Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Barren Island, Brooklyn/archive1

Barren Island, Brooklyn

 * Nominator(s): epicgenius (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

This article is about a former island in Brooklyn, NYC, one of the "Outer Barrier" islands. Through the present day, it has been isolated from the rest of New York City, leading to its primary use as an industrial neighborhood in the 19th and early 20th centuries, complete with a small but thriving community of up to 1,500 residents. The island no longer exists because it was connected to the rest of Brooklyn in the 1920s to create the now-defunct Floyd Bennett Field.

This was promoted as a Good Article about two years ago thanks to an excellent GA review from. After much-appreciated copy edits by and several others, I think it's up to FA quality now. I look forward to all comments and feedback. epicgenius (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Support from Shearonink
Just a few comments for now. Generally the article looks to be in very good shape - I'll re-read it a few more times and come back with any other possible issues. Shearonink (talk) 15:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This sentence doesn't quite make complete sense to me... "In 1910, developers began dredging ports within Jamaica Bay in an effort to develop a seaport district.[53][69] Although the city allowed several piers to be constructed in 1918, only one was built." I think I know what you meant, that permission was given for several piers but only 1 was actually built? but that's not quite what the sentence says...
 * There isn't any alt-text for several of the images including File:Brooklyn, Vol. 3, Double Page Plate No. 39; Sub Plan from Plate 38; (Map bounded by Barren Island, Part of Ruffle Bar; Including Duck Point Marshes, Pumpkin Patch Meadows) NYPL1703808 (cropped).jpg, File:Barren Island factory.jpg, File:Brooklyn, Vol. 3, Double Page Plate No. 39; Sub Plan from Plate 38 (cropped).png. Was wondering why.
 * There is no WP:Short description.
 * Thanks for the comments. I have clarified the sentence about the piers (only one of them was built, despite the city giving the go-ahead), and added a short description and alts. epicgenius (talk) 18:11, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I am going to read through the article a few more times over the next day or two, but unless something new comes to my attention?, at this time I intend to Support for FA. Shearonink (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Full Support as indicated above in my header. Shearonink (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Ref check...pass
 * References are a mix of Harv cites/sfn & cite news/web/etc. WP:FACR's 1.C requires consistent citations.
 * All the NY Times refs need to be checked for "Subscription required" notices, for instance - Ref 88/"US Takes Airport Tract" has no subscription notice. Is the use of the separate template discouraged? I missed the fact that several of the refs have the embedded code because I clicked on them too quickly.
 * Personal preference: Refs #92 & #93 both refer to the beachcombing or mudlarking that some folks are doing on the eroding landfill at Dead Horse Bay. That aspect of the articles is more interesting to me than "The coast contained many exposed broken glass bottles and other non-biodegradable material." Also, contained looks like it is the wrong tense, shouldn't it be "contains"? Shearonink (talk) 19:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for more comments. I disagree that we need to have CS2 references & harv references to be separated, though - the FAC page only mentions using a consistent style of shortened footnote and/or full-length reference, rather than using exclusively shortened footnotes or exclusively inline references. Examples of FAs which use a mixture of both include Statue of Liberty and The Cloisters. I may be incorrect, though, and I am open to converting these in-line references to shortened footnotes if you think this is important.
 * As for the other issues: I have fixed the instances of NY Times references without subscriptions, and I added the mention of beachcombing to the article. epicgenius (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "The coast contained many exposed broken glass bottles and other non-biodegradable material, and as such, the site was used for beachcombing." Is there a reason you used the past-tense? Shearonink (talk) 03:52, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops, I have fixed that. epicgenius (talk) 21:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Never mind, I will convert these refs anyway. epicgenius (talk) 19:40, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh. I did go back and looked at the criteria and at the other two FAs you mentioned above, I was under the impression that all the refs had to be in stylistic agreement with each other but these other 2 FAs have a mixture... Shearonink (talk) 19:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I just saw this comment. I can go with either this version with only shortened footnotes, or this version with a mixture of both. epicgenius (talk) 20:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh ok, but if you don't mind, let me think about it...I'll go over the FA criteria a bit more etc. If it's not necessary for you to change things per the criteria I'd rather you wouldn't have to. Shearonink (talk) 21:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I am fine with the 2 different styles. Shearonink (talk) 05:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Support. The refs pass, my prose concerns were addressed, and I found no image issues. Shearonink (talk) 19:15, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ref #46/ "Barren Island Nuances..." has an incorrect title - it's "Nuisances" not "nuances". Shearonink (talk) 02:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ref #22/Ross, Peter (1902). A History of Long Island, Vol. 1. Jazzybee Verlag. p. 37. Is that page # correct? On Archive.Org the info is on Page 28  - https://archive.org/details/historyoflongisl01ross/page/28/mode/2up/search/spicer . And, ummm, who/what is Jazzybee Verlag? Shearonink (talk) 03:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I've tried to check all the refs for any possible issues and - other than what I mentioned above with #22 & #46 - everything in general looks good but I would really like another set of eyes looking over the refs to confirm my preliminary opinion that they are fine/ok/perfect/etc. Even just a spot-check of various refs would be quite helpful. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 05:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. I've fixed both of these issues. I really appreciate your attention to detail here. epicgenius (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Spot check - pass

Shearonink has sub-contracted the spot checking of the references to me, so here goes.


 * Bibliography: "JAMAICA BAY: A HISTORY" should be in title case.
 * Cite 1 a - fine.
 * Cites 92 and 93 - fine.
 * Cite 31 c - I cannot find support for "though after the facility was destroyed by fire in 1861"
 * - looks like the year is wrong, the year should be 1859 (see page 29/22 of the ref). Shearonink (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Cite 50 c - the text is supported, but why is Schneider a RS?
 * Cite 61 a - fine.
 * A lot of the links are dead -
 * & - In this case the dispenser.info gadget ("A lot of the links are dead") is incorrect - All the New York Times refs that it is flagging as "dead" - (the first # is the dispenser.info #, second is the ref # in the article)#15/46, 16/49, 21/55, 22/57, 20/54, 24/63, 25/65, 26/66, 28/71, 31/82, 32/84, 34/88 -  are valid, they are available through the NYTimes (subscribers only) or through the Times' archives (sometimes subscribers only, sometimes not) "Time Machine". Shearonink (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks . I confess that when I tried Blakemore in the Bibliography and both the link and the archive failed I then ran the link tool and just assumed that the others were also faulty. I'll let run there eye over them and then actually click on each one. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2020 (UTC)


 * That all seems fine. Except that for Blakemore neither the PDF link nor the archive of it will connect for me - still. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's strange. This is a long 230-page PDF and the archive works fine for me. Maybe try this instead. epicgenius (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Even deader., does it work for you. If it does, I will AGF that there is some weird issue at my end. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, both links work for me. Shame you can't see it, what a great resource. Maybe try a different browser? Could be the sheer size of the pdf is bollixing things up for anyone across the pond. Shearonink (talk) 14:57, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * OK. Clearly some technical issue at my end. Not one I have had before. Anyway, everything seems tickity boo with the sourcing, so I am passing the spot checks.

Nb. I wasn't intending to, but given how long this has grown, I intend tio claim points for this review for the WikiCup. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you . I haven't participated all that much at FAC and appreciate all your time & attention to checking the refs. Shearonink (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

That's probably enough for now. I'll have another look when these have been addressed. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the source check. For 31c, the relevant text is "The Cornell factory was burned in 1859 and the operations moved to Flatbush" (page 26) - I had the wrong year by accident. For cite 50, the New York Times is generally considered a reliable source for info relating to NYC history, unless I'm missing something, in which case I will remove it. For NY Times sources in general, TimesMachine is frequently marked by bots as a dead link, even though it is still visible to subscribers like me. I've also fixed the title case of the Black source. epicgenius (talk) 14:27, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I have clicked on each TimesMachine link and confirmed they all still work. Also added another source to back up the claim about no running water or fire department, which is supported by 50(c). epicgenius (talk) 14:30, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:Barren_Island_factory.jpg: source link is dead. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have fixed that. epicgenius (talk) 18:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Support by Lee Vilenski

 * You don't link Dutch as in the place, but you do link Dutch as in the language. It's a little confusing. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have linked both. epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure if there is a MOS for this, but I'd rather know about the geography before the name section. Could we swap them around? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Done.
 * By the late 1920s, industrial development on Barren Island's eastern side had transformed that area, with a small patch of dunes remaining. The western side of the island, containing dunes, woods, and wetlands, was largely untouched. The southern coast contained a tidal creek stretching into the center of the island, where the tidal wetlands remained mostly intact. The wetlands were abutted by the man-made Mill Basin to the north. Tidal creeks also stretched across the island's marshes, although one of these creeks was bisected by the construction of Flatbush Avenue in 1925. The water adjoining the northern and western coasts was heavily polluted.[16] All 1,300 acres (530 ha)[17] of the former island, now a peninsula, are occupied by Floyd Bennett Field,[18][19] which in turn is part of the Gateway National Recreation Area.[20] - could we source a bit more inline in this paragraph? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski  (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * All of this is sourced to the same reference. Anyhow, I have done this. epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * According to another account, "only part of [the treasure] was recovered".[29 is a quote really necessary here... Doesn't seem particularly noteworthy. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Removed, and replaced with a more detailed description. epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * An isolated settlement[30] on the island was developed in the late 19th century. - odd placement of ref. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Moved to the end of the sentence. epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * A subsequent census in 1880 counted six "households" that were entirely composed of single men, as well as 17 families, - is households really needed as a quote? Seems like a regular word. It is only six people, is it particularly notable? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The only reason "households" is in quotes is that usually (in American contexts at least), the word "households" refers to families of 2 or more, and not necessary a single person. I removed it. epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * $1 million - is this the right formatting for this? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed, using US$.
 * these bills died because the governor and mayor opposed these actions.[56][54] - reforder. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed.
 * corpses in 12 days.[67][56] - reforder Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed.
 * upon which about 400 people still lived on the island.[67][59][54] - reforder Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:02, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks for the extensive comments, Lee. epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support from me for the prose. I see someone above is working through the refs, but I'm happy to support this one, unless I see something further. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh, Brooklyn, I was hoping to move up there this fall. And now... it's the epicenter of a pandemic. Fun times y'all. Anyway, I came here from my FAC, so I figured I'd review this. It's a good read, I appreciated the in depth history you provided. I hope none of my comments are too arduous. Let me know if you have any questions. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support from Hurricanehink
 * Its name is a corruption of Beeren Eylandt, the Dutch-language term for "Bears' Island". - Link corruption and/or Dutch language?
 * I have linked "Language change". Not so sure about Dutch language, because Lee commented above that "Dutch" should be unlinked. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "and landfill was used to unite the island with the rest of Brooklyn." - link Land reclamation?
 * Done.
 * "70 acres (28 ha)" - link these units on their first usage
 * Done.
 * "In 1818, Barren Island was described as having dunes and scattered trees." - who described it? (not sure if relevant)
 * It was a survey of Long Island. I think this should provide enough context to this statement. If not, please let me know. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "The water adjoining the northern and western coasts was heavily polluted." - I'm guessing that's also in the 1920s?
 * That's correct. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * " the homeland of the Canarsie Indians" - not a fan of the usage of "Indians" here
 * Fixed. The article about that tribe is "Canarsee", so I have changed that, too. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "The name "Barren Island" is a corruption of the Dutch "Beeren Eylandt"" - you put the Dutch name in italics in the lead, but in quotes here. Not sure if intentional
 * I accidentally saw the quotes as double quotations (which would make italics). It has now been fixed. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "According to a study by the State University of New York, historians believe that the Canarsie Indians who originally occupied the area used Barren Island to fish." - I get what the point is here, but I think the writing could be stronger. For example. "Historians with the State University of New York believe the indigenous Canarsie [people] used Barren Island to fish." Indigenous is a good substitute for "originally occupied the area".
 * I replaced "originally occupied the area" with "indigenous". The SUNY study states that this is the belief of other historians, but I avoided this wording altogether. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "In 1664, New Netherland became British New York and Amersfoort was renamed Flatlands." - I was just going to edit it and add a comma after "New York" (it could use one), but I thought of a nitpick. Would it be appropriate to call it "British"? England didn't link up with Scotland until 1707
 * Just to make sure, I have fixed that. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "At low tide, people on "mainland" Brooklyn" - why the quotes?
 * Brooklyn is on an island as well, not a true mainland. I removed the quotes. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "Around 1800, a man named Dooley established an inn and entertainment venue" - was that his whole name?
 * Added the full name. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "as well as for "fertilizer plants" that processed offal products" - why the quotes?
 * Removed the quotes. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "By the late 1850s, two plants had been built on the island,[37] The plant" - did you mean for a semicolon here, or a fullstop?
 * Replaced it with a period. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "The 1892 census recorded" - not 1890?
 * This date is correct, but it was a state census. I have added that. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "The unstable land along the coast caused numerous instances of landfall from 1890 to 1907" - do you mean landslide instead of landfall? I'm used to hurricanes here, so this might be right
 * I think landslides would be more appropriate, because these weren't the result of hurricanes. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Link garbage scow
 * Done.
 * Should you mention when the island (and Flatlands) became part of NYC?
 * Done.
 * Why wasn't Robert Moses able to expand the island in the 1950s?
 * Actually, the expansion did happen. The point of the sentence was supposed to be that the soil later eroded. I have fixed that. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your in-depth comments. I have now resolved all of these. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick replies! I'm happy to Support now. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:47, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
 * By chance, would you mind checking out one of the hurricane FAC's? We always have a tough time getting outsiders to review our articles, and I personally want to make sure they are understandable to non-storm experts. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 14:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. I will leave a review on one of these FACs soon. epicgenius (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

--Ealdgyth (talk) 15:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)