Talk:Minetta Creek/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ceranthor (talk · contribs) 17:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this. ceranthor 17:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"Minetta Creek was one of the largest natural watercourses in Manhattan, New York City." - would it be overkill to clarify that the creek is in the US? Obviously it's in NYC and all but just a thought
"Debate continues on whether the creek still exists. Minetta Creek caused flooding in basements and construction sites from the mid-19th century through the mid-20th century. Pools of water were also found at several construction sites along the creek's course." - how long has there been debate for? the organization of this paragraph is confusing

Course

"Nearly two miles long" - I'd add a {{Convert}} to kilometers
"From there it flowed southward across what is today Washington Square Park, it then crossed southwest, traversing what is today Minetta Lane, one of the creek's namesake streets.[5][6]" - this is a run-on as is; should use a semicolon or rewrite to "and then it crossed"
too much "what is today"; use a different phrase every so often

Origins of name

seems fine.

More prose and reference and image comments forthcoming. ceranthor 16:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceranthor: Thanks for the comments. I believe these issues have all been addressed. epicgenius (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I'm hoping to post some more comments soon. ceranthor 22:32, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. I'll fix these tonight. epicgenius (talk) 13:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Colonial days

"In fact the filling-in had preceded real-estate speculators' infill, according to the British Headquarters Map of c 1782–83, when the British carried out extensive defenses of the city: "they dammed Minetta Water to create a lake in what is now the West Village"[12]" - punctuation?
- Added.
"The Land Ordinance of 1796 – a U.S. federal cadastral survey done for purposes of taxation, also reprinted by Hoffman – laid out the line of West Street, which had been built over landfill, and noting three geographical points." - the last bit, "nothing three geographical points" doesn't work grammatically
- Fixed.
"He concludes his note by stating" - this is present tense, but the rest of the verbs use the past tense in the paragraph
- Fixed.

Covering

"archeologist" - think this is spelled "archaeologist"
"who wrote an archeological assessment" - same note as above
- Done both.
"Viele was quoted as saying "I have no doubt that the water in Mr. Sayles's cellar comes from the sources of Minetta Creek."" - I'd add a citation for the direct quote here
- Done.
"He went on to describe the source of Minetta Creek as a perennial spring." - cut out "went on"; it's such a redundant phrase
- Done.
"Such springs are as natural as the island's rock formations and cannot be dammed, Viele concluded.[3] " - not really encyclopedic... I'd rephrase this or remove it
- It has been rephrased. epicgenius (talk) 01:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Thomas A. Janvier wrote: "Although Manetta Creek no longer is visible on the surface, it still flows in diminished volume through its ancient channel—as those living near or over it sometimes know to their cost." " - same note about citation after a direct quote
- Done.

Encounters with the creek underground

Seems fine and engaging.

References

Ref 4 has an extra period
- Fixed.
Does ref 5 have an accessdate? same with 16?
- Fixed.
Ref 9 lacks a page number
What makes ref 22 a reliable source? same with 24? same with 38, 39, and 40?
- @Ceranthor: 22 is a digitization of Village Voice from 1945. It isn't available anywhere else online.
- 24 is a digitization of records from 1890.
- 38, 39, and 40 are primary sources supporting the claim "Bloggers claim that the creek still exists, based on evidence of flooding in basements and cellars." epicgenius (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Janvier, Thomas Allibone (1894). In Old New York. Harper & Brothers. pp. 86–9. - this isn't consistent with other page ranges which reuse the number in the tens place
- Fixed.
ref 28 needs to be standardized with the other references; get rid of the all caps bit
Earwig's tool suggests checks out

I think this will be ready to promote once these are addressed. ceranthor 00:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Any progress since the other day? ceranthor 17:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceranthor: Yes, all of these have been fixed. I also explained how the five sources above are reliable. epicgenius (talk) 17:54, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: It looks like there are still reference comments that have not been fixed. There are missing page numbers, and ref 28 needs to be fixed for the ALLCAPS bit of the title. ceranthor 17:56, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, looks like you've fixed them. Passing; great work! ceranthor 18:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]