Talk:Richmond station (California)/GA1

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

Reviewer: KN2731 (talk · contribs) 08:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments This is a pretty well-written article, I couldn't really find many issues. Made a small MOS correction with this edit; Earwig copyvio detector turns up 8.3% but it's all caused by railway names. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Should all references to the San Joaquin train service be spelt San Joaquins instead? The main article seems to use the extra S throughout.
 * I've updated the current usage; when the train was introduced, it was only a single round trip without the s.
 * Are there 2021 statistics for average weekday BART passengers? Would think 2020 values were abnormally low due to the pandemic.
 * These are the February 2020 numbers, which should reflect pre-pandemic ridership. I'll update to current numbers eventually, but that will be done across the whole system using a template.
 * The CurrentSF link (ref 10) appears dead.
 * ✅ Added archive.
 * Is Proto-inc (ref 12) a reliable source for art in San Francisco?
 * They fabricated that piece of art, so should be reliable for the basic information.
 * "SP station building was closed on August 30, 1968, and demolished shortly afterward for BART construction, leaving passengers with only a platform" - since the source says "Richmond has been without a train depot since August 30, 1968", I'm assuming in the US depot also refers to the surrounding station infrastructure like a ticket office? (Over here depot is used to mean rail yard instead)
 * Correct, "depot" = "station building" in the US.
 * Is MacDonald Avenue (capital D) supposed to be Macdonald Avenue (lowercase D)?
 * "Some direct service to San Francisco began in April 1976" - should be "some direct services" or something along the line of "partial direct service"?
 * I think that's an ENGVAR thing - the current wording is typical for American English.
 * Curious, is the Subway Nut generally considered a reliable source for US rail transport? I see they're self-published but do cite their information to Amtrak's Great American Stations and Museum of Railway Timetables, which is a plus point in terms of reliability.
 * It's definitely suitable for basic information like station layouts and service dates; anything controversial I'd want to have a second source.
 * Image licensing looks mostly good, either own work and public domain - just for commons:File:BART train at Richmond station postcard.jpg, the eBay link to the postcard looks dead, and I'm hoping c.1970s is actually early 1970s since the license only covers up to 1977 as of this year.
 * Yeah, eBay links die quickly unfortunately. The wording on the reverse of the card implies it was made soon after BART started service; even if the card was published as late as 1989, it's almost certainly PD - postcards being explicitly registered for copyright renewal is basically nonexistent.
 * Yeah, eBay links die quickly unfortunately. The wording on the reverse of the card implies it was made soon after BART started service; even if the card was published as late as 1989, it's almost certainly PD - postcards being explicitly registered for copyright renewal is basically nonexistent.
 * Thanks for the review! I've left my comments above. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the prompt response! Stating explicitly for GAN backlog drive: sources are reliable in context (those uncertain have been clarified above) and support the content as written (AGF on ref 44 - book source without preview). Will pass shortly. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)