- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:14, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
NS Line
edit.jpg)
A streetcar on the NS Line
- ... that Portland's NS Line (pictured) opened in 2001 as the first modern streetcar in the United States in 50 years? Source: "The fact that it is the first modern streetcar in the United States in 50 years makes Portland's streetcar even more notable." (Portland streetcars--something old, something new)
Created/expanded by Truflip99 (talk) and SJ Morg (talk). Nominated by Truflip99 (talk) at 17:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC).
I dropped by to start a review on this nomination, but I noticed there is a question at Talk:NS Line regarding the article's name. I am curious if we can get some more comments there. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 04:57, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
- Comments on the article's talk page seem to agree on keeping the article's name as is. I will happy to start a full review on Sunday. Sorry I am occupied with something else until then. I do have one quick question on the hook. Does "the first modern streetcar" wording refer to a Low-floor tram? Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 19:12, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
- Yes that is correct. I suppose the wikilink should be linked to that instead. Thank you for picking this up, by the way! -Truflip99 (talk) 23:37, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying. Would you like to propose a slightly updated hook with that link? Flibirigit (talk) 04:07, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
-
- My response to the same question would be "no, not really". First, "streetcar" in the initially proposed hook wording is short for "streetcar line", not streetcar vehicle (or short for tramway, not tram[car]). Although in the 21st century it has become fairly common to use "streetcar" or "tram" to mean "streetcar system" or "tramway"/tram system, I feel that an encyclopedia should avoid such ambiguity, and therefore I'd change "streetcar" to "streetcar line" in the hook. That is essentially what the supporting references were saying, except they were saying "streetcar system", since the NS Line was the (originally unnamed) first line of an all-new system.
- The Portland Streetcar system (of which the NS Line was the first route) was the first modern streetcar system to open in the United States in around 50 years. That distinction would be true whether or not the vehicles were low-floor streetcars. "Modern" meant that the PS system was the first in many years to use contemporary-design streetcars/trams (which nowadays usually does mean low-floor vehicles). The reason this was so noteworthy in 2001 (when the system opened), and received a lot of attention by transport publications, is this: Several newly built streetcar systems had been opened in the U.S. between 1976 and the 1990s (the first period of any tramway openings since the 1950s, when the trend toward closure of streetcar systems was accelerating), but every one of them had been heritage streetcar systems – using vintage tramcars (or replica-vintage cars in a few cases), intended in part to attract tourists. Examples include the Waterfront Streetcar (in Seattle, 1982), Dallas's McKinney Avenue Transit Authority (in 1989) and Memphis's MATA Trolley (1993). All used trams built between the 1900s and 1940s, whereas Portland was opening a system in 2001 that would use trams that had just been built, and built to present-day ("modern") design, not historical designs intended to attract tourists, which also meant modern-day features such as being wheelchair-accessible without need for cumbersome wheelchair lifts at stations. Some of the articles written about the Portland Streetcar system when it opened in 2001 used a clearer wording, calling it the first new streetcar system built in the U.S. in 50 years "to use modern vehicles". (This 2001 article in a British magazine is among those that made that distinction. Yes, the type of vehicle chosen is what made the system 'modern' in 2001, but low-floor trams are not the only type of tram that would have done that.)
- However, as I see it, there is no need for the DYK hook, or even the NS Line article, to convey all this detail. I believe the hook can stay the same, with "streetcar" simply changed to "streetcar line". An alternative might be:
- ALT1: ... that Portland's NS Line (pictured) opened in 2001 as the first newly built streetcar line in the United States in 50 years to use modern vehicles?
- This looks good to me. I had not even bothered to check until now that the tram (streetcar) article was all-encompassing, having a section for low-floor trams. -Truflip99 (talk) 14:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. I will resume this on Sunday. Flibirigit (talk) 18:17, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- ? - Interesting:
- Other problems: - ?
Image eligibility:
- Freely licensed:
- Used in article:
- Clear at 100px: - ?
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
The article was promoted to GA status within a week of being nominated, therefore it is eligible for DYK despite not being a fivefold expansion within a week. Length and sourcing are adequate, and no plagiarism issues were found. Article is neutral in tone. QPQ is not required since the nominator have less than five DYK credits. The photos in the article are properly licensed and eligible for the main page. The photo is this nomination is not clear at a low resolution, it is difficult to tell that it is a streetcar instead of a bus. One option is to crop the outer areas of the photo to focus on the streetcar, or to use one of the other photos that has more of a side profile for the streetcar with some cropping as well. I am fine with the wording of the hook as is. I cannot locate Portland streetcars--something old, something new in the NS Line article, however I did locate This 2001 article. Please point out the first citation if I missed it. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 04:17, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Regarding the photo, I have replaced the suggested image with a newly uploaded one that I hope you might like. It shows the side of the vehicle, and I believe it's clear even at small size that it's not a bus. (For reference in connection with your comments above, that originally suggested image can be viewed here.) Regarding the original two (very similar) candidates, personally, I would not want to see either of those cropped to "focus on the streetcar", because one of the main reasons I chose them is that they show the operating environment, and not just the vehicle; and this is an article about a route/line, not a vehicle. I also liked the fact those two other photos show the tall buildings of downtown Portland, and a streetcar stop with shelter, but still have some (blue) sky in view (which, to my eye, makes them more attractive than a skyless view).
- I shot this new photo yesterday, but not for DYK (I was not even thinking about that, as you had not yet left your comment). I had noticed a few months ago that Commons still lacked even one well-composed photo of a streetcar anywhere on the Portland Streetcar system's multiblock sections in the Northwest Portland district, and so it had been on my to-do list to take and upload some such photos, when weather and other factors allowed. From your comment above, I am guessing you may feel that the streetcar in this new photo is too small for DYK, but if so, I would disagree. Lastly, I looked all 70 or so photos in the three Commons categories by car type (since most are only in one of those subcats), and surprisingly after eliminating the many shots that are not well-composed (or well-lit), then the shots that are not on the NS Line, then the three already considered here, and lastly two that are good but have a tree-filled setting that is not at all typical of the line's character, there is only a single other photo that I feel might be suitable for this DYK nom, and it is this one (but it does not show "NS" on the car's destination sign).
- I will leave it to the nominator, Truflip99, to reply to your other comments. (Of course, Truflip99 is also welcome to comment on the image discussion.) Thanks for the review. – SJ Morg (talk) 10:16, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks again for the review, Flibirigit. I opted to replace a ref used in the article (35) to the one used here. I wasn't aware that that was a requirement. I hope it's okay. I also support the new photo. -Truflip99 (talk) 14:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
.jpg)
A streetcar on the NS Line
- I have restored the original image above, and placed the new image here. For the sake of the promoter and the admin who double-checks this review, it is important to keep both images on the nomination to follow the complete conversation. The newer photo added is clear at 100px, is used in the article, and is properly licensed. I also like the contrast of the green streetcar with the red building in the background. I think it will definitely generate reader interest. I will go over the hook momentarily. Flibirigit (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Truflip99 I have looked at the hook and source again. The hook is definitely supported by Portland streetcars--something old, something new, but someone could challenge the use of "second-generation streetcar line" in the section "Opening and later extensions". Is there anything we can add to solidify that? Maybe another source or footnote similar to your explanation earlier in this nomination? In the same context, someone might challenge the definition of the word modern. Again, is there something we can source as to what is modern? In the lead section the use of modern vehicles is cited by this 2001 article, but I am missing where the source is in that article. Could you point out which paragraph in the source? I really do want to see this in the photo slot, and make sure that nobody can poke a hole in the sourcing. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 19:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- I guess the claim is rather weak and I did encounter this issue during the expansion process. It's interesting because I know what it's trying to say, but it is said rather poorly. Also, it seems the term "second-generation streetcar" was actually coined by Wikipedia itself, and not by external sources. I would like to opt with removing that phrase entirely, replacing both instances with what's on the hook: "first newly-built streetcar line in the United States in 50 years to use modern vehicles" (Btw, I think "newly built" in the hook should be hyphenated as well). Hopefully, SJ Morg can also provide his input. -Truflip99 (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the sincere response. I will wait to hear from SJ Morg. I am flexible in the wording, and am confident there is a solid solution out there that nobody will challenge. Flibirigit (talk) 21:17, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry for the one-day delay, but I did not have any time for Wikipedia yesterday (as you may have deduced from my "User contributions" data if you checked it). The term "second-generation" streetcar system/tram system has been around for decades, probably since the late 1970s, when it was referring to the first new North American light-rail systems that were then under construction in Calgary and San Diego (about 10-15 years before anyone seriously proposed bringing back "conventional" streetcars - using mixed-traffic street running – in the U.S., with the City of Portland being the first). It was certainly not "coined by Wikipedia". At first, I searched my (paper) files for a suitable reference, since most or all of that was pre-Internet, but then I found a good reference online, which I have now added to the NS Line article. Another one, which I have not added, is this 2017 article at Politico. So, I obviously disagree that "the claim is rather weak".
- In reply to Flibirigit's question about "modern": The word appears four times in that 2001 British article (including in the title), something my (Mac) computer allows me to find instantly by a "command-F" (F for "find") word search. If your computer does not offer a similar feature, here are their locations: After the title, there are two in the paragraph next to the photo of the green-and-orange streetcar ("Skoda 003 southbound ...."; where it says "replica trams" there, it means replicas of vintage trams, as the previous paragraph states) and the last is in the paragraph next to the photo of the vintage-style trolley. Altogether, I feel the text you'll find in those paragraphs sufficiently supports the article's aforementioned claim, and to be honest I don't want to spend time looking for more refs for that (even though I know that many exist), as I feel it beyond what is needed for a review of DYK compliance. But I do appreciate (sincerely) your effort to be thorough. As to hyphenating "newly built", the New York Times Manual of Style advises against including hyphens after adverbs ending in "-ly" in most cases, as does WP's MOS:HYPHEN. You can try it, if you want (I won't object), but someone will probably remove the hyphen during one of the last two stages of the DYK process. – SJ Morg (talk) 08:48, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. I will look at this tomorrow. Real life is busy today. Enjoy your Fourth of July festivities tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 18:26, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
- Likewise! Happy 4th! Truflip99 (talk) 19:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
I have review the changes and am satisified with the hook being supported here, and the terms "modern" and "second generation" supported here and here. Thanks for your diligence, and I hope to see this in the photo slot on DYK soon. Flibirigit (talk) 14:31, 4 July 2019 (UTC)