Talk:Lechmere station/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 03:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Some copy changes, one minor issue with a source, and you'll be good to go. You might find more given how long it's been! 7-day hold. Ping me when done. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:26, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Lead

 * The surface station was closed on May 24, 2020 missing DATECOMMA

Station design

 * The platform is 8 inches (200 mm) high for accessible boarding on current LRVs, and can be raised to 14 inches (360 mm)... — drop this comma, see User:Sammi Brie/Commas in sentences. Future errors of this type are denoted (C in S)

History

 * north end of the viaduct, but rejected — remove comma (C in S)
 * Unlike the Commonwealth Avenue, Beacon Street, and Huntington Avenue, the Cambridge Street and Bridge Street lines did not have dedicated medians, — consider adding "lines" after "Huntington Avenue"
 * Question: is the Massachusetts Public Service Commission the same as the Massachusetts Public Utilities Commission or is that an error or something actually different?
 * It appears that the Utilities Commission replaced the Service Commission in 1919 - see here. I believe the names are correct for the time periods given.
 * the construction rest of the terminal was already well underway. Is that a missing "of the" I see?
 * Cambridge street — capitalize for consistency
 * The new terminal was expected to be used by 24,000 passengers daily in each direction, and to increase daily seated capacity through the subway by 8,754 passengers. Drop comma (C in S)
 * In 1924, the BERy indicated that Lechmere was "not fitted to be a permanent transfer station, and while being used as such must fail to satisfy", and recommended an extension to a larger transfer station. (C in S) I'd be fine with a comma here if we had "recommending" instead of "and recommended".
 * I'm inclined to keep the comma here; because there's a comma in the quote, the comma afterwards makes the sentence structure more clear. I think "recommended" is better to match "indicated".
 * then follow — should be "then followed"
 * This routing was deemed safer by the MBTA due to the fewer turns, though it was "extremely inconvenient to inbound passengers." — sentence fragment, so quote before period. See MOS:INOROUT
 * for pedestrian from East Cambridge — pedestrians, plural
 * the state begin planning — "began"
 * as was elimination of the Union Square Branch and other cost reduction measures — "as were" plural subject
 * , and 100% in October 2019 — remove comma (C in S)
 * This was delayed in June 2021 to a December 2021 opening, and in October 2021 to a March 2022 opening — remove comma (C in S)
 * Again, I'm inclined to keep the comma - without it, having four dates in close succession might be difficult to parse. I think the increased clarity outweighs the grammatical misdemeanor.
 * for pedestrian from East Cambridge — pedestrians, plural
 * the state begin planning — "began"
 * as was elimination of the Union Square Branch and other cost reduction measures — "as were" plural subject
 * , and 100% in October 2019 — remove comma (C in S)
 * This was delayed in June 2021 to a December 2021 opening, and in October 2021 to a March 2022 opening — remove comma (C in S)
 * Again, I'm inclined to keep the comma - without it, having four dates in close succession might be difficult to parse. I think the increased clarity outweighs the grammatical misdemeanor.
 * , and 100% in October 2019 — remove comma (C in S)
 * This was delayed in June 2021 to a December 2021 opening, and in October 2021 to a March 2022 opening — remove comma (C in S)
 * Again, I'm inclined to keep the comma - without it, having four dates in close succession might be difficult to parse. I think the increased clarity outweighs the grammatical misdemeanor.
 * This was delayed in June 2021 to a December 2021 opening, and in October 2021 to a March 2022 opening — remove comma (C in S)
 * Again, I'm inclined to keep the comma - without it, having four dates in close succession might be difficult to parse. I think the increased clarity outweighs the grammatical misdemeanor.

Source spot checks
I chose 12 of the 156 reference numbers at random for spot checks. All check out; one seems to need a bit of reconciling with the source.


 * 30: Map - Description seems adequate.
 * 33: Cambridge objection to loop track
 * 39: Cost of elevated railway at $100,000
 * 50: Mention of "improved waiting room facilities" in BERy report
 * 63: Opening date (4/23/41) of parking lot
 * 66: 1961 service changes
 * 68: 1984 service changes due to line congestion (in footnote)
 * 86: Inadequacy of streetcars, proposed line rerouting
 * 103: Urban Ring fact sheet with "New Lechmere" as a station
 * 114: 2012 signing of pact
 * 117: One of two references for 2013 MassDOT contract award
 * 148: April meeting mentions 5 of 9 central instrument houses installed (5, not 1, making it different from "a signal instrument house" mentioned in article)
 * Yeah, it's a bit confusing. Source 147, the April meeting page 19, specifically calls out the Lechmere house as being installed (and shows a photo). Source 148, the May meeting, mentioned 5 being installed but doesn't mention locations. I think "signal instrument house" is a good term to clarify that it's for the signal system; that phrase is used in the technical provisions (page 11.4-1 etc).

Other

 * All images are appropriately licensed and have alt text. You know how to steal my heart!
 * Someday I'll manage to get alt text added to the GA criteria!
 * References aren't archived, but I remember from reviewing Green Line Extension that this is your personal choice, so I'm not going to require it here.
 * Earwig catches names of organizations and things like "Green Line Northwest Corridor"; no significant issues.

Review in progress


 * Thanks for the detailed review! I've fixed most of the items you've commented on, and replied to the remaining few. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)