Talk:Hastings station (MBTA)/GA1

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 03:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Greetings! I'll begin by assessing this article's infobox and lead section.

Infobox

 * It seems safe to assume good faith that File:Level crossing at Hastings station, August 2015.JPG is in fact your own work
 * Unless you tell me otherwise, I'm guessing that 2018 stats were the most recent ones available for ridership
 * Correct - the agency releases statistics at irregular intervals.
 * Can you find any information on when during the 1890s Hastings was opened? At the very least, it would be nice to have a specific year.
 * Unfortunately, my efforts haven't secured a year or date.

Lead

 * Seems a bit bare. Maybe you could add something on riders (or lack thereof) when that's partially why it first got nominated for closure. I see you've already mentioned its lack of handicap access (which also contributed to this decision).
 * ✅ I've expanded that sentence in the lede.
 * That definitely was an improvement. I would just add "its" or "a" before the word "lack" from "low ridership and lack of accessibility".

More to follow in the future. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Station design

 * I can't find any mention here of Route 117 details. Maybe you could just replace it with distance from the North Station terminus, which actually is mentioned not only in that, but in this too.
 * Distance from the terminal isn't terribly relevant; I tend to believe it falls under travel information except in particular cases (such as extremely distant stations). Unfortunately don't have a citation for the exact distance from North Avenue, but I've added a map showing its position.
 * Since the bit on not having shelter is from 2011, I can't help but suspect this could be outdated. Have Lincoln and/or Plimptonville since obtained any?
 * Lincoln is still shelterless, and Plimptonville closed along with Hastings without ever getting a shelter either. All new stations have fairly substantial canopies.

Early history

 * No qualms with File:Hook and Hastings organ factory postcard.jpg
 * The second paragraph is tiny with just three sentences (two of which are quite brief). Either expand upon that or merge it with the first paragraph.
 * ✅ I've expanded it with some service details.

I'll most likely get the rest in my next batch of comments. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

MBTA era

 * I see no good reason to doubt that File:Hastings7.jpg is the uploader's own work as claimed
 * Link West Concord station
 * Ref#13 only needs to be used at the end of "including the Fitchburg Route, on December 27, 1976" per WP:REPCITE
 * Ref#13 only needs to be used at the end of "including the Fitchburg Route, on December 27, 1976" per WP:REPCITE

Closure

 * Unless I misread something, it looks like Hastings was part of six peak-hour trips from the November 2017 schedule, not just five
 * I think you're mistaken - I see inbound stops at 5:54, 6:50, 8:25, 10:37, and 11:50; and outbound stops at 4:33, 5:34, 6:29, 6:59, and 7:47.
 * Thanks for pointing those out; I was combining total stops used and probably confused parts of it with Silver Hill's times (which were even less frequent)
 * There's something odd with the distance from Kendal Green. While Ref#18 suggests 0.8 miles (which I've noticed mentions that there were fewer than 5 daily boardings for this station as of 2020 but I'm convinced that such ridership stats are usable when it doesn't give any specifics), Ref#2 makes it look like only half a mile. A Google Map inquiry gives either 0.8 or 0.9 depending on whether somebody drives or walks from one station to the other. Not sure which to go with, but in any case, it's not 0.6 miles.
 * The exact distance along the nearly-straight rail line is 2,960 feet (0.56 miles / 0.90 km). Kendal Green is at milepost 13.16 (rounded to 13.2) and Hastings at 13.72 (13.7) - see page 52 here - so the less accurate 0.5 miles comes from that rounding. The MBTA number of 0.8 miles comes from the walking distance, which is longer than the actual distance between the stations.
 * In that case, we just need an indication the figure is rounded, which I've done myself SNUGGUMS (talk / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 02:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No weekend service is mentioned here, and I have a feeling you meant to write "weekday" instead.
 * The reduced-service schedules were indeed based off weekend service. Compare the weekend service from the 2017 schedule, and the weekday service from the December 14, 2020 schedule, and you'll see they're almost identical.
 * Indeed they are quite alike; the biggest difference I found was that 2020's reduced weekday schedule had one additional inbound train leaving Wachusett at 4:50 AM <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 02:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Are the proposals for closing non-Fitchburg stations relevant here? Aside from Silver Hill (singling that out is understandable when part of the same line and their absence on the reduced service schedule helps emphasize that they had stopped being used), I'd save such details for other station pages.
 * I think it's worth noting the number of other stations - it only takes a few words and gives useful context.
 * Fair enough <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 02:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Overall

 * Prose: Nearly there
 * Referencing: A couple refs need tweaking, and some detail isn't supported by the given citations
 * Coverage: While all major aspects appear to be included, there's a portion that seems irrelevant
 * Neutrality: Looks good
 * Stability: Perfectly good
 * Media: Three images are used, and I don't have copyright concerns with any of them
 * Verdict: Putting on hold for seven days. You should be able to sufficiently improve the article within this timeframe. <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 22:45, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! I believe I've addressed all of your comments. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:22, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I made one minor adjustment, and it's now ready for promotion :). <b style="color:#009900">SNUGGUMS</b> (<b style="color:#009900">talk</b> / <b style="color:#009900">edits</b>) 02:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)