Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Chicago 'L' stations/archive1

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

The list was not promoted by NapHit 21:40, 1 October 2012 [1].

List of Chicago 'L' stations edit

List of Chicago 'L' stations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 03:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it contains a comprehensive lead, lists all stations (including planned/future stations) uses color where appropriate and contains an appropriate graphic representing geography. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 03:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 04:12, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Image caption needs to be re-written/fixed
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order
Both done! Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow; it's a wonderful list. That's all. Cheers, TBrandley 03:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per the below concerns of The Rambling Man, NapHit, and Arsenikk. TBrandley 17:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • A lot of the opening dates need references.
In progress Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a more specific opening date for Berwyn than "1916-17"? Or the two Green Line stations that opened in March 1894, for that matter?
Working on it but still coming up with zip Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There should be a symbol for terminal stations in addition to the shading per WP:COLOR.
Done! Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The list doesn't distinguish Metra transfers from 'L' transfers, which could be confusing to some people. Either those should be distinguished in the list or something should be added to the lead about the different types of transfers.
Done! Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems like almost every other train station FL has pictures of some of the stations, and I think pictures would help this list too.
In progress Done! Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 18:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Howard should be marked as a transfer station.
I didn't list Howard as a transfer station (Belmont, Fullerton, etc.) because all of its lines are already in the "lines" category and anything in the transfer column would be a duplicate. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 12:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They're still transfer stations, though; even if you don't put anything in the transfer column, they should be marked. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 13:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great list, and very close to FL quality; the referencing issue is the only major problem I can find. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 04:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In progress Done! Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • " the City of Chicago" no need for City to be capitalised.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On an average weekday 650,000 passengers " Do you really mean "On a weekday, an average of 650,000 passengers..."?
Oddly, "average weekday" is the phrase the source uses. I guess this is to differentiate those days from holidays falling on weekdays and weekdays with special events expected to significantly alter traffic. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "operated totally independently " no need for "totally".
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was achieved " not keen, it wasn't so much "achieved" as "built" really, was it?
Glad you pointed that out. The dates were screwed up anyway. Reworded. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Chicago Transit Authority (a public agency) " You've already abbreviated this to CTA, and it would be better to say "a public agency" the first time round.
Changed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Milwaukee-Dearborn " shouldn't that be an en-dash rather than a hyphen?
Double checked over at WP:DASH and it falls under the same condition as "singer-songwriter." The Milwaukee-Dearborn is only one subway. Since it begins under Milwaukee Avenue, runs beneath Lake Street, Dearborn, and then ends under Congress Parkway it isn't a to or through situation. Also, as that's the subway's name it doesn't get reversed.Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As of May 2012" it's now nearly September 2012.
Switched to September. I don't know if this falls under WP:CRYSTAL, but CTA has no plans to open any other stations in the immediate future, and physically can't construct a new station with less than two days. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "spread out over eight " no need for "out".
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "95 of these stations ..." avoid starting sentences with numbers.
Fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you check all the symbols used are accessible?
They should be. The accessibility icon was the basis for the airplane, train, and transfer icons. I created the last three duplicating the code from Template:Access icon then modifying the size and alt text parameters.Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "only stationon the " caption needs fixing.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image captions which are complete sentences need a period.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure I understand "at-grade", not clear on what "Grade" means.
Switched to "Ground level." Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "1916-17" en-dash required.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 7 needs an en-dash.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • As does 27.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 55, no need to SHOUT.
Done. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "or a combination of things" really not encyclopedic language.
Fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 01:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead is a little too long per WP:LEAD.
Fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 01:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The notes aren't referenced.
They are now. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 01:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not all of the Open dates have references, why?
    • Nudge, is this going to be resolved? If not, my oppose stands and I recommend you withdraw the nomination until you can reference everything adequately. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, okay, I take the hint. I hereby permanently withdraw the nomination. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 23:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 16:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments'
  • As TRM states the lead is a little too long, six paras is a bit too much, would and merge and trim a few bits
  • "The system began as three separate companies which built..." comma after companies
  • "In 1947, the a public agency" doesn't make any sense, not keen on sentence starting with In 1947 either would re-jig it
  • "North/Clybourn is the only stationon..." station and one should be separate
  • ref 58 hyphen in year range should be an en dash

NapHit (talk) 22:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 01:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose based on the concerns raised by TRM and Arsenikk. NapHit (talk) 17:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Arsenikk (talk) 15:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments by Arsenikk (talk)
  • "third busiest" should be "third-busiest"
Fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • How long a time-span is "shortly thereafter"? A few days, three years, two decades?
Clarified. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Generally it is better to put prose between commas rather than parenthesis, such as with (the Pink Line...)
Placed it within em dashes. The comma in the middle of the appositive would make the structure less than ideal. The date illustrates the time frame between most recent changes. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Of the 145 stations on the system," is utterly redundant; remember that if starting a sentence with a number, it should be written out.
Reworded. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Berwyn sorts wrong if the table is sorted by year.
Fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dashes to indicate empty cells are normally center-aligned.
Fixed. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see station lists back at FLC—it has been quite some time now. Arsenikk (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  • Last part of the second paragraph lacks references. Arsenikk (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This section was originally longer but had to be cut down due to constraints on the length of the lead. References exist for an expanded and more detailed version, but I doubt there are any for the large scope of the paraphrased version. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Surely there must be some references, especially the finalization in 1926. From reading the old version I also see that 1926 is not mentioned, but that a new line in 1943 is, which seems to contradict the current statement. That is among the reasons why a reference would be much appreciated. Arsenikk (talk) 15:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The "finalization" mentioned was just that of the basic structure, which happened in 1900. The new line referred to in the next sentence is the Westchester bracnch. As stated in the paragraph, the system expanded outward until '26, that is, the line in 26 was the last line into new territory. You are correct in that there was an error. The Westchester branch had a line extension in 1930 that I had forgotten about. The "1926 line" was indeed in the older version, but it remained hidden as a note (and actually misidentified the line) because the existent list was getting to be long and repetitive. The 1943 line previously mentioned was the State Street Subway which traveled alongside/underneath preexisting 'L' lines, so its opening doesn't represent outward expansion.
I can get references for individual openings, but I don't know of one (a reliable one, that is) that outright states that the mile-long extension of the Westchester branch would be the last extension into new territory until 1969.
I'm not sure how to address this problem. Advice is appreciated. Lost on Belmont 3200N (talk) 00:02, 13 September 2012 (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_list_candidates/List_of_Chicago_%27L%27_stations/archive1&oldid=1138481601"