Talk:Woodhaven and Cross Bay Boulevards buses/GA1

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

Reviewer: Bob1960evens (talk · contribs) 16:36, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I will review. I will work through the article, making notes as I go, and return to the lead at the end. Can I suggest that you mark any issues fixed with comments or maybe the ✅ template. I am not in favour of using strikethrough, as it makes the text difficult to read at a later date, and it is an important record of the GA process. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:36, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Route description

 * ...share a route along majority of Woodhaven... Suggest "...along most of Woodhaven..." or "...along the majority of Woodhaven..."

✅
 * and extend into the Rockaways Needs a period after Rockaways, but would benefit from some context and a link to Rockaway Peninsula. So: "and extend into the Rockaways, an isolated peninsula in the south-west of Long Island which is popular as a summer retreat." or similar.

✅
 * and whose southern half was reactivated for rapid transit... Suggest "reactivated" needs clarification. You might mention the fire of 1950 and the bankrupcy of LIRR, which seem to be the main causes.

✅


 * Q11
 * it crossed a bridge (no longer present) over Hawtree Creek, Reads awkwardly. Suggest "it crossed a bridge over Hawtree Creek, which has since been removed," or similar.

✅


 * Q21
 * Prior to the MTA takeover.... Suggest this should be "MTA Bus Company" and wikilinked here as well as in the lead. If you want to use just MTA later, it should be "MTA Bus Company (MTA)".

✅


 * Q52
 * As part of the planned conversion of the route into Select Bus Service... This is a single sentence paragraph. Suggest it could be expanded, with a small amount of information about what Select Bus Service entails.

✅


 * Q53
 * the Q53 originally was labeled as an express service. Suggest "the Q53 was originally labeled..." would read better.

✅
 * Originally operating from the LaGuardia Depot (the former Triboro Coach depot) in East Elmhurst, the Q53 was later operated out of the College Point Depot (the former Queens Surface Corporation facility). Suggest removing the brackets, and incorporating the parenthetical clauses into the sentence more fully.

✅


 * Other bus routes
 * where many former Green Lines routes terminate. This sounds awkward, because both Lines and routes are plural. Presumably Green Lines is the same as Green Bus Lines, wikilinked in the next section. If so, it should be Green Bus Lines and wikilinked here on first occurrence. Suggest "which is the terminus for many routes formerly operated by Green Bus Lines, commonly known as Green Lines." or similar.

✅

Back soon. Bob1960evens (talk) 22:23, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

History

 * running between Jamaica Avenue (at the Woodhaven Boulevard station of the BMT Jamaica Line)... Suggest replacing brackets with commas.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * the Q21 became a franchise of Green Bus Lines, "Green Bus Lines" is wikilinked here, but was introduced in the previous paragraph. It should be linked on first occurrence.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * with the company awarded the rights to all of "Zone C" in southern Queens (including... It is unclear what "Zone C" is. Please clarify, and I suggest removing the brackets around the final phrase.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * ...which opened that November; this was rejected... There are a lot of short sentences in this section, which breaks up the flow of the text. Suggest "...which opened that November, but this was rejected..."
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * On June 25, Triboro Coach (owned by Green Lines' shareholders)... Again, the flow can be improved by removing the brackets. So: "On June 25, Triboro Coach, a company owned by Green Lines' shareholders, ..."
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * took over the operations of the Green Lines routes, part of the city's takeover These two phrases need linking. Suggest "...Green Lines routes, as part of the city's takeover"
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * the Q53 express was converted into limited-stop service... Suggest "...converted into a limited-stop service..."
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * On September 12, 2010, late night service on the Q11 after midnight was truncated to Pitkin Avenue. This is a single sentence paragraph. Suggest it could be joined to the previous paragraph with a few linking words.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * to serve the growing "Arverne by the Sea" development. We are left guessing what the "Arverne by the Sea" development is. Can it be expanded a little?
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * For a short period of time after Hurricane Sandy... This, and the next sentence, are both single sentence paragraphs. Suggest amalgamating.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * (typically assigned to the Q10). It is not obvious what this means. Were the buses normally used on the Q10 route? Clarify.

Select bus service

 * Bus rapid transit could do with a little bit of background explanation here, rather than relying on the wikilink.
 * The Q52 and Q53 SBS routes... "SBS" is an acronym, and has not been introduced. It should be "Select Bus Service (SBS)" in the previous paragraph. I think I would also replace BRT in "the MTA's brand of BRT service" with "bus rapid transit", to avoid too many abbreviations.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Opposition
 * business owners, have opposed to the Select Bus Service project, Remove spare "to".
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * as evidenced by an op-ed from 2014. What is an op-ed? Clarify.
 * ✅, although it's really a term by itself. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The plan was changed in May 2016 to change his mind, Reads awkwardly. Suggest "In order to accommodate his objections, the plan was changed in May 2016," or similar.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * to speed up travel times by eliminating the signal time allocated to split phases, This may be understandable to road engineers, but needs a little more explanation for average readers.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Local community members are also opposed to the plan... Another single sentence paragraph. Suggest joining to the previous one.
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

In popular culture

 * This is a single sentence paragraph and section. Maybe you could add something like: "It includes the lines
 * Bus ride is too slow
 * they blast out the disco on the radio"
 * ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I will move on to checking the references next. Back soon. Bob1960evens (talk) 07:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Lead
✅ – I have expanded it with some history of the routes. Epicgenius mentioned that it has not been universally welcomed.
 * The lead should introduce the subject, and summarise the main points of the article. It seems somewhat short for an article of this length. However, in view of the material covered by the text, it actually makes a reasonable attempt at summarising the salient points. One thing that might be worth adding is the fact that select bus service has not been universally welcomed.
 * The route map is a splendid addition to the article, making the discussion of routes much easier to follow.
 * Thanks. I'm thinking of adding route maps to similar articles, too. epicgenius (talk) 19:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

The formal bit

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * See comments above
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * See comments above
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * In view of the speed with which you have addressed the issues raised, it hardly seems worth putting the article on hold, but it updates the article talk page, so I shall. Good work so far, and I look forward to completing the review. Bob1960evens (talk) 13:38, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think all the issues have been resolved. Thank you for doing the review. epicgenius (talk) 19:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that all of the issues have been addressed. Congratulations on another well-researched article. It is my pleasure to award it GA status. Keep up the good work! Bob1960evens (talk) 22:25, 26 July 2017 (UTC)