Talk:Cincinnati Union Terminal/GA1

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

Reviewer: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 01:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Prose and coverage
In the interest of a fair review (due to this being a large article), I will note major problems here. Also, I'll note that I have worked with the nominator on GA reviews before. This, however, should not affect my comments. epicgenius (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Lead:
 * The building's largest tenants are the Cincinnati Museum Center, a group of three museums, a library, and a theater, as well as the Holocaust & Humanity Center. - is "a group of three museums" included in the Cincinnati Museum Center?
 * Yup, made clear by the wikilink and further info below. Any way to reword to be more clear? ɱ  (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Try "a group of three museums that includes the Cincinnati Museum Center"? epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Reworded.


 * Third paragraph: This is way too large in proportion to the size of the history section. I see you have an article called History of Cincinnati Union Terminal
 * There are really a couple of key events necessary for understanding where the terminal is today, that's why there's an offshoot article to cover the full history. I'll look into adding more to balance however.


 * Conversely, there is little coverage of the design, structures, murals, etc. However, this is what the majority of the article is about. Please consider expanding the lead to this effect.
 * See above ɱ  (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Done mostly. It's easy to talk about the design of the terminal, though the key historical information is more important to the lede than attributes of the various rooms, really. ɱ  (talk) 18:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Name:
 * In general, this appears straightforward to me. I don't think this section is needed
 * Especially after Grand Central and its numerous names I wanted to be clear here. Most people are unfamiliar with the concepts of union stations and terminals as train station terminology. As well there isn't any better place to include the initialisms. ɱ  (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The facility was also designated a terminal, as six of its seven founding railroads terminated there (all except the Baltimore & Ohio) - this sentence has an awkward flow, and should be rewritten, or the factoid about the B&O moved elsewhere.
 * Agreed. Any advice? I can move B&O to the Former Services section. ɱ  (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "Six of the seven founding railroads terminated there, while the Baltimore & Ohio operated through services"? epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed.

Service:
 * arriving in Cincinnati at 1:31 a.m. for trains to Chicago or 3:17 a.m. for trains to New York, each departing 10 minutes later. - this may need to be rewritten as well. Something like "Trains to Chicago arrive at 1:31 and trains to New York arrive at 3:17, each departing 10 minutes later."
 * Done.


 * Ohio's total ridership for 2018 was 134,000 people. - how does this relate to the preceding sentence?
 * Puts the previous sentence's numbers in context of total statewide travel.


 * bus system, connecting the terminal to downtown - mentioning "the terminal" again is unnecessary here.
 * If I swap that out for "it", "it" would typically refer back to the last noun, the bus system... Any other way to reword? ɱ  (talk) 14:53, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "bus system, which connects to downtown". Generally, the bus just connects the neighborhoods with the terminal. The terminal is not directly linked with these neighborhoods except via the bus. epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed.

Operations
 * The section heading doesn't really fit. I assumed that this was an extension of the last section.
 * Sure I can see that. These are different operations presently in the terminal; do you have an alternate proposal? I can only think of "Building uses" which isn't exactly standard or professional seeming...
 * Building operations? epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I read that with "building" as a verb, like "construction operations". What about "Facility operations"?


 * while the tracks and platforms are owned by the freight railroad CSX Transportation - CSX is technically a company. So "freight railroad company".
 * I took this from the lede of the CSX article. Do you want to change it there too?
 * Sure, I guess you can change both articles. epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed.


 * The museum center maintains a collection of items related to the terminal - this single sentence, not connected to the sentences before it, seems to be a trivial factoid within its current placement. I'm sure this is important, but this sentence's placement should be reconsidered.
 * Sure yeah. Done.

Visitor services
 * The Rookwood Tea Room is operating as a Graeter's location. - does Graeter's have a link? I don't know what that is.
 * Done, Graeter's ice cream! ɱ  (talk) 14:58, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Architects and Art Deco design
 * The station building was designed by the firm Fellheimer & Wagner, considered its magnum opus - this is a run-on sentence
 * It's still comparatively very short. Only way to break it would be to make a sentence out of the magnum opus part, which would be too short on its own.


 * The large and busy firm gave the project design to Roland A. Wank, a younger employee - Do you know why him specifically? OK if you don't.
 * Nope but it follows the trend of then-busy Reed/Stem/Warren/Wetmore giving the then-novice Fellheimer power of GCT's design.


 * Wank's original plan was a mixture of modern architecture (later known as Art Deco) and Renaissance design. - Can you expand a little more on this paragraph? What specific features (if you know) were added or removed in the redesign? And why was the design changed later on?
 * This is discussed much more in the History article, but I will try to make it a little more detailed.
 * Done.

Location, layout, exterior
 * the Queensgate neighborhood, created in the mid-20th century; originally it was part of the West End. - I don't see the importance of mentioning this in the prose. Maybe in a note. However, this distracts from the main point that the terminal is located in Queensgate.
 * I think this is important to note. Most of its active station use was before Queensgate existed. GCT's article has to mention "modern-day Midtown Manhattan" as the neighborhood has changed drastically; same goes for this area of Cincinnati. What used to be ultra-dense, relatively low-income residential areas was redeveloped into Queensgate, a mostly industrial area with large highways running through it.


 * Ezzard Park Drive (named Lincoln Park Drive from 1935 to 1976, after the park, and subsequently named for Cincinnati resident Ezzard Charles) - this is also interesting, but distracting.
 * I really like to keep this here, links the terminal better with Lincoln Park and Cincinnati, with the resident Ezzard Charles. Provides more context here than any book I've read about the terminal.


 * while its eastern boundary is Western Avenue (formerly Freeman Avenue) - by the context, it should be "and its eastern".
 * Fixed


 * Didn't you just mention the Gest Street rail yard?
 * Sure, yeah, but the first mention was of things surrounding the terminal - the yard and the lawn - but the later sentence is about roads that surround the complex. On the west side though there is no road, so I just mention the rail yard again.


 * It was built with five floors, but only two primary levels: the track level, and the station floor, placed above the tracks for simplicity of arrangement and for more architectural opportunities. - The following sentences seem to talk about the site context, though, so this doesn't really fit.
 * I think it does! The first part of the paragraph is about describing the placement and shapes - T-shaped, 2 main stories, 5 full stories, east of tracks, faces downtown, one axis of lawn to terrace to concourse to lobby to train concourse to platforms. The two pull-through sentences aren't as related but also show how trains and passengers are situated and travel here.


 * The station was considered to have a "pull-through" design - Can you explain this?
 * I gave examples as it's hard to describe without being too wordy. You know, stations like GCT, the rail yard abuts the terminal, all trains stop. Stations like Kansas City, or Croton-on-Hudson, have a concourse above platforms, with stairs down to them, and trains can come and go from either end of the tracks.


 * though even in 1933 it was seen as possibly the last grand intercity train station built - Who said this? I generally think this may benefit from some more instances of architectural criticism, if we're mentioning such things. Not really necessary, but would be a welcome addition.
 * A lot of sources have stated or speculated on the matter, I will see about adding more. The one cited was from 1933, one of the earliest instances. They knew rail was already declining by that point. ɱ  (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

More later. epicgenius (talk) 01:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Grounds east of the terminal
 * and gently carries broad driveways upward to the terminal - Can you qualify "gently" more specifically? Does this mean a gradual slope, and if so, do you know what the percentage of the incline is?
 * Yes, it does refer to a gradual slope, as gentle refers to mild, kind, moderate, or gradual; the latter two terms are most applicable here. No idea for the incline, but I don't think it's consistent. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * It was remodeled to simply have pleasant landscaping during the terminal's construction - Some clarification may be needed for pleasant landscaping, since it may be seen as subjective, and since I can't tell whether this means "simpler landscaping".
 * This comes directly from Lost Cincinnati; I'll reword a little to clarify. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * the name of Lincoln Park - "the Lincoln Park name"
 * I dunno, I like the prior better. The phrase "retained the name of" is quite common via Google searches. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * intact, however - either the comma should be a semicolon, or "however" should be "but". Otherwise it's a run on sentence.
 * Ok yeah. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * not original to the building. - perhaps you can say "added after the building's completion" instead.
 * I dunno also, that seems to imply directly after completion. This is clear, do you just not like how it sounds? I wish a real date could be found, alas. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure. epicgenius (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Main facade
 * and the outer lane was intended for Cincinnati's streetcar system, though it was never used. - was the streetcar discontinued by this time? Or did the system just not run to Cincinnati Union?
 * From the article on it, the whole system was discontinued by 1951. Not sure if it ever ran to Lincoln Park, but I doubt it. A 1911 streetcar map shows the whole neighborhood really left alone, nearest lines a few blocks away at least. A 1944 map shows it going down Freeman Ave, just basically right by the entrance sign. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The terminal was also reported as resembling Kiev-Pasazhyrskyi railway station - Who said this?
 * It's part of the article cited, Cincinnati Magazine, not really attributable but you can see the resemblance. ɱ  (talk)


 * relatively without ornamentation - sounds weird, you can just say "relatively plain".
 * That's not really as technical, plain could mean boring/uninteresting, not elaborate, no decoration, etc. I think clarification that there's not too many ornaments or intricate details on the facade is a little better? ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I suppose that works. epicgenius (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Exterior materials
 * Morton Gneiss is known for its popularity in American Art Deco architecture at the time. - I would advise against the phrasing "is known for". I'd suggest "Morton Gneiss was popular..."
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Related structures
 * 742 feet long, 40 to 136 feet wide - metric conversions?
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Also, I'd suggest "and between 40 and 136 ft wide"
 * Done sorta, before I saw this. Does that work? ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure. epicgenius (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)


 * 115-foot-diameter turntable - conversions?
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

I will comment more later. epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

All right, here are more comments.
Interior layout and architecture
 * The flooring was designed to guide traffic - the color pattern?
 * Clarified. ɱ  (talk) 02:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Rotunda
 * "Rotunda" should be lowercase unless it's a proper noun.
 * Is a proper noun, is usually capitalized in these works. ɱ  (talk) 05:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The room's marble dates 150 million years; there are approximately 24 fossilized skeletons visible in its walls - Quick question, were the skeletons already in the marble, or added afterward? Also, "dates 150 million years" sounds weird. I'd say "is 150 million years old" or "dates back 150 million years"
 * Yeah the stone is as old as the fossils. Cut and polished and placed but nothing more. Also done.


 * The northern curved wall housed 18 ticket windows, while the southern curved wall had a soda fountain, telegraph counter, drug store, and the entrance to the terminal's two dining rooms.
 * What's the concern with this sentence? ɱ  (talk) 05:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Why is the whispering gallery seemingly unlikely?
 * Unlike somewhere like Grand Central, where you can see the ceiling slope from each opposing corner to their pair, you wouldn't guess that this effect would work here too; it really doesn't in most domed buildings or anything. Unfortunately, it's much noisier in this main concourse than GCT's whispering gallery, making for a much more subdued effect. ɱ  (talk) 05:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Train concourse
 * which plans to assess the clock's condition and plan where to display it - You mention "plan" twice in such a short sentence, but one of these has a singular/plural disagreement. Or else I am reading this wrong. Either way, this should be worded better.
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 04:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I think you can split this into two paragraphs: room dimensions/materials, and furnishings. Not necessary, though would be much easier to read
 * Hard to find a natural break; as it is now it flows well from dimensions to colors to uses and furnishings. Any suggestions? ɱ  (talk) 04:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Platforms and tracks
 * You mention several qualities and describe them as unusual. How so? Pretend I'm a reader with no idea of how a normal platform size or column size is supposed to be.
 * I'm no railway engineer, I just report the facts. Presumably the width of the platforms and spacing between columns were both unusually spacious. British standard appears to be at least 12ft wide platforms... ɱ  (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Tower A
 * the club was required to pay rent, required for tax credits for the renovation. - "required" is used twice, so you should switch the wording up a little.
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * the museum center planned to reopen the space to the public in spring 2019 - Update needed
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Foodservice spaces
 * The kitchen is referred in the past tense. Does it not exist anymore?
 * It does, though I doubt it's on the mezzanine too now. Removing for lack of clarity, doesn't add much either. ɱ  (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Other interior spaces
 * Looks good.

Murals
 * In general, be careful when you mention left and right. You can probably add compass directions as short reminders.
 * Fixed. ɱ  (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Rotunda murals
 * Is the first paragraph of Rotunda murals related to art in the whole station, or art in the rotunda?
 * Hmm, whoops. ɱ  (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

World map mural
 * due to its size, the cost of saving it was estimated at $100,000 - what would be the inflation equivalent of that today?
 * Unfortunately too much. Added. ɱ  (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Four of the clocks remain, all except the Eastern time clock - Think you can just say "All of the clocks remain, except..."
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Industrial murals
 * Entire section is unsourced. As a general guideline, you should have at least one source per paragraph. This is not a parent section of any other subsections, so I would personally say that this is a very important issue to resolve.
 * It's just a simple summary of a very extensive, well-sourced article. Will be easy, no worries. ɱ  (talk) 05:06, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Other murals
 * Looks good.

Innovations, reception and legacy
 * The terminal is popularly recognized by the American public, as the 45th most popular work of architecture in the United States in the American Institute of Architects' 2006-2007 survey America's Favorite Architecture. It is also the most popular work of architecture in the state of Ohio - was that all in the same survey?
 * Yup, fixed. ɱ  (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

In popular culture
 * I'd generally avoid sections like this unless the material is extremely well sourced, with tertiary sources proving notability. In this case, sourcing seems good.
 * The show's producer, Hanna-Barbera, was at the time owned by Cincinnati-based Taft Broadcasting. - What is the purpose of this sentence?
 * Fleshed out, though still really strange to word. If you think it's awkward I need help finding a better way! ɱ  (talk) 02:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

More later.

Thanks for bearing with me. I will leave more comments on Monday. epicgenius (talk) 03:57, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I haven't looked at this yet. I will leave more comments when I get home in several hours. epicgenius (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

History section
I'll just create a new subsection for this, using History of Cincinnati Union Terminal as a baseline for comparison. Since we have a main sub-article, this is not too long, which is good. Also means this won't take long.
 * After the great flood of 1884 - does this have a wikilink? If so, both this and the CUT History page should both have the link.
 * No article, not for most floods affecting Cincinnati. Capitalized as it was known as the "Great Flood of 1884". ɱ  (talk) 18:39, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * An agreement for a union station among the seven railroads that served Cincinnati and the city itself was not achieved until July 1927. - why the delay?
 * Added big factors, but it appears to have also been such a complex project requiring so many agreements and plans. ɱ  (talk) 18:39, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The seven railroads–the Baltimore and Ohio [...] Southern Railway–selected - this should either be spaced n-dash or unspaced m-dash, per MOS:DASH. Generally the unspaced n-dash is reserved for numerical ranges or component joiners.
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 18:39, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The architectural firm Fellheimer & Wagner was commissioned to design the terminal in spring 1928 - I suggest "June 1928". June might be spring or summer depending on the exact date, and per MOS:SEASONS, seasons should really be avoided.
 * Where do you get "June"? The source I found is one of few to even mention a date, saying "late spring 1928". ɱ  (talk) 18:43, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The History of CUT article says, After a limited architectural competition, the firm Fellheimer & Wagner was commissioned to design the terminal in June 1928, shortly after completing their work on Buffalo Central Terminal. So either that article has an unsourced date or this article is too generic. epicgenius (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, found it. ɱ  (talk) 18:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * (4.2 million cubic metres) - "meters" is the US spelling, so use us in the convert template.
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 19:17, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * because of another Ohio River flood - I'd say that you should either specify how the flood affected operations (i.e. "because of service disruptions caused by another Ohio River flood") or remove this fragment entirely.
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 19:17, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * railroad museum; transportation center for air, bus and rail lines; court building; convention center; Air Force museum; museum of science and industry; private industry; and a shopping center - Would you be able to put this in a footnote? I don't think it would fit in a section that is supposed to be just an overview.
 * I included it because it's interesting, and that two to three of the eight proposals became reality. As well, when you say "eight proposed uses", that really makes people ask, well what were the eight proposed uses? ɱ  (talk) 19:17, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * On October 31, 1972, the terminal was added to the National Register of Historic Places, with a note of emergency as Southern Railway planned to demolish the terminal.[28] The last passenger train departed on October 28, 1972,[19] and Amtrak abandoned the terminal and opened a smaller station nearby on the following day.[15] - I get why the other article has the timeline this way, but here, the two sentences should probably be flipped.
 * If the chronology is what is concerning, I'll add that the nomination was submitted prior, but approved after. ɱ  (talk) 19:17, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The railway announced its plans and allowed interested parties time to remove the concourse's murals - this sentence seems awkward, first because "announced its plans" doesn't seem connected to anything, and also because you use "railway" instead of "railroad" or "Southern Railroad" (which would be more consistent)
 * It's related to the sentence prior, at least saying that they made it public and allowed time for saving pieces, rather than demolishing everything quickly and quietly. Fixed a little better. ɱ  (talk) 19:24, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this is a little better. epicgenius (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * At its peak, the mall had 7,800 to 8,000 visitors per day and it 54 vendors - missing word
 * Fixed. ɱ  (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Oz closed in 1984, however, Loehmann's Department Store, located in the center of the rotunda, remained open until 1985 - also awkward, can probably do with one or two fewer commas
 * Yeah, lots of commas, wow. Is it better now? Still hard to word well. ɱ  (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I guess so - just replace "however" with "but" and it will be grammatically correct. epicgenius (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. ɱ  (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * After approving the move, the terminal's 200,000 square feet of underground space, as well as its taxi and bus ramps, were renovated into exhibition space - who approved the move?
 * The two organizations looking to move and combine. ɱ  (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * After approving the move [...] waiting room and ticket counter. - Also, do we need this entire description? Genuine question.
 * I think it's cool to see how spaces have changed, and it's only mentioned tangentially in the article. This puts a date and a purpose. ɱ  (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * complete a $228 million renovation throughout the entire building - "A renovation throughout" sounds weird. I'd go either with "complete a $228 renovation of" or "complete $228 million worth of renovations throughout".
 * Fixed. ɱ  (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Was wondering why the further reading is before the references as well. That's all my prose comments for now. epicgenius (talk) 18:09, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. ɱ  (talk) 19:24, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks almost ready to pass. I will take a closer look when I get home. epicgenius (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

POV
Will review later as well.

Seems fine, as this is also covered above with prose. epicgenius (talk) 18:09, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Images
The licenses seem OK, though there are a high number of "not renewed" licenses. I still have 30 images to examine, but on a cursory check, I see no blatant problems. epicgenius (talk) 01:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * This is a perfectly valid license on Commons, so I'm not sure why you mention it here. The sources are not as old as 1924, as the building wasn't built yet, but there were no copyright mentions, and I have checked copyright registers for the works. ɱ  (talk) 14:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know that these are valid Commons licenses. That is why I said the licenses are OK. epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Overall
I am passing this article now. This seems to meet the GA criteria. Let me know if you want me to review the History of CUT page as well, or any of your other nominations. epicgenius (talk) 16:38, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Will let you know. ɱ  (talk) 18:00, 5 February 2020 (UTC)