Talk:Norwich and Worcester Railroad

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Norwich and Worcester Railroad became independent again in 1976 after over 100 years of being leased, only to immediately have its line taken over by another railroad? Source: Karr, Ronald Dale (2017). The Rail Lines of Southern New England (2nd ed.). p. 127-128
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Dance of the Twisted Bull

Created by Trainsandotherthings (talk). Self-nominated at 16:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC).

• New-from-redirect, easily long enough, no policy-related issues. Hook is neat - it has that pity-the-underdog feel - and it's cited and present. QPQ is done and we're good to go here! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Norwich and Worcester Railroad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 22:39, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

• Hoping to get to this within a few hours. 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 22:39, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
• Should be all! I have placed this article on hold for now. Please ping me once you have addressed my concerns so that I can know when to reevaluate. Thanks, 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 18:48, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
• Nice work on the changes Trainsandotherthings and Pi.1415926535! I am now happy to pass this article for GA status. Congrats! ツLunaEatsTuna (💬)— 17:14, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio check

Earwig says good to go. No concerns from me either.

Files

All images are relevant, of acceptable quality, and copyright-free:

File:West portal detail of Taft Tunnel, December 2017.JPG: CC-BY-SA 3.0;

File:1859 Norwich and Worcester Line advertisement.jpg: valid public domain rationale;

File:Plainfield station postcard.jpg: valid public domain rationale;

File:Aerial view of the US Naval Submarine Base New London c1990.jpg: valid public domain rationale;

File:Putnam station from parking lot (1), October 2020.jpg: CC-BY-SA 4.0;

File:Norwich station, December 2018.JPG: CC-BY-SA 3.0;

File:Gales Ferry station postcard.jpg: valid public domain rationale.

Prose

• "Described by contemporary press as "extremely liberal"" – does this have to be noted?
  • I think it's worth mentioning - most railroad charters were much stricter, specifying both endpoints and often some route details. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
  • As Pi said, this was an unusual charter, and multiple sources have drawn attention to how much freedom it gave the railroad. I believe it should be mentioned. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
    • Noted.
• "but the balance of the line" – pardon my ignorance, what does "balance" mean here?

  Synonym for "remainder" [1]. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• "Two steamships" – I think we can wikilink steamship here.
  •  Done
• "loans from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts" – just "Massachusetts" is fine.
  •  Done
• "(The railroad was assisted by a federally-funded dredging of the Thames River channel.)" – starting and ending a new sentence with parentheses looks quite odd; are these really necessary?
  •  Done
• "10% of the stock value; the struggling NY&NE cancelled the lease in 1884 and re-leased it at 8%." – recommend "10 percent" and "8 percent" per MOS:%.
  •  Done
• "With southern New England's dominant railroad in control," – I would wikilink New England for the benefit of non-American readers.

  Linked. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• "The New Haven went bankrupt in 1961" – wikilink bankrupt.

  Linked. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• "arguing that with the disaffirming of the lease it was not really part of Penn Central." – could it say something like "actually" or "technically" as opposed to "really"?

  "Actually" is fine by me, reworded. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• "plus a guarantee of financing from a bank to purchase the line." – ignore me if this is standard American English; could it say "as well as" instead of "plus"?

  It could say "as well as", but I wanted to avoid repeating "as" twice in the span of three words. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

  Oh, I see!

• "In contrast, the Norwich and Worcester had no train crews or trains" – recommend "In contrast, the Norwich and Worcester had no train crews nor trains"

  Sure, changed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• "(By that time, the southern section was served by a weekday freight, while the northern section only had twice weekly service and was no longer used as a through route to Worcester.)" – same concern with the parenthesis as above.
  •  Done

Refs

All sources are RS. Spotcheck—no concerns with refs 1, 11, 12, 15 or 21. But for ref 24 b:

• I could not seem to find where it mentions the Norwich and Worcester had no train crews nor trains?

  My bad, it's ref 17 (Weicker Bolsters RR For Area) that explicitly states "Weicker said the Norwich and Worcester Railroad Co., which owns the track in question, has not actively run trains in the area for more than 100 years." Added a footnote to this source at the location in question. Ref 15 (Dodd Supports Rail Unit) also discusses this. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, noted.

Formatting:

• Some web refs have retrieval dates whilst others do not.
  • Scans of old newspapers shouldn't need accessdates, since the actual content (the printed paper) is never going to change. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
    • Okay, the article needs to be updated to reflect this. Refs 23–25 are scans with retrieval dates and ref 11 a digital work without a retrieval date, for instance.

• I removed the access dates for all newspaper scans, and added a retrieval date for ref 11. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:28, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• Refs 14, 23–25 and Karr 2017 have location parameters whilst none of the other templates do.

  I use location parameters for newspapers when the location of publication isn't obvious from the title. The Day is a good example; there's also a newspaper called The Day in Ukraine. But the Boston Globe or Boston Evening Transcript doesn't need a location parameter since it's obvious it's in Boston. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

  Oh I see. That makes sense.

Other

Infobox, short desc, WP:ALT text, navs, other templates and cats good.

• Recommend template:Use American English
  •  Done
• Recommend template:Use mdy dates
  •  Done

• @LunaEatsTuna: Were you planning to start the review soon? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

• Sure! Was waiting for you and Pi.1415926535 to finish any major additions. I'll get to it now. 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 17:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, I should get to everything by tomorrow. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

• @Trainsandotherthings: I've made the changes for the portion of the article I added - hopefully that's okay. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

• I certainly won't complain about someone making my life easier! Thanks for the help (and I was going to credit you when I list this GA on my userpage regardless). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.