# Talk:96th Street station (Second Avenue Subway)

Why is the text in the tables grey? --Badger151 (talk) 03:45, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Because the station is under construction. Vcohen (talk) 08:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on 96th Street (Second Avenue Subway). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://nycsubway.org/lines/2ndave-el.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://stationreporter.net/2avl.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stationreporter.net/3avl.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100802231532/http://www.rpa.org/pdf/metrolink.pdf to http://www.rpa.org/pdf/metrolink.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:96th Street (Second Avenue Subway)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Will211 (talk · contribs) 05:43, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Will review soon. Will211|Chatter 05:43, 18 October 2016 (UTC)


### Comments
"In 2009, there were disputes about the locations of the station entbrances" I'm assuming you meant entrances?
Fixed. Thanks for pointing that out! epicgenius - (talk) 12:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Sources 5,28, 36, 38, 68, and 70 all no longer exist, so these will have to be either replaced or removed from the article.
Refs #5 and 68 were combined, with #5's url being replaced. #28's url is replaced. #36 is totally replaced with another reference, as is #70. Meanwhile, #38 will be archived later. epicgenius - (talk) 12:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Other than the above issues the article looks very good and is very well written. Perhaps I may review more of your articles! Will211|Chatter 04:57, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have a few other GA's that are available for review, if that's what you mean. epicgenius - (talk) 12:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I am passing the article now. Will211|Chatter 03:17, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

I noticed that the Effects section, which I and User:Epicgenius recently edited is repeated in pre-edited form in our articles on the other two new 2nd Ave stations. If we can agree on wording I think we should replace the text in the other two articles, or maybe move the paragraph from the station articles to the Second Avenue Subway article.--agr (talk) 04:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

@ArnoldReinhold: I would definitely like to come to a consensus about the preferred wording, then replace it in the other two articles. The reason the paragraph is repeated in the three articles (and also in the main Second Avenue Subway article) is because the effects are also localized to the stations themselves. epicgenius (talk) 04:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
@Epicgenius: I made an edit pass. I did not see any support for "since the 1990s" in the source given so I used more general wording. See what you think. Maybe we should add a comment to the text we include in the three articles suggesting any edits be coordinated with the others.--agr (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 96th Street (Second Avenue Subway). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140517132213/http://www.newyork.com/articles/real-estate/updates-on-nycs-biggest-subway-projects-second-avenue-and-east-side-access-59421/ to http://www.newyork.com/articles/real-estate/updates-on-nycs-biggest-subway-projects-second-avenue-and-east-side-access-59421/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721194135/http://www.arema.org/eseries/scriptcontent/custom/e_arema/library/2008_Conference_Proceedings/Second_Avenue_Subway-A_Status_Report_2008.pdf to http://www.arema.org/eseries/scriptcontent/custom/e_arema/library/2008_Conference_Proceedings/Second_Avenue_Subway-A_Status_Report_2008.pdf
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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on 96th Street (Second Avenue Subway). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140330041727/http://gothamist.com/2014/01/22/heres_what_the_second_avenue_subway.php to http://gothamist.com/2014/01/22/heres_what_the_second_avenue_subway.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111103171357/http://gothamist.com/2007/04/12/second_avenue_s_5.php to http://gothamist.com/2007/04/12/second_avenue_s_5.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140205175328/http://gothamist.com/2013/11/05/photos_the_2nd_avenue_subway_statio.php to http://gothamist.com/2013/11/05/photos_the_2nd_avenue_subway_statio.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150501202048/http://gothamist.com/2015/04/27/2nd_ave_subway_photos.php to http://gothamist.com/2015/04/27/2nd_ave_subway_photos.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170309003159/http://gothamist.com/2012/02/01/video_inside_the_abandoned_second_a.php to http://gothamist.com/2012/02/01/video_inside_the_abandoned_second_a.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170105000123/https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/New_York_City_2nd_Ave_Subway_Phase_2_Profile.pdf to https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/New_York_City_2nd_Ave_Subway_Phase_2_Profile.pdf
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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:57, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

96 Street art vc.jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

So my edit to be grammatically correct, which English teachers and professors want, was reversed. I redid the edit and now I have a question to ask. Wikipedia may not be reliable, but that shouldn’t mean be different in language from the sources used as evidence. Tell me guys, is Wikipedia for a general audience or people who love to break English rules? Wikis6501 (talk) 18:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)