Talk:Southbridge Branch (New England)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Southbridge Branch (New England)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 00:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

This looks fun! I will get to this within seven days. Please note that I am returning to GA reviewing after an hiatus, so please WP:TROUT me if I make a mistake. Thanks, ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 00:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

There we go; sorry for making you wait. On hold for now with my comments listed below. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 21:55, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

@LunaEatsTuna: Thanks for the review! Replies are below. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Nice work! I am satisfied with the changes and now happy to pass this article for GA status. Congrats! ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 19:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio

Earwig says good to go. No concerns with me either.

Files

Good to go— Southbridge station from the southeast, June 2021.jpg is CC BY-SA 4.0; Webster station 1909 postcard.jpg has a valid public domain rationale; Southbridge Branch bridge in West Dudley, June 2021.jpg is CC BA-SA 4.0; East Webster station postcard.jpg is public domain.

Prose

• "The promoters of the line" – does the source say whom?
  • It doesn't, unfortunately - likely just local businessmen.
• "Passenger service on the first portion between Webster, Massachusetts, and East Thompson began early in 1866." – recommend "in early 1866" for better flow.
  •  Done
• "the western portion was driven on" – not familiair with train jargon; does driven mean the first time a train drove on the railroad tracks, and if so, could it perhaps be made clearer?
  • Added some wikilinks to make it clear. The source specifically gives that as the last spike, and not the completion of construction.
• In the sentence starting "The line was operated as part of a Southbridge–Boston mainline" I would wikilink mainline and branchline for readers unfamiliar with the difference.
  •  Done
• The Great East Thompson Train Wreck is wikilinked but could an additional sentence or two be added to this article regarding the wreck's cause/deaths etc.? It seems rather noteworthy.
  • The crash itself is noteworthy, but it's only tangentially related to the branch in that one of the trains came from the branch. The wreck took place on the mainline.
    • Oh, I see!
• In the caption, I believe the first hyphen in "Early-20th-century" is not necessary.
  • I'm inclined to leave it to make it clear that "early" is modifying "20th century" and not "postcard".
    • Good point.
• "Trackage continued west a short distance from Southbridge station" – wikilink Southbridge station as first mention in the body and unlink it in § Stations.
  •  Done
• Is there a reason the empty tables of Connecting lines do not use ! to grey them out?
  • I've never seen that done before. I don't think it's a good idea, since you're then using the same color to indicate headings and empty cells.
    • Fair enough.
• I would add a year or year range if possible to the postcard image of East Webster station.
  •  Done
• Recommend adding Template:Use mdy dates
  •  Done
• Recommend Template:Use X English
  •  Done

References

Good to go, passes spotcheck on refs 6, 7, 12 and 16.

Drive-by comment from TAOT

Sorry to butt in, but I do have one thing I think should be considered. Trains Magazine writes in 1994 that the Southbridge Branch was still active, but seldom used (see the map on page 60). This of course contradicts Karr's 1988 end of service. I do know Scott Hartley directly talked to at least some people at P&W in writing the story, but Karr is generally very reliable. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Interesting find. "Active, but seldom used" as the 1994 status doesn't necessarily contradict the last train movement being in 1988 - it's not uncommon for lines to be nominally active for years without a move. (See the remains of the Millis Branch, which sometimes goes years without activity.) I'm inclined to leave it as-is unless there's a specific statement of a post-1988 move. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.