant enough to include here
 * It's not part of the construction, but it's a major enough incident to be in the article. I think chronologically is the best place for it - it would feel very awkward in the previous section.
 * As far as I can tell, construction work wasn't really affected by last July's crash, so perhaps that's not relevant enough to include here
 * It's not part of the construction, but it's a major enough incident to be in the article. I think chronologically is the best place for it - it would feel very awkward in the previous section.

Overall

 * Prose: Some revision is needed
 * Referencing: Not quite everything is properly attributed, and there are formatting issues with some citations
 * Coverage: Including the July 2021 crash is questionable unless it's known to have interfered with construction (which the given piece didn't suggest)
 * Neutrality: There isn't any bias present
 * Stability: Article hasn't gone through any edit wars lately
 * Media: Each of the three used images are relevant and properly licensed
 * Verdict: Placing the nomination on hold for seven days. I have no doubt you'll manage to address my remaining concerns within that time. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 01:10, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! I believe I've addressed all your comments above. Would you be willing to also do the review for the twin stop, Amory Street station? A lot of the text is similar because of the shared history, and I've incorporated your comments on that, so you could do it relatively quickly if you're looking to knock off another review. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome, and I don't have a problem assessing that other page too, just don't expect everything to come right at once. Passing this in the meantime. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 14:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)