Talk:University Heights Bridge/GA1

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

Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 19:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Starting review. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Prose
(before working on these, see my comments at the bottom about my preference for terse writing) "The northern sidewalk was eliminated in an 1989–1992 renovation", change "an" to "the". Also, "was widened" could be just "widened"
 * "connecting the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx ... It links West 207th Street in Inwood, Manhattan, and West Fordham Road in University Heights, Bronx." These two sentences are basically saying the same thing.  They could be combined/condensed.
 * "three masonry piers, and the approach spans are made of steel.", how about, "three masonry piers, supporting steel approach spans"
 * ✅ I do have a tendency to say things in a roundabout way sometimes. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "The sidewalk features four shelters with cast-iron piers,", avoid repetition of the word "piers". "cast-iron support columns", perhaps?
 * The last paragraph of the lead ("The structure comprising the modern...") is a little confusing. You click on "Harlem Ship Canal Bridge", and you get to Broadway Bridge (Manhattan), with a picture of something that's obviously not, "a double-deck swing bridge".  I get what's going on there, but it takes a while to unwind it all.  What about leaving out some of the details about the other bridge, and just saying, "The structure was originally located 3/4 of a mile to the north, where it served as the first of three bridges to carry Broadway between Manhattan and The Bronx.  It was moved to its current location in 1908", then pick up with the NYC LPC stuff.
 * (Original site) "further north, during which it was known as" "during which time"
 * "sections supported by three masonry piers.", piers should be linked the first time it's used (in the lead).
 * " When it was relocated, the bridge had two sidewalks" -> "The bridge originally had two sidewalks". Also, no need to repeat "the roadway measured 33.5 feet (10.2 m) wide" since that's no different from what it is now and mentioned in the previous paragraph.
 * (Original site) "further north, during which it was known as" "during which time"
 * "sections supported by three masonry piers.", piers should be linked the first time it's used (in the lead).
 * " When it was relocated, the bridge had two sidewalks" -> "The bridge originally had two sidewalks". Also, no need to repeat "the roadway measured 33.5 feet (10.2 m) wide" since that's no different from what it is now and mentioned in the previous paragraph.
 * " When it was relocated, the bridge had two sidewalks" -> "The bridge originally had two sidewalks". Also, no need to repeat "the roadway measured 33.5 feet (10.2 m) wide" since that's no different from what it is now and mentioned in the previous paragraph.
 * " When it was relocated, the bridge had two sidewalks" -> "The bridge originally had two sidewalks". Also, no need to repeat "the roadway measured 33.5 feet (10.2 m) wide" since that's no different from what it is now and mentioned in the previous paragraph.
 * link Ashlar.
 * "The western end of the bridge is at 207th", make this the start of a new paragraph.
 * "when it is in the "open" position.", -> "when it is open".
 * ✅ I had tried to avoid this wording because it could be misconstrued as the bridge being open to vehicular traffic. I've clarified it as being open for maritime traffic. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Yeah, as somebody who owns boat a boat and a car, I've always been befuddled by the ambiguity of what "open" means :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 20:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "when it is in the "open" position.", -> "when it is open".
 * ✅ I had tried to avoid this wording because it could be misconstrued as the bridge being open to vehicular traffic. I've clarified it as being open for maritime traffic. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Yeah, as somebody who owns boat a boat and a car, I've always been befuddled by the ambiguity of what "open" means :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 20:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

(I'll pick up with History in another session)


 * "In 1891, a wooden drawbridge between 207th Street in Manhattan and Fordham Road in the Bronx", something's missing here. "was built", maybe?
 * "This bridge was usable only by pedestrians", just make the previous sentence, "..a wooden pedestrian bridge..."
 * "Ultimately, the city made an agreement with Interborough Rapid Transit, the Metropolitan Street Railway, and the New York Central Railroad" Excessively verbose.  Maybe just, "...with the three railroads"?
 * "followed by the northern approach in November 1905" -> "and the northern approach in November".
 * operator of the Fordham Road streetcar line, planned to extend their line " -> "planned to extend their Fordham Road streetcar line"
 * " the mayoral administration of John Lindsay " -> "John Lindsay", or if you want to be verbose, "Mayor John Lindsay".
 * "The initiative would have effectively introduced a congestion fee for Manhattan traffic." is editorializing. Neither of the sources say anything about congestion fee.
 * Technically this would have been true since the tunnels, RFK, and GWB are all tolled, so the East and Harlem River crossings are the only free crossings. But this is irrelevant to the subject, so I removed it. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * "moved to ban the enactment of any tolls -> "banned tolls"
 * "held a hearing to determine the possibility of designating " -> "held a hearing on designating"
 * " which represents Inwood,", delete. If anybody really wants to know the CB's turf, they can click the link.
 * I had included it only since it would've been weird for a CB from, say, Midtown to oppose the move. However, it would make sense for Inwood. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * " while the city and state governments advised against ", starting this clause with "while" makes it sound like it's comparing opposites. Suggest something like, "The city and state also opposed the designation"
 * "On September 11, 1984, the bridge was designated a city landmark", here's where you want to do the opposition thing: "Despite that..", "Ignoring those protests...", "Objections notwithstanding", etc.
 * (new paragraph) "The bridge's condition continued to deteriorate"
 * "were banned from crossing the bridge. To comply with the weight limit, wheelchair-accessible buses " -> "were banned and wheelchair-accessible busses had to be...
 * "By 1988, the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) estimated", you've already defined the acronym above, so just "By 1998, NYCDOT estimated" here.
 * " to fix the corroded approach viaduct of the University Heights Bridge", you don't need to specify "University Heights Bridge", the reader knows which bridge we're talking about. Actually, this applies in multiple places throughout the article that I haven't called out explicitly.
 * "estimated that it would cost" -> "estimated it would cost"
 * Actually, how about redoing the first few sentences as, "By 1988, the deck had several holes and corroded steel beams" The NYCDOT estimated it would cost $24 million to fix, but the New York State DOT received a $34.3 million low bid for the bridge's that year."
 * " while the city and state governments advised against ", starting this clause with "while" makes it sound like it's comparing opposites. Suggest something like, "The city and state also opposed the designation"
 * "On September 11, 1984, the bridge was designated a city landmark", here's where you want to do the opposition thing: "Despite that..", "Ignoring those protests...", "Objections notwithstanding", etc.
 * (new paragraph) "The bridge's condition continued to deteriorate"
 * "were banned from crossing the bridge. To comply with the weight limit, wheelchair-accessible buses " -> "were banned and wheelchair-accessible busses had to be...
 * "By 1988, the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) estimated", you've already defined the acronym above, so just "By 1998, NYCDOT estimated" here.
 * " to fix the corroded approach viaduct of the University Heights Bridge", you don't need to specify "University Heights Bridge", the reader knows which bridge we're talking about. Actually, this applies in multiple places throughout the article that I haven't called out explicitly.
 * "estimated that it would cost" -> "estimated it would cost"
 * Actually, how about redoing the first few sentences as, "By 1988, the deck had several holes and corroded steel beams" The NYCDOT estimated it would cost $24 million to fix, but the New York State DOT received a $34.3 million low bid for the bridge's that year."
 * "By 1988, the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) estimated", you've already defined the acronym above, so just "By 1998, NYCDOT estimated" here.
 * " to fix the corroded approach viaduct of the University Heights Bridge", you don't need to specify "University Heights Bridge", the reader knows which bridge we're talking about. Actually, this applies in multiple places throughout the article that I haven't called out explicitly.
 * "estimated that it would cost" -> "estimated it would cost"
 * Actually, how about redoing the first few sentences as, "By 1988, the deck had several holes and corroded steel beams" The NYCDOT estimated it would cost $24 million to fix, but the New York State DOT received a $34.3 million low bid for the bridge's that year."
 * "estimated that it would cost" -> "estimated it would cost"
 * Actually, how about redoing the first few sentences as, "By 1988, the deck had several holes and corroded steel beams" The NYCDOT estimated it would cost $24 million to fix, but the New York State DOT received a $34.3 million low bid for the bridge's that year."


 * "The reconstruction was performed in three phases", drop the leading "The"
 * "The Fordham Road overpass over the Hudson Line and I-87", you already said in a previous section that the overpass went over the rail tracks and I=87, no need to repeat that here.
 * "The Fordham Road overpass over the Hudson Line and I-87", you already said in a previous section that the overpass went over the rail tracks and I=87, no need to repeat that here.

That does it for my initial read-through. Many of my comments reflect my preference for terseness vs your preference for, um, less terseness. I acknowledge that there's room for style differences, so I tried to call out just the places that seemed the most verbose. Use your best judgement in applying these suggestions. I'll come back for a review of the sources, probably tomorrow.

As a resident of The Bronx, I'm embarrassed to admit I don't know if the bridge still opens. It would be good if you could find that and include some statistics about how many times per year it operates.
 * Honestly, there were plenty of bridges in this city which I didn't realize still operated. According to the 2014 NYCDOT report (the latest year for which I could find info on annual bridge openings), this bridge opened exactly zero times in 2014 or 2013. I summed up the number of openings in 2000-2014 per WP:CALC. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Other criteria

 * No issues seen with the sources as far as WP:V goes.
 * No problems with copyvios, Breadth of coverage, Neutrality, or Stability.
 * All the images look to be appropriately licensed.
 * Thanks for the extensive review. I've addressed all these issues now. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

A few final comments upon reareading

 * "Over the following decades, the University Heights Bridge carried streetcar and bus service, and by the late 20th century it was in disrepair." This is two distinct thoughts.  End of sentence after "bus service", then, "By the late..."


 * You've still got piers linked in two places (lead and "Original site")


 * "In 1971, mayor John Lindsay". I had to look this up, but mayor -> Mayor.

I'm going to go ahead and pass this, and you can follow up on these final points as desired. Very nice article.