# Talk:Pier 40

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pier 40 at Hudson River Park. 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/20150402184051/http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121220/west-village/with-50k-donations-pier-40-ball-fields-reopen-after-sandy to http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121220/west-village/with-50k-donations-pier-40-ball-fields-reopen-after-sandy
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://new.stuybaseball.org/about-us
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) 07:11, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pier 40/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 18:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
As a thanks for reviewing one of my articles, I shall review this one. MWright96 (talk) 18:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@MWright96: Thanks for taking up the review, and for removing that unsourced paragraph. I only realized just now that the paragraph about the 2017 truck attack - which incidentally is irrelevant to any aspect of Pier 40, other than the fact that the attack occurred nearby - was added by an IP user who apparently likes to add badly sourced info about terrorism to other articles as well. epicgenius (talk) 18:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Lead
"The pier is the largest structure in Hudson River Park at over 14 acres in size" the convert template should be used on "14 acres"
@MWright96: Done. epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


### History
"and ended all operations around 1983.[16][17][18][19][20][1]" - refs should be in numerical order
I removed the last three ref mentions as citation overkill. epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
"Additional plans called for a branch of the Guggenheim Museum[28]" - a comma is missing between the word "museum" and the reference
Done.
"The main field (occupying the former cargo level) began construction in 2004" - the parentheses are unneeded
Removed.
"and opened in May 2005 with then-Governor" - don't use wording such as "then-Governor"
Reworded.
"and 40% of the entire park's annual operating budget." - 40 percent per MOS:PERCENT
Removed.


### Current condition and use
"Pier 40's design resembles a square doughnut," - should be donut since this is an American topic
Didn't realize that - in NYC we have both "doughnuts" and "donuts". epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
"also referred to as the pier's "shed"," - referred to by whom?
Clarified.
"the pier is held up by over 3,500 steel H-pile girders" - more than would be better in this instance
Done.
"According to several reports, the Pier is severely dilapidated and gradually sinking into the Hudson River." - do the sources state why it has become dilapidated and is sinking into the Hudson River? If so then it should be included into the article.
The NY Times source doesn't say why, and neither does the NY Post. I can only assume that the pier is sinking because of the deferred maintenance, but there's nothing in either source. Villager source (which I did find a new url for) only talks about the dilapidation. epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
"the Pier was closed after being engulfed by over 12 feet of water." - the convert template should be used on the text highlighted in bold
Done.


### As Hudson River Park
Wikilink dugout to Dugout (baseball) and batting cage
Done.
"covering each half or each corner of the field respectively.[42][40]" - refs should be in numerical order
Done.
"Prior to 2008, Public Schools Athletic League-sanctioned" - the acronyms of the Public Schools Athletic League should be mentioned in parentheses
Done.


### Future development
"several proposals have been floated" - made?
Done.
"cost anywhere from'" - between
Done, but "between tens and hundreds..." epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
"A 2012 proposal from local real estate developer Douglas Durst (who served as the chairman of Friends of Hudson River Park group until late 2012)" - how about A 2012 proposal from local real estate developer and former Friends of Hudson River Park chairman Douglas Durst instead so that it is more concise?
Done.
"A 2014 proposal would demolish and redevelop the St. John's Terminal Building across the street (owned by the Atlas Group) into a residential and retail facility over the course of 10 years" - not so sure whether the mention of the Atlas Group owning the St. Johns Terminal Building is notable unless they proposed the idea
Removed. I also added a red link to the building, because it is notable and pretty prominent, and I am surprised this doesn't have its own article. epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
"but would generate and estimated $100 million in revenue." - typo; should be an
Fixed.


### References
No shouting in the references per MOS:ALLCAPS please
Fixed.
References 1, 4, 16, 23, 24, 31, 35, 39, 43, 45, 46, 59 are dead and require archiving
Just to be sure, I archived all the refs. epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Reference 8 should have the publisher of the source inserted
Fixed.
The work of Reference 24 should be Downtown Express and not The Villager
Fixed.
Reference 56 should feature the publisher not the work of the source since it is not a newspaper citation
Fixed.
The main issues with the article concern the prose in certain areas and the status of some references which are dead but can be archived. On hold. MWright96 (talk) 19:39, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@MWright96: Thank you very much for the expedited review - it was much faster than my 2-week-long GA review, for which I apologize. I have addressed all of the issues above. epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
@Epicgenius: Reference 46 will need replacing since it is a permanently dead link MWright96 (talk) 20:31, 17 February 2020 (UTC)