Talk:Hudson Valley Rail Trail/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Racepacket (talk) 11:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC) Both disamb and dead link reports are clean. No disamb. links or broken links.[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
In lead, "Operated by a variety of railroads, the corridor" -> "Operated by a variety of railroads, the rail corridor" to parallel the body text.

"discontinue service" -> "abandon the line"? - whatever is the term of art in ICC terminology.

"a bridge and tunnel, and to complete the path.[16] " - the "tunnel" requires some explanation. If a tunnel were needed on the corridor, why would not the railroad have built it?
The revised text is still confusing to the reader. I understand that there was a blockage under the U.S. Route 9W bridge, and I understand that a "tunnel" was needed to remove this blockage. But I don't know what happened (if anything) between the time that the rail was abandoned and 2009 that would create a blockage sufficiently big to warrant a tunnel. Was it a cave in or is the trail deviating from the rail corridor?

"that it contained lead." -> "the paint contained lead."

I would move the sentence "The eastern expansion was officially opened on October 2, 2010." to the previous paragraph.

In the Route Description section, explain whether you are describing from North to South (West to East) or the opposite direction. Explain that it connects to other trails at its termini.

"To celebrate the opening of the Vinyard Avenue bridge, the concurrent Route 44/55 throughout Highland was shut down for a day; Vinyard Avenue is concurrent with Route 44/55.[29]"->"To celebrate the opening of the Vinyard Avenue bridge, Vinyard Ave (which is designated concurrent Route 44/55) was shut down for a day throughout Highland.[29]"
How about "To celebrate the opening of the Vinyard Avenue bridge, Route 44/55 throughout Highland (including Vinyard Avenue) was shut down for a day.[29]"
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Are there dates associated with any plans for future construction or improvements?

Article should explain that the Poughkeepsie Bridge is now converted to a pedestrian bridge across the Hudson River.

Are there any plans to continue the trail east of the Hudson through Dutchess County? Fn 25 says, "On the eastern shore, the Walkway will connect the 12-mile Dutchess Rail Trail that is currently being built between Poughkeepsie and Wappinger's Falls."

Was the Hudson Valley Rail Trail part of the National Trail designation?
Prose is still unclear - was just the Poughkeepsie Bridge designated a National Recreational Trail, or were the Hudson Valley Rail Trail and/or the Dutches Rail Trail a part of that designation? Perhaps say "The bridge is a National Recreation Trail, and connects the Hudson Valley Rail Trail with the Dutchess Rail Trail to the east."
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Nice pictures, thank you for contributing them.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I am placing the article on hold.Racepacket (talk) 11:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changes I believe I've completed your changes, but the HVRT currently has no designation. It might get one in a few years, hopefully. I also didn't change the sentence on Vinyard Avenue (much), because not all of 44/55 in Highland is concurrent with it.
--Gyrobo (talk) 16:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I covered two of your points, but the available source isn't clear on the tunnel. Presumably it doesn't deviate from the corridor, because Mabee just says the area under the 9W bridge was "clogged". There's no mention in any source that I can find of what caused the blockage, or why the original bridge over Vinyard Avenue was removed. I think I should remove the part about the blockage here anyway, because it a kind of synthesis since it wasn't mentioned in the source.
--Gyrobo (talk) 22:01, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. Racepacket (talk) 22:19, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]