Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Union Station (Erie, Pennsylvania)/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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2016 [1].

Union Station (Erie, Pennsylvania)

Nominator(s): Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While there are several railway station FA's (mostly British), there isn't one from the US, only a handful of GA's. Wasn't sure there would've been enough for an FA when I started, but was surprised by Union Station's unique, and often overlooked, history as well as how it went from neglected and abandoned to being revitalized and a hub of activity. This article has previously been reviewed by Finetooth and West Virginian who were instrumental in helping to get the article ready for FAC. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:Erie_PA_Panorama_c1912_LOC_6a14402u.jpg: when/where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:52, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sourced from the Library of Congress who indicate that it's original copyright was to Haines Photo Co. in 1912. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 19:45, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but the tag you're currently using is intended for images published, not just taken, before 1923 - do we know whether the company published the image? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:51, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Must have been...it is listed in the 1912 Catalog of Copyright Entries as "Erie, Pa. two panoramic views. © Sept. 18, 1912." [2] (page 20049, if you're interested). Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:02, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great, then just add that detail to the image description page. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:58, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added, thanks for doing the image review. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 20:55, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from West Virginia

Support As Niagara has stated above in his nomination of the article, I've already engaged in a thorough and comprehensive review at this article's peer review. All my comments and suggestions were addressed there. I still assess that this article easily meets Wikipedia:Featured article criteria because it is well-written, comprehensive, well-researched, neutral, stable, and has a lede that adheres to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. Once again Niagara, you've done a splendid job illustrating the storied past and revival of this historic building. -- West Virginian (talk) 17:56, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Finetooth

I peer-reviewed this article in August 2015 and did some minor copy editing, and all of my original concerns have been addressed. I'm leaning toward support, but after re-reading the revised article again today, I have two (or several, depending how you count) additional suggestions:

  • I see four sentences in the article that appear as unsourced last-sentence additions to paragraphs. The first of these (Fellheimer) is at the end of the first paragraph of the "Design" section, and the second (railroad offices) ends the third paragraph of the "Design" section. The other two are in the "Operations" section, at the ends of paragraphs 2 and 3 (express trains and Bliley). Can you add reliable sources for these claims?
  • For the books in the bibliography that are too old to have ISBNs, I would add OCLCs as in the Harriet Tubman bibliography. You can generally find these via WorldCat. For example, WorldCat lists the OCLC of History of Erie County, Pennsylvania as 8622308 here. Readers who use your bibliography will then be able to click on an OCLC link to see the WorldCat listings, which include information about other editions and formats and where to find them. For example, the History of Erie County, Pennsylvania, has appeared in nine different forms, including a 2006 reprint. Finetooth (talk) 19:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added the appropriate sources and OCLC numbers. Thanks for catching those! Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:12, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A very well-done and interesting article. Finetooth (talk) 02:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dudley

  • "The first railroad station in Erie was established 1851" Is "established 1851" AmerEng? I would say "built in 1851".
Missing preposition, should read "established in 1851". Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Superintendents for both the New York Central and Pennsylvania railroads, as well as other railroad officials, retained offices on the second floor of Union Station." "retained" does not sound right to me - maybe "had"?
Replaced. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • " early-1960s" Why the hyphen?
My thinking was along the lines of MOS:DECADE which specifies that prefixes for decades like "mid-" or "pre-" should have hyphens. If I'm misinterpreting it, let me know and I'll remove the hyphen. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Philadelphia and Erie continued to maintain its original station on State Street" You refer to this as if you have already mentioned it.
Changed to avoid making the reference. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lake Shore '​s demise.[43][44] Erie remained devoid of any passenger rail service until the Lake Shore Limited was introduced on November 30, 1975" This is a bit confusing. How about something like "until November 30, 1975, when service was restored, named Lake Shore Limited after its predecessor."
Changed, but actually named for the original, New York Central train. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Train arrival times - I think they are too detailed for an encyclopedia article as they will be subject to frequent change.
It was suggested in the peer review that they be added. I could be less specific and just say "early morning" if that's any better. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally I disagree with the PR comment. You provide a link for the times. However, if you added "As of December 2015" and deleted the actual times that would be a compromise. Dudley Miles (talk) 07:36, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The microbrewery details are excessive and verge on advertising.
Obviously I'm better at historical and architectural/engineering writing than about businesses; I'll work to tone it down. If you have suggestions on what is the most egregious, I'll have a better idea of what needs to be changed or removed. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking at it again, the same comment applies to Logistics Plus. I do not think that details about commercial tenants belong in an article about a railway station. If any are significant enough to have its own article you can wikilink it. I suggest instead of one section on "Major tenants", two sections headed "Railway services" and "Commercial tenants". In the latter you could list them in one paragraph, with maybe a sentence about the most important ones. You might also change "art gallery" to "art studio" as it is a commercial business rather than a public gallery. Dudley Miles (talk) 07:36, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I've cutback on extraneous details. I've also retitled the rail section "Services and facilities", which appears in other Amtrak station articles, and decided to reorder the sections for a more logical progression. Did I miss anything? Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:56, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • No change needed, but there has been a dramatic revival of passenger numbers in Britain. I assume from this article that there has been no US revival?
When oil prices were high, Amtrak ridership did increase and had a record ridership of 30 million in 2013. But, outside of the California and the Northeast Corridor, driving and (as is often the case) flying is faster. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • A first rate article. All points are minor apart from advertising for the brewery. Dudley Miles (talk)
  • Support - although I would delete the last sentence as close to advertising. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:33, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Imzadi1979

Just some comments after meandering here from my own nomination:

  • "with stairways leading to the platforms" would read better, and avoid the "noun plus -ing" issue. I suggest "with stairs that lead to the platforms" as a neater replacement.
    • "with the remainder having level crossings" likewise would be better as "and the remainder had level crossings"
    • "with trains traveling west to Cleveland" would be better as "with trains that traveled west to Cleveland".
    • "Conrail, in turn, was dismantled on June 6, 1998, with the former New York Central rail lines going to CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern Railway gaining control of the former Pennsylvania lines" → "Conrail, in turn, was dismantled on June 6, 1998, and the former New York Central rail lines were transferred to CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern Railway gained control of the former Pennsylvania lines."
  • "early-1960s" doesn't need the hyphen like "mid-1960s" or "pre-1960s" would.
  • "...waiting room could patronage its... " → "...waiting room could patronize its... "?
  • "moved from 8th and Peach Streets" → "moved from 8th and Peach streets" to match how other similar pairings of streets are named in the article.
  • "continued to operate a New York to Chicago train" → "continued to operate a New York-to-Chicago train" or "continued to operate a New York–Chicago train" because the two cities form a compound adjective to describe the noun "train".
  • In footnote 33, there's a [sic]. For something as minor as a missing space, I'd have just silently fixed the issue and avoided the notation. Correspondingly, over on footnote 47, there's an apostrophe error that has no notation (assuming that isn't a transcription error and it's an actual error in the original source).
  • Looking back at the source, the exact format was "Gradecrossing" which means it was intentionally one word; the other footnote was a transcription error on my part. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:42, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it's possible to add the missing page numbers for news sources, they should be provided for articles not published/re-published online. I'll take you at your word though if those articles came from databases that omitted the page numbers. (If possible in the future, if you can make a trip to a library and find the original articles on microfilm and add the page numbers, that would be a benefit to our readers who may want to verify sources in the future.)
  • I had intended to do that, but never did. The articles had been clipped from the original newspapers and sorted by subject; most did not have the page numbers included. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:42, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, I think the article is in great shape. My comments above are really quite minor and could be fixed in a few minutes' time, except the missing page numbers. On that last point, I wouldn't oppose promotion over that issue, and I'm inclined to support overall pending fixes. Imzadi 1979 → 10:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look at the article. I have also made the grammatical and punctuation changes you've recommended. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:42, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—everything looks good now. As I said, adding the missing page numbers is a bonus, and not something I'd hold up promotion over. Imzadi 1979 → 06:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Crisco comments

I'm far from a railfan, but I'll give the best lay review I can.

  • The first railroad station in Erie was established in 1851 - was this on the same site? If yes, probably worth mentioning in the lead. If not, definitely worth mentioning in the body.
  • The sources I have say only say that it was "replaced by" the 1866 station; that could mean either way. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 17:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • rough brown firebrick and sandstone - though you are using others' wording, I'm not sure you need the quotes. I mean, Fire brick and sandstone are both technical terms, and "rough brown" is not a unique idea in and of its own
  • I've left "rough brown" in quotes as its not a phrase I would come up with on my own to describe the building materials. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 17:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Entrances from 14th Street open into a large, - what period is this paragraph talking about? And the next? Some may facilities have lasted for 50 years, but restaurants and lunch counters generally don't have that kind of longevity.
  • How many entrances on 14th street?
  • There are two other sets of doors in addition the main, but they may or may not be original. It is likely they were added when the building redeveloped, but I don't have any sources that indicate which is correct. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link locations etc. on first mention outside the lead as well?
  • Name of the restaurant?
  • Not knowing which one you are referring to, I've added details for both. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Been two years since the feasibility assessment was undertaken for the high-speed line. Any follow-up yet? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:57, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Last October, the group raised enough money to fund the the study; if that's relevant I'll add it. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 17:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm... no, I guess that's not sufficient development in and of itself. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:31, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I believe I've taken care everything; let me know if I've forgotten anything. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:50, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Union_Station_(Erie,_Pennsylvania)/archive1&oldid=1088821312"