Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/South Lake Union Streetcar/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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 28 September 2019 [1].

---

South Lake Union Streetcar

Nominator(s): SounderBruce 23:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The streetcar with a crude nickname and largely detracted for being a slow-moving speculation machine, but now serves as a critical connection to the headquarters of Amazon and many tech offices in Seattle. This article passed GAN a few months ago and I don't think it would need major work to pass here. SounderBruce 23:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments by RL0919

I'll add more later, but the thing that immediately jumped out at me is this: The article is titled "South Lake Union Streetcar" and it is mostly called that in the text, which says that is the official name, but the bolded name in the lead is "South Lake Union Line", which isn't even a redirect. --RL0919 (talk) 14:58, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Circling back around with more comments. (Sorry for the long gap, although I'm a little surprised there hasn't been any other activity in the interim.)

Lead:

• The primary naming issue above still should be addressed.
  • I've decided to put both in, with the common name leading.
• I realize the nickname is slightly embarrassing, but given that it is a widely used alternative name and has a redirect, I'd expect "South Lake Union Trolley" to be bolded where it first appears in the lead.
  • I'm leaning against it, as I don't like seeing bolded text so far down in the lead. It's also an unofficial name, so I'd rather not highlight it and spoil the fun.

Earlier streetcars and planning:

• "The first electric streetcar to run along Westlake Avenue was operated by the Seattle Electric Railway and Power Company in October 1890, taking five days to construct after the company was awarded the city government's first streetcar franchise." The "taking" construction is awkward here. I'd go with the straightforward "it took five days", either after a semicolon or as a separate sentence.
  • Reworked the sentence.
• "with the final streetcars on Westlake Avenue ceasing operations" – straightforward noun+ing situation here: drop the "with", used "ceased", and make this either a separate sentence or an independent clause.
  • Done.
• "by then a low-rise industrial area" – use "at that time" or some other phrasing instead of "by then", to avoid the implied change from some (unmentioned) prior state.
  • Done.

Approval and construction:

• "leaving half funded by the city" – $25M is more than half the previously stated $45M estimate or the following $47.5M estimate. Probably this phrase can be omitted entirely, since I think it could be presumed that the remainder would be funded by a source other than the levy.
  • Decided to use "the remainder", as it could be ambiguous because transit projects do often use state and federal funds.
• "only 12 filed a formal protest" – "only" seems editorial here, unless there is some known typical number of owners that file formal protests.
• "with others discussing a potential lawsuit" – another noun+ing situation that would be better as an independent clause or sentence.
  • Split the sentence and fixed it up.
• There is mention of a criticism of "overstated promised ridership", but the estimated ridership isn't mentioned until the end of the next paragraph. I initially put the omission in my notes until I came across the number later. It's not an important flaw, but if you can bring the two closer that might help.
  • Moved it up.
• Shouldn't "Mayor Nickels" just be "Nickels" after his first mention?
  • It can go either way, but I'd like to keep it for consistency. Nickels is the only mayor to be mentioned more than once (so far).

Opening and later improvements:

• "which was also removed from the Mercer Street intersection" – what is the "also" here?
  • It was meant to convey that Mercer Street's signal priority was removed. I've reworded it here.
• "with almost all candidates in the 2009 city council and mayoral elections saying" – noun+ing that could be an independent clause or sentence.
  • Split with a semicolon.
• "High-rise development in South Lake Union, including offices to accommodate the expected relocation of Amazon, was opened alongside the streetcar alongside new condominiums, businesses, and retailers." Could do without the double helping of "alongside". Also, given that the sentence calls out "offices ... condominiums, businesses, and retailers", what other high-rise development was there?
  • Just a list of examples, but notably there was a lack of traditional offices in this high-rise boom. It's almost all tech.

Expansion plans:

• "do not intersect, instead leaving a gap" – the simpler "do not intersect and leave a gap" would be better.
  • Fixed.
• "The independent review was delivered several months late and found issues with vehicle procurement and estimated that the project would cost $252 million to construct." A run-on sentence.
  • Split.

Route:

• "with a tail track continuing north" – another opportunity for an independent clause or sentence.
  • Fixed.

Fares:

• "replacing an honor system" – "to replace" seems appropriate here (I assume the replacement wasn't incidental).
  • Fixed.

See also:

• I think links to sister sites (such as Wikinews) normally go under "External links" rather than "See also".
  • Moved.

That's all I've got for now. Mostly just prose style comments, so it seems pretty close to ready. --RL0919 (talk) 21:49, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@RL0919: Thanks for being the first to review this. I have addressed everything you've thrown at me. SounderBruce 05:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Your changes mostly looked good. I made a few other grammar changes, hopefully nothing you find controversial. I didn't spot anything else to complain about, so I'm happy to support on prose. --RL0919 (talk) 18:22, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done

• Some of the details in the infobox, eg the track length, don't appear to be sourced anywhere
  • Added citations for track length and electrification, which is all that should be necessary.
• FN14: page?
  • The database did not give a source.
    • (Now FN16). If you're citing a database, cite the database, not the original print source. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:26, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
• FN16: source gives different date. Same with FN18, FN26, check for others
  • The citations use the print date and title, which often fall behind the web versions.
    • From where are you deriving the date you provide? Nikkimaria (talk) 11:26, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
• FN95: don't need accessdate for GBooks links, don't include the ISSN if you're not including the series, and you don't need the OCLC number when you have an ISBN.
  • Removed the ISSN and accessdate, but I would prefer to have a working OCLC link (which gives one-click access to library availability).
• What makes The Transport Politic a high-quality reliable source?
  • The author (Yonah Freemark) is a frequent contributor to urban planning publications (e.g. CityLab/Atlantic Cities and occasionally the NY Times) and is considered an expert in the field of urban planning and transportation. The post used in the citation is presenting data from the city that would be hard to replace without running into SYNTH issues.
• Why italicize NBC News but not KING 5 News?
  • Un-italicized NBC News, as it is a publisher.
• FN115: the author's first name is a date? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:41, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Fixed 115. @Nikkimaria: Are there any other issues with the sources? SounderBruce 04:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Support by David Fuchs

Forthcoming this evening. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 12:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

• General and prose:
  • The left-aligned images in the "Service and operations" section collide with text headings repeatedly on screen sizes any larger than around 1366x768 FWXGA; I'd suggest removing one or both of them or shifting them right.
    • Fixed.
  • It travels 1.3 miles (2.1 km) and connects Downtown Seattle to the South Lake Union neighborhood using Westlake Avenue, Terry Avenue, and Valley Street. To me "using" seems a little weird to describe a streetcar route. Bus and train routes I've seen often use "along", and indeed that's what other parts of the article use.
    • Fixed.
  • So Vulcan never ponied up the $25 million mentioned earlier?
    • Found a citation that mentions Vulcan's contribution ($8.6M in the local improvement district).
  • The linkage between the two clauses joined by the semicolon in The streetcar was criticized for its slow speeds due to the lack of dedicated lanes and widespread transit signal priority; a transit priority intersection at Mercer Street was removed in 2009 during the street's reconstruction. leaves me confused. It's saying that a pro-transit intersection was removed? If that's just one of the problems and sources of the complaints it's weird to link them so causally.
    • Split them apart and added something to the resulting first sentence. SounderBruce 15:22, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

• Images:
  • Images look fine, are appropriately licensed.
• Sources:
  • Source check performed using this version and checking statements attributed to refs 1, 5, 7, 9, 20, 42, 43, 58, 87, 92, 100, 103, 117, 118, 120, 121, and 123.
    • I didn't spot issues with close paraphrasing.
    • Refs 7 and 9 don't mention the actual Alaskan Way path of the streetcar.
      • Replaced Ref 7 with one that mentions Alaskan Way in particular.
    • Refs 42 and 43 don't adequately cite the service line McGraw Square, South Lake Union, and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (neither mentions the Square, instead talking about a hotel.)
      • Replaced with a mention of the mall (found in a caption); McGraw is the terminus, but the name wasn't in common use until 2011.
    • Ref 87 doesn't contain the 1.3 mile figure for the union line.
      • Added a citation that supports the mile figure.
    • Ref 92 doesn't adequately support The northbound track splits from Westlake Avenue at Thomas Street, running parallel one block to the east on Terry Avenue; a set of platforms between Thomas and Harrison streets serve the center of South Lake Union's high-tech office district.
      • @David Fuchs: Added a map citation for both claims (to establish the streets) and removed "high-tech" from the second. SounderBruce 18:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Ref 100 is dead (404 link at source)
      • Fixed.
    • Ref 118 doesn't adequately cite The South Lake Union Streetcar uses four tri-section articulated streetcars built by Inekon in the Czech Republic. (Mentions Prague and Inekon, but doesn't support the time of streetcar, and mentions six street cars, not four.
      • @David Fuchs: Removed the details, but I will look around for a suitable source to re-add them. The Business Journal source is mentioning six streetcars in the 2014/15 order (1 for SLU and 5 for First Hill). SounderBruce 01:03, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Further source review to current refs 20, 25, 31, 32, 86, 96, and 102. Did not spot additional issues. As such, supporting. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:01, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 13:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Coordinator notes

I've added this to the Urgents list but it will need to be archived soon if it does not receive some additional reviews soon. --Laser brain (talk) 11:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

• Sup SB, hope you're well. Bloody nice article; just wondered if you had anything to say about staffing? Grades, levels, wages, etc., I guess. Best of luck! ——SerialNumber54129 18:02, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Serial Number 54129: Thanks for dropping in. I don't think that kind of information is readily available, as King County Metro (the operator) does not seem to separate streetcar and bus roles in their employee directories (which are publicly available, but in a hard-to-cite database). It would be more appropriate in the King County Metro or Seattle Streetcar article, though, as it would apply to the other line as well. SounderBruce 14:40, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

• Just a quick comment: "combination of contributions from ... state grants, and a federal grant". Unless there is a subtle difference in meaning in the US, state and federal grants do not give contributions, but are contributions. I presume state and federal bodies were the ones making the contributions. - SchroCat (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
  • @SchroCat: Good catch. I replaced the last part with "grants from the state and federal government", which should cover it. SounderBruce 03:54, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support A couple of minor tweaks here, but meets the FA criteria as far as I can see. - SchroCat (talk) 07:17, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Epicgenius

I hope to take a greater look at this article later. So far this looks like another great article by SounderBruce, and it would be a shame if there weren't enough feedback for this nomination. epicgenius (talk) 15:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Epicgenius - resolved

with support from Paul Allen and his venture capital firm Vulcan Inc. Does this mean they provided the funding, or just worked on the idea. I know this is mentioned further on, but it would be good to clarify a few words. Added "lobbying and financial support" Construction began in July 2006 and was completed in December 2007 by the Seattle Department of Transportation. It was already mentioned that the streetcar opened in December 2007. Unless I'm missing something, usually it's assumed that construction is completed when the project is opened. Replaced with timeframe, though I think it was completed a bit earlier than the opening implied. The line is popularly known by its nickname, the South Lake Union Trolley (abbreviated as "SLUT"), which is used on unofficial merchandise sold by local businesses. Does this at all tie into the controversies mentioned in the following sentence? Not entirely related, but I'm having trouble seeing a good place for the SLUT line. The proposed 2.5-mile (4.0 km) streetcar would travel from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center to the Westlake Center, where it would connect to the monorail, buses, and light rail trains. So just to be clear, the Seattle Center Monorail should be explicitly mentioned here. Otherwise it may seem like you are talking about the proposed monorail, since that is also linked with the displayed text "monorail". Un-piped the link. Westlake Avenue was originally a northbound-only street until September 2007, but was converted to two-way traffic for the streetcar while Terry Avenue became northbound-only. What was Terry Avenue originally? Two-ways? Added mention of it being two-way. Thanks for starting this review and I look forward to responding a bit later (though I will be out of town this weekend). SounderBruce 05:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC) No problem. I'll get back to this review later, probably will have some time tomorrow to look over in detail. epicgenius (talk) 14:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC) @Epicgenius: Good morning! Will you have additional comments for this review? --Laser brain (talk) 11:42, 9 September 2019 (UTC) @Laser brain: Yes. I will post some comments later today. epicgenius (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2019 (UTC) More comments: The streetcar line is officially named the South Lake Union Streetcar, but it is also known by a popular moniker—the South Lake Union Trolley (abbreviated as "SLUT"), which is used on merchandise sold by local businesses. - It seems awkward to wikilink "slut" (lowercase) with the display text being "SLUT"? I feel like this wikilink should have context - e.g. its use as a derogatory term for women. I don't think it would be necessary to add a description of what "slut" means, especially with the link. OK. It's not a big deal. I just think WP:EGG might be an applicable policy, but it doesn't look like that's the case, since only thing different is capitalization. epicgenius (talk) 21:04, 13 September 2019 (UTC) Streetcar service between the Pacific Place shopping center, South Lake Union, and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center began on December 12, 2007, with 600 people at the ribbon-cutting ceremony and full trains throughout the day - I take it that all of the trains were crowded to capacity. But this phrasing doesn't say so directly, so rather, you should just say directly that it was crowded. Added the figure from the second source. Streetcar ridership rose in later years due to an increase in new businesses around South Lake Union, necessitating new service improvements. ... - I wonder if the public opinion also improved in regards to this, since you mentioned how unfavorable was the public perception of the streetcar in 2009. Most of this is informal, so finding a reliable source is a bit difficult. and are planned to be expanded by 2020 - in which way? Extending the lanes? Extending the time frame of said restrictions? It's a physical extension, albeit by only one block. The first (and, so far, only) addition to the network, - I think this can be rephrased, e.g. "The only addition to the network so far," Fixed. to mitigate the loss of a planned light rail station - was Sound Transit planning to build a light rail station there, but then canceled? Yes, and that is covered in the First Hill article. The streetcar project remains suspended as of January 2019, but is anticipated to open in 2025 if funding is found for the $286 million cost. - Nothing wrong with this sentence in general, but if the project is suspended, then i wonder how the sources got the date of 2025. Assuming that it takes at least six years to build the extension, this date is likely to be pushed back for each year that funding is deferred. Just my observation anyway. Also, it seems that this is covered in the article Seattle Streetcar#Center City Connector. Again, not a big deal, just an observation of the source. The date has been pushed back a year, so this piece will have to be continually updated for a while. Generally it is assumed that construction itself will take a fixed amount of time and most of the planning work is already completed, so we're waiting on funding and a new vehicle contract. Also, I don't know if you are planning to make a new article for the combined streetcar line if the Center City Connector is ever built. It doesn't affect the outcome of the FAC though. The operating plan would just extend both lines so they overlap in the downtown section (and for quite a bit into South Lake Union), so there is no need for a separate article. Since it will most heavily affect the SLU Line, the CCC information has been prioritized here. Some stations have corporate sponsorships that are named at stations and raise additional revenue for operations - You should probably name a few examples. The 2007 article lists some outdated examples, and I can't find a reliable source that lists some of the more recent ones. Fine by me. epicgenius (talk) 15:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC) More to come. epicgenius (talk) 15:48, 9 September 2019 (UTC) @Epicgenius: Thanks for the comments. Looking forward to closing this one out soon. SounderBruce 19:07, 13 September 2019 (UTC) @SounderBruce: No problem. I hope to have the rest of my comments by early next week. epicgenius (talk) 21:03, 13 September 2019 (UTC) More comments: with connections to Westlake station in the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (which carries Central Link trains) and the Seattle Center Monorail terminal - This may be confusing. I'm reading the sentence like this: there are two connections to Westlake station: one in the DSTT and the other at the Monorail terminal, and the DSTT carries Central Link trains. It may be just me, but if this is wrong, it should be fixed. If this is correct, it should be "... and at the Seattle Center Monorail terminal". The monorail terminal is actually in a separate part of the Westlake Center mall and is not considered part of Westlake Station. @SounderBruce: How about "to the Seattle Center Monorail terminal"? This is the only wording that still seems vague to me. epicgenius (talk) 21:48, 16 September 2019 (UTC) @Epicgenius: I have swapped the order on the two, which might help make them separate. SounderBruce 23:30, 16 September 2019 (UTC) under-construction Google campus - Nothing wrong here, just wondering, when will this be finished? Due to a recent crane collapse, it's not clear when the campus will be complete. I walked by there this weekend and it looked almost ready. 9 hours per day on Sundays and holidays - I suppose per MOS:NUM, this should really be "nine hours..." Fixed. the line reached its highest-ever ridership levels in 2013 - daily or annual? Looks like both. It is assumed to be both, given how the weekday average is derived from annual numbers. The first three vehicles, numbered 301 to 303; The fourth vehicle, numbered 407 - are the vehicle numbers necessary? If they just run on the SLU line then maybe this may be appropriate. If not they should be remove. I know in NYC, bus and subway fleet rotates between different transit lines all the time in spite of supposedly fixed-in-place fleet assignments. Not sure if that's the case here. The two streetcar lines have separate fleets because of their isolation, but it's not clear whether they will be mixed when the center connection is completed (if it does get built). There is a third generation of streetcars planed to be acquired for that project, but the contract was just canceled. SounderBruce 21:27, 16 September 2019 (UTC) deployed upon request - passenger request? Added.

That's all for now. I think this covers pretty much the whole article. Overall this seems to be in good shape. epicgenius (talk) 15:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support. With the above issues resolved, there isn't a reason for me not to support. epicgenius (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Support from Gerda

Thank you for an interesting article. Just minor observations:

Earlier ...

• In the first sentence, I'd like a year much sooner, and no long red link.
  • I think the sentence reads fine. The redlink will be resolved soon.

Approval ...

• I'd move the pic from the opening to the next para.
  • I think it fits better with the first paragraph. SounderBruce 15:43, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

No reason not to support! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:02, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Comment from TRM

I see a table there (in the "Stations" section) which doesn't seem to have any MOS:ACCESS compliance, could we address that please? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:41, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I'm not well versed in accessibility for tables, but I did try to add some elements from WP:DTT. For the row headers, I can't seem to find a way to make them comply (with ! scope=row without adding the bolding and/or left-adjusted text. SounderBruce 18:50, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Does the table look fine now? SounderBruce 04:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

It looks good now, and the rest of the article is chipper, so I'm supporting. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Support from Gonzo_fan2007

Initial comments, nothing major:

• "but chose to defer the streetcar issue until funding sources could be found." - recommend "could be identified", "could be found" sounds too colloquial.
  • Fixed.
• Ref 106 is used at the end of consecutive sentences under the second paragraph of the "Service and operations". Neither sentence is controversial and neither sentence is a direct quote, so that fist ref can be removed.
  • I don't see the harm in keeping it as is, especially since there is a monetary figure attached to the second.
    • Not harmful, but not really accepted practice (WP:CITEDENSE). The sentence The streetcar is owned by the City of Seattle and is currently operated by King County Metro under a contract with the city government is covered by Ref 106 after the next sentence The line's annual operating budget of $5.9 million (in 2016) is covered by a $1.5 million contribution from the King County government, an appropriation from the Federal Transit Administration, sponsorships, and the city's general fund. If the "monetary figure" sentence came first, I would understand the duplication of the reference. But in the current instance, it is unwarranted. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:10, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
      • I see your point. It's been removed.
• Some instance of WP:OVERLINK: e.g. Food truck, corporate sponsorship (which is a redirect), Thanksgiving, Christmas Day, ribbon-cutting ceremony, naming rights, general fund (which is a redirect), biotechnology, biomedical, and smartphone could all be reasonably understood within the context of the article and probably don't need links.
  • Removed a few of the links, but the days and concepts may be unfamiliar to non-American readers and should be kept.
    • Food truck seems absolutely unnecessary, as they are common across most countries. 2 billion people celebrate Christmas and it's not an American holiday. General fund is a common term to all businesses. I guess the rest are ok, but still don't think "reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from" per WP:OVERLINK. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:10, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
      • I disagree with removing such links. If Thanksgiving (an American holiday not celebrated by the majority of the planet) is kept, then so too should Christmas for consistency. Food trucks, naming rights, and corporate sponsorships are not exactly common concepts associated with transit, so having their links is helpful to readers. "General fund" is also an uncommon term for those outside of the political realm, especially in how it relates to project funding. SounderBruce 05:46, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
• Uses of both "pm" and "p.m." - be consistent throughout. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Fixed. SounderBruce 04:44, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Additional comments

• The lead says The South Lake Union Streetcar was the first modern line to operate in Seattle, beginning service on December 12, 2007., but the first section says Streetcar service in Seattle resumed in 1982 with the opening of the Waterfront Streetcar line along Alaskan Way, but the line ceased operations in 2005. Do you mean it was the first modern streetcar line to operate in Seattle (p.s. that would be a good red link to create)? You may need to differentiate heritage streetcar and modern streetcar.
  • Created a redirect using that redlink and added it to the paragraph, along with a small mention of the Waterfront line.
• ...and a proposed monorail system. One proposal from Mayor Paul Schell in 1998 included re-routing a surface light rail line between downtown and the University District to serve the Seattle Center and South Lake Union, at the time a low-rise industrial area. The duplication of "propose" makes it unclear if the mayor is Mayor's proposal is for streetcar? Maybe add "streetcar" after "one"?
  • Done.
• ...the Seattle City Council and political activists who saw other unfunded transportation needs. Seems like there needs to be more here. They "saw other ... needs" that were higher priority? Would have a bigger impact than the streetcar?
  • The quotes in the source are pretty vague, so I can only provide a small example here.
• ...and trainloads of over a hundred people throughout the day. This doesn't seem to meld. The vehicle has a capacity of 140, so "over a hundred" would be one trainload? Do you mean hundreds? The source says that each train was still carrying over 100 people late into the day, which isn't exactly clear the way you wrote it.
  • Changed it to "each train carrying a hundred people", but I'm not particularly satisfied. Will try another fix later.
• ...with an overrun blamed on additional utility work after the line opening. "An" -> "the"
  • Fixed.
• ...to low advertising revenue and increased costs. Recommend "higher" instead of "increased", which sounds better when combined with "low" earlier in the sentence.
  • Fixed.
• Its tracks were also identified as a hazard for cyclists riding on Westlake Avenue "Its" -> "The"
  • Fixed.
• Public opinion of the streetcar and its low ridership grew unfavorable in its first years of operation The inclusion of "and its low ridership" confused this sentence a bit. It seems you are trying to say "Public opinion of the streetcar, due to its low ridership, grew unfavorable...", but the way it is written it reads "low ridership grew unfavorable", which doesn't make sense.
  • Reordered.
• General comment: surprised there is only a brief mention of the O&M facility. Was this facility built along with the streetcar line? Had it existed before? What is its capacity? Are you able to answer any of these questions?
  • @Gonzo fan2007: Added more using a source I found. Thanks for the suggestion. SounderBruce 03:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• That completes my comments after a thorough read through. The overlink item I mentioned above is minor and more a matter of personal preference, thus I consider all of the initial comments resolved. Nicely written article SounderBruce. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:49, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Nice work SounderBruce. All my comments have been addressed. Happy to support the article per the criteria. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:32, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

support from Lee Vilenski

Looks like a great article. Seems like a lot of supports above, but as it's on the urgents list, I'll take a look now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• It travels 1.3 miles (2.1 km) - is travels the best word (considering it is in the lede? The route itself doesn't move (I can see why it would be ok though) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:25, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Saying it's 1.3 miles long wouldn't be totally accurate (as it's a two-way route), so "travels" is a compromise that still makes grammatical sense.
• can we link the dollar sign in the lede and first instance in main body? There are more than one type of dollar. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:27, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't think this is necessary, as it doesn't seem to be common among American articles that are strictly dealing with an American subject.
• When you say SLUT in the prose - is it wise to link the slut? It might be better explained, than the term itself being linked. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Addressed this above, but I feel like the link helps explain the term and having a note in the article itself would be overkill; the citations didn't need to explain the definition of "slut", so I feel we should follow their lead.

That's all I have for now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Thanks for dropping by. I've answered your questions above, but haven't taken any actions for now. SounderBruce 21:43, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

No worries, been meaning to take a look, but been struggling with time recently. Spent some time today checking through most of the prose. Article is in great condition, quite happy with the responses and the article in general. support Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:54, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 12:38, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

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