Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hudson Valley Rail Trail/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ucucha 01:20, 20 October 2011.

Hudson Valley Rail Trail

 * Nominator(s): Gyrobo (talk) 20:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I feel that I've exhausted all research material on the subject. This 4 mi rail trail was once part of a useful rail corridor that was somehow despised by its various owners. In the 1980s it was sold for one dollar to a felon, then seized by the government and paved. Today, it's part of a larger trail network that spans two counties in New York. Gyrobo (talk) 20:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * No issues were revealed by copyscape searches. Graham Colm (talk) 21:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:29, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't italicize format notation (PDF)
 * The italics are in Cite interview, and that's full protected. --Gyrobo (talk) 01:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * FN 9: page(s)? Also, can we include the interviewer's name?
 * Cite interview doesn't support page numbers, but I've included the interviewer's name. --Gyrobo (talk) 01:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't mix and  family templates
 * The only use of Citation occurs where the work being referenced is a document that's part of an engineering report. I didn't know how to reference that, does Cite conference work? --Gyrobo (talk) 01:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in whether ISBNs are hyphenated or unhyphenated. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:29, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't really know how ISBNs should be formatted, so I've removed the hyphens. Thank you for spotchecking. --Gyrobo (talk) 01:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - There are two "comprising" in this sentence: "The land comprising the Hudson Valley Rail Trail is part of a former rail corridor comprising the Poughkeepsie Bridge Route." Could this be reworded to avoid the repetition? Eisfbnore   &bull; talk  19:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --Gyrobo (talk) 19:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Overall, a very informative and interesting article. I had no idea about the corridor's connections with the Selkirk freightyard. Nice work. Juliancolton (talk) 21:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This trail has led to many a stalled bike ride by inevitably forcing me to decide whether to go &rarr; toward the bridge or &larr; into Highland from the Haviland parking lot. With that said, major props to Gyrobo for his continued work on pieces of Hudson Valley daily life. The article seems well-referenced and illustrated at first glance, and I really hope to be able to support in due course. FWIW, I have a whole bunch of pictures of the trail, mainly from the walkway side, which I can upload if you want (or, since I'll be there several times over the next week anyway, I can try to fulfill any photo requests you have if you can't get to it yourself at the moment). Now, some comments:
 * The creation of the trail was supported by a local Rotary club, which built a welcoming pavilion along the trail. - "Welcoming" seems a little weird to me. I think I know what you mean, but it reads like it's advertising that the pavilion is welcoming in the sense that it draws people in (again in the conversion to trail section).
 * The infobox says the only trailhead is the Highland terminus, but I know (and the article says) it allows access from four parking areas. At least as I understand it, any entrance from a designated parking lot is a trailhead. Just a thought.
 * Rail traffic along the corridor continued until March 1982 - I'm a little confused here. You said the bridge stopped operating after the fire in '74 (which I know is true), but then how did the corridor remain in use?
 * Do you know anything that says what Lloyd did with the other $330,000?
 * Unless there are two, they've since moved the caboose to near the Haviland parking lot. I don't know how to cite this, but I think it would be good to have a more up-to-date description of its location.
 * Removed instances of "welcoming", I see what you mean and it really doesn't add to the article. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed trailheads; the other trails I've written of span multiple towns, so I've just been listing locales along the route. Parking areas makes more sense. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Although trains didn't run over the bridge, they continued up to the bridge: "Up to 1981, Conrail's two major rail lines reaching out from the bridge, both the one westward to Maybrook and the one eastward to Hopewell Junction, were still operating, although because the bridge was closed, they were not profitable." Mabee 2001, p. 255. I've changed the wording. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe the rest of the money was put into some kind of reserve fund, but I've had trouble finding sources for the 1990s; it took place during the small but crucial period before newspapers began publishing online, but after the period covered by Carleton Mabee in his book. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two cabooses! At first I thought they had moved it, when I saw the second caboose at the bridge last year. Then when they moved it to the Haviland lot, I realized that there was more than one, though I've (also) been trying to find sources for it. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I sourced the second caboose to the trail's brochure, it's on page two. --Gyrobo (talk) 16:16, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - Huh, sure enough, I biked it yesterday and found that there were indeed two before checking here again (I like how you incorporated this into the article). Anyway, I'm happy supporting at this point. Congrats on an excellent article, once again. Juliancolton (talk) 20:59, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Media Review Everything checks out.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  03:26, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment – Only thing I see worth noting is that the abbreviation NYSDEC in Route could stand to be spelled out. Other than that this looks solid.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 03:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --Gyrobo (talk) 20:51, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Support – Writing, sources, etc. all seem FA-worthy to me, and I enjoyed reading it. Nice work.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 00:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * My first time reviewing one of these, so I hope you find my comments helpful. I don't use the trail as often as Julian (although I'm pretty sure I live a whole lot closer), but it's really nice to see such good work done on something close to home.  I've read through the article and have a few comments and suggestions.
 * Lead:
 * the bridge was "severely damaged" by fire. I'm not clear if the 700 feet of damage to the wood constitutes "severe" or not; the bridge is so solid that it would have taken $40 million to tear it down, some four times what it took to convert it to a park (not a reliable source; I attended a presentation by the main organizer of that movement).  Please consider this a question, rather than a request.
 * I removed "severe", because it did seem to be a bit of an embellishment. From my perspective, it was enough to merit closing the route, so I described it as severe. Since the degree of damage to the bridge isn't needed for an accounting of the trail, it would probably be good enough to just say that there was damage, without going into too much depth. Incidentally, the total cost of converting the bridge to a walkway was $38.8 million, compared to the $50 million to demolish it. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, seems that the cost estimates prior to the actual project were embellishments, too. ;)--~TPW 18:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * last paragraph, "The trail is expected to be extended west, where it will border Route 299." Can we add ". . . and connect to the Wallkill Valley Rail Trail to this sentence?  The expanding trail system seems important.
 * I don't think should be mentioned in the lead, because the connection between the trails is only talked about as vague future plans. To connect the trails, the HVRT would need to cross the Thruway and cut through downtown New Paltz. The HVRT brochure, which is the only source I have for a westward expansion in 2012, shows that the expanded trail will still fall about a mile short of the Thruway. The HVRT is definitely part of a larger network now, but I can't find any definitive sources for further westward expansion. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Reasonable reason, as it were.--~TPW 18:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Declining rail usage: First paragraph, quote in the second-to-last sentence:  I believe that the quotes always go after the period.
 * The article uses logical punctuation. I remember reading something in the manual of style (I think MOS:LQ) about this being preferred, but now I can't find it. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Odd that the British form got the "logical" name . . . since this is about a United States feature, doesn't it make more sense to use the American form?--~TPW 18:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Having reread MOS:LQ, it actually does mandate logical punctuation (I really should stop editing late at night). There are three instances in the article where a period follows a quote. The other two do not have a period in the source material, but this passage in particular is in an offline source that I don't currently have access to, so I can't confirm whether the period appears in the quote. I'll check the source the next time I'm at the library. --Gyrobo (talk) 22:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't much like that, but I have no interest in trying to stall a fine article because a poor style is mandated. Thanks for clarifying.--~TPW 13:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, I hope that this helps out in some small way; I am going to review the criteria more carefully before I actually support.--~TPW 02:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You're doing fine, I haven't checked some of those sources in a while and was also under the impression that the trail connection was more definite than it actually was. I'm sadder but wiser. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Overall I am very impressed with the work on this article. I wish I had enough time to do this level of quality work!--~TPW 18:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Support promotion of this article. Citations are consistent, images are appropriately licensed and captioned, the article is comprehensive with an appropriate structure and concise lead.--~TPW 19:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Is there anywhere else to get the Pevsner information? The oral history is a primary source and really should not be used on Wikipedia. Karanacs (talk) 02:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The closest I can find is:"Once it seemed clear that neither Central Hudson or Pevsner would buy it, Conrail's President L. Stanley Crane seemed to abandon his sense of responsibility for the bridge. To the embarrassment of other Conrail officials, Crane arranged for Conrail to sell the bridge to Miller without considering who he was."

- Mabee 2001, pp. 262–263


 * I don't think there's a problem with the interview, though. Pevsner's role in the bridge/route's history is described in the book, and I believe the interview to be reliably published and valid, per WP:PRIMARY. --Gyrobo (talk) 03:30, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it's okay to use a primary source to claim that a (probably) living person is a charlatan. Ucucha (talk) 14:34, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Done, the other refs already say that he was convicted of bank fraud, so that was probably redundant anyway. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:16, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.