Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Damen station (CTA Blue Line)/archive2

Damen station (CTA Blue Line)

 * Nominator(s): – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The previous FAC of this article got closed due to trifling poppycock procedural issues, but I would like to nominate this article that I hope provides a thorough and comprehensive history of one of the most popular stations on the Chicago "L". The oldest station on the Blue Line, this aesthetic station is credited for developing the surrounding area. Although it and the neighborhood took a dive in the mid-20th century, being one of the roughest areas of the "L" by the mid-1980s, they have rebounded significantly and received multiple renovations since then. Unfortunately, the historic character of this station means that it has not received ADA accessibility despite these renovations. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Coordinator comment - as is probably obvious; this one's in danger of timing out. I'd review myself, but am going to have an out of town work trip in a few days, so I don't really have the time to start a general review. Hog Farm Talk 17:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Four weeks in and only one general support. I am afraid that this has timed out and I will be archiving it. The usual two-week hiatus will apply. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry to see that this has failed to garner much interest. Please ping me if you renominate, as I'll be happy to provide my support once again. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 16:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Harrias – support
Okay, let's get this rolling, and hopefully more reviewers will appear. I have a nomination that could similarly do with more attention, if you would consider taking a look at Featured article candidates/Battle of Bronkhorstspruit/archive1, I would greatly appreciate it, but my review is not at all dependent upon that.


 * This might be an ENGVAR thing, but "on" would seem more suitable than "of" to me here.
 * Done.
 * A couple of issues here. Firstly, "upon its opening" is redundant and can be removed. Secondly, the word "revenue" seems oddly used here. "revenue-generating" or simply "commercial" seem like better fits, unless I'm missing something.
 * I think "revenue" is the common usage for railroads in the US that are not heritage/special-purpose, but I could be wrong. In any event, removed "upon its opening".
 * Fair enough. It sounds weird and wrong to this Brit, but a Google search does show it is apparently suitable in USese. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 10:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * What does "the local portion" mean? Isn't everywhere local to somewhere?
 * The portion alongside Milwaukee Avenue; other parts of the Metropolitan were over other alleys (or, in downtown, directly above the streets).
 * I think that needs to be made clear, I don't find that obvious from the text as written. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 10:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I've tried to replace with "this part" of the elevated; if that's still unsatisfactory please feel free to come up with something that concisely refers to this specific stretch of the elevated rather than the other parts. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:TIME, "6 a.m." should have a.
 * All times either NBSP'd or nowrapped.
 * This is the first time I can see that you've mentioned ""L" lines" – what are they?
 * What they call the choob in Chicago – I've linked accordingly.
 * Why is "de facto" in italics?
 * Because it's Latin.
 * I would say that per MOS:FOREIGN ( "de facto" does not require italics. However, if you feel strongly that it does, it should use as per MOS:LANG.  Harrias  (he/him) • talk 10:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Templatized. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Given that this is correctly placed in the narrative, the tense is wrong. It should be something more like
 * Hopefully did something to the right effect.
 * This is the first time the station has been referred to as "Damen". The article mentioned that Robey Street was renamed Ramen Avenue, but never explicitly said that the station also changed names. This needs to be made clear.
 * The newspaper source never mentions the station specifically, so I've worded it appropriately.
 * Avoid the Noun plus -ing construction.
 * Replaced "with" by "upon".
 * Replace "would be" with "was".
 * Done.
 * Link terracotta on first use, in Station renovations and rehabilitations, rather than in Infrastructure and facilities.
 * Done.
 * Are these individual stations, or is "California and Western" a group of stations? If they are individual stations, it should be and provide Wikilinks to those stations if they have articles.
 * "The" not added as my American brain prefers them as false titles, wikilinks added.
 * This was already mentioned in the History section. Pick where you want it, but don't include it twice.
 * Slightly trimmed, but see below.
 * Again, this is a repeat of information in the History section.
 * I've often been suggested to occasionally repeat information on these types of articles in both the History section and Station details where appropriate.
 * and Again, add s. (There are more of these later too, could you check through and pick them all up please.
 * Done, as said earlier.
 * Expand this slightly on this first use to explicitly say "equivalent to $1.37 in 2021".
 * Done, for first use only.
 * Make it clear whether this refers to the area or the railway.
 * The source itself is ambiguous on that matter, and indeed typical parlance, at least in Chicago, is to use (e.g.) the "Green Line" to metonymically refer to the area around the physical Green Line. It refers to the railway, moved accordingly. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Per the MOS either all of these times should be words, or all should be numbers.
 * Decided for all words.
 * It might be an ENGVAR thing, but I'd prefer "On the opening day.."
 * Probably ENGVAR, added "its" instead see above with "California and Western".
 * "struggled" seems an odd word to use here?
 * I agree, but struggle (hah) to come up with a better way to phrase it; how does "competed closely" sound?
 * I guess my issue is that these phrasings make it sound like having the highest ridership was some sort of competition. I'd prefer something like  Harrias  (he/him) • talk 10:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * "Similar statistics" was used, feel free to tweak as needed. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * What does this mean? Is "global" being used as a synonym of "overall"? If so, use "overall".
 * Done.
 * A few times you use "Milwaukee-Dearborn" with a hyphen rather than an endash. Change all these to endashes, and check for other lines.
 * Done.

Overall, an interesting read, nice work. Harrias (he/him) • talk 09:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! For future reference, editors are always welcome to directly edit my FACs to make tweaks and minor corrections/lintrolling. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 14:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * A few replies above. Where I haven't replied, I'm happy with the changes or rationale. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 10:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Those changes work for me, I'm happy to give this my support now, great work. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 17:41, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

and, templates are creeping back in to FAC, contrary to FAC instructions (that they cause problems in archives with template limits) And the page is experiencing load issues, possibly as a result. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  03:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, let's please remove the templates for load time/transclusion limits sake as per the FAC instructions. I've left a courtesy reminder at WT:FAC; if the problem continues it may be necessary to manually remove transclusions. Hog Farm Talk 05:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I'd actually missed that xt was one of those to avoid. Replaced throughout. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 07:14, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for understanding! Sandy Georgia (Talk)  11:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)