A fact from SmithâNinth Streets station appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 May 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the SmithâNinth Streets station (pictured) in New York City is the world's highest subway station?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion. See also:
WikiProject Trains to do list and the
Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
The reference says that the station is the highest in the world. The article says that it isn't. Maybe, it's worth to delete the reference (or add a comment).
Vcohen (
talk)
18:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC)reply
I have just modified 4 external links on
SmithâNinth Streets (IND Culver Line). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
"The first short section of the line opened on March 20, 1933" - "short" isn't needed.
 Done
Why is the word "temporary" in quotations in the next sentence.
 Done
"...and E trains from the Queens Boulevard line replaced them." --> "...and was replaced by E trains from the Queens Boulevard line."
 Done
"GG (later renamed the G)" - This renaming should be mentioned at the first mention of the GG train.
 Done
"...with leaks and broken concrete riddling the viaduct." --> "...with leaks and broken concrete riddling it."
 Done
"This shorter platform could only accommodate G trains..." - Why?
 Done
 Not done@
Kew Gardens 613: The new sentence: "This shorter platform could only accommodate G trains, which are only 300 feet (91 m) long", is still missing info. What is the length of the station?--
Dom497 (
talk)
17:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
It would be a nuisance to try to find a source for that. Most IND stations were built to be 660 feet, and 11-car trains did run at one point on some lines. However, there aren't too many definitive source indicating which stations were 660 feet long. To make it easier, I changed it to state that the station could platform 600-foot long trainsâthe length of F trains.--
Kew Gardens 613 (
talk)
18:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Kew Gardens 613: Hmmm. Given the current reference maybe we should just stick to something like "Due to construction limitations, the platform could only accommodate G trains; F trains bypassed this station on the same track."--
Dom497 (
talk)
22:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
For the station layout diagram, is there a reference for the level names (4F, 3F, 2F, etc).
@
Dom497: What do you mean? Are you referring to the use of the labels 4F, 3F, 2F, etc., which are used to distinguish the levels or the features on each level? This information is cited in the following paragraph.
"With an elevation of 87.5 feet (26.7 m), this station is the..." --> "With an elevation of 87.5 feet (26.7 m), SmithâNinth Streets is the..."
 Done
"and three long escalators and one staircase going up to a landing, where three more long escalators" - Remove the "long" words.
 Done
The "Exit" subsection can be merged into its parent since it just has one sentence.
 Done
Regarding the Gallery, I think some of the images could be removed. Images 1 and 2 are pretty similar so one can be removed. Images 6, 7, and 8 are also similar so two can probably be removed. Regarding, the tiling images (3 and 4), I don't see the significance of including them in the article. With the remaining images I would try to merge them into sections of the article but I'm a little bit bias since I generally don't like to use Galleries. However, if you feel the images have signifcance and the gallery should stay, by all means just let me know (Galleries are NOT part of the GA criteria so which ever way this goes it will have no effect on the outcome).
 Done I reduced it to two.
Just my preference so feel free to disagree...I would move any citations in the middle of sentences to the end. I find it helps with flow. For example, "...or partially closed for a $32 million[18] renovation.[19][20]". I find citation 18 breaks the flow of the sentence.
 Done
Several refs need access dates (for example, refs 3 and 5)
@
Dom497: The information is obtained from ERA NY Division Bulletins from October and November 1968. These Bulletins have been deemed as sufficient in previous Good Article Nominations.
@
Kew Gardens 613: The source says "Adapted from ERA NY Division Bulletins October and November 1968" but there is no link to it or any proof that it actually is adapted from the bulletins. Given that the website's reliability is already questionable, it is possible that the author just added that line to make it seem credible. Does New York keep a public record of these bulletins somewhere?--
Dom497 (
talk)
01:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Dom497: I don't think that the website's reliability is in question. The webmaster for the site worked for the TA. Joe Korman would not just add the line to the top. He is trusted. For instance, the subway car assignment information is cited from his website. Joe Korman gets it directly from the TA. While these Bulletins are not online,
others are.--
Kew Gardens 613 (
talk)
01:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
I think I've asked this in some of your previous nominations (or I may not have...I forget) but what makes nycsubway.org and Forgotten New York reliable?
 Done I have replaced them.
Ref 25 is dead
 Done
What makes ref 23 reliable (looks like its just a blog?)
A short conversation has taken place above regarding if "thejoekorner.com" is reliable (see the 16th bullet above). Based on responses from the nominator and another editor, the website owner is trustworthy. However, I cannot verify this. I'm hoping another editor can give some input regarding this source. (For reference, we are talking about reference #8 in the article).--
Dom497 (
talk)
02:10, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
These all come from his own website. Also, the second and third link don't work. If an a second source can be found talking about Joe, that would be preferable.--
Dom497 (
talk)
11:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)reply
I have two concerns with the use of "subway" in the "highest subway station in the world" claim:
"Subway" is a very American word; a reader outside of North America might not understand this. In the UK, as I'm sure you know, a "subway" is a tunnel underneath a busy street that allows pedestrians to cross without inconveniencing traffic. So the concept of "subway station" is meaningless in that context.
"Subway" implies that it's underground, which of course it's not here.
So maybe we could call it the "highest elevated rail mass-transit station in the world" and it would be clearer to everyone?
Also, I put a {{fact}} tag on the footnote saying that it is not the highest above sea level. Well, what is? We should explain this here and give sources.
Daniel Case (
talk)
03:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)reply
The photos that are used as an example of the before renovation and after renovation are taken at different parts of the station. They do not accurately represent a before/after of the same location in the station. â Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2604:2000:800E:AC00:7DDB:D18C:F8A1:6D5 (
talk)
14:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)reply