![]() | December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment has been listed as one of the
Engineering and technology good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: May 21, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 27 December 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Can we come up with a better title, one that is more user-friendly? Most people in the general public do not know the term "Spuyten Duyvil". Most will try "2013 New York City train derailment" ... or "2013 Metro North train derailment" ... or "2013 Bronx train derailment" ... or some such. Few will know the very specific title of "Spuyten Duyvil". Thoughts? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro ( talk) 21:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Shall I create a new request right now? George Ho ( talk) 20:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Next several days are busy for me; I would cancel other activities if my pix were really valuable. Good thing I'm not trying to make a living as a news photographer. Must get a bigger camera for the occasional long-range work like this. These two are uploaded exactly as the camera made them, and I inserted one. Other retouchers ought to crop, increase contrast, etc and maybe they'll think I inserted the wrong one. I hope to retouch and upload a few more before Sunday's road trip, but they will be even less relevant than these. Jim.henderson ( talk) 00:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
And we might as well get a Commons category set up soon, too. Daniel Case ( talk) 01:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
It seems that ATC was operational on other parts of the Metro-North line, but not at this curve. It would be interesting to know why. This curve seems to be a prime candidate for ATC protection. -- Westwind273 ( talk) 19:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was not moved. -- BDD ( talk) 23:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment → ? – 2013 New York City derailment or December 2013 New York City derailment I prefer. The current title is too specific and NYC-biased. George Ho ( talk) 09:32, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Here's a few photos of the July 2013 freight derailment that took place before this one, just in case anyone is curious. --------- User:DanTD ( talk) 20:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
< http://new.mta.info/news-metro-north-permut-giulietti/2014/01/10/mta-announces-new-president-metro-north-railroad> (Link to MNRR press release on Permut's departure)
I believe that Permut's retirement and departure is significant enough to merit mention, as a result of Metro-North's bad year. I understand if people disagree with me on this. Northeastern292 ( talk) 03:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Northeastern292
Alvar☮ 13:48, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
There was another accident in almost this exact spot on the night of January 13, 1882. The Western Express from Chicago to NYC stopped suddenly because a passenger pulled on the stop cord. The Tarrytown Special, also heading south, couldn't see the stopped train because of the curve of the tracks. The Tarrytown smashed into the last car of the Western Express, which was then pushed into the next car forward. The two cars caught on fire, and despite efforts to quell the flames with river water and snow, eight people died and nineteen people were injured. Webster Wagner, Senator of NYS and inventor of the Wagner Sleeping Car and Wagner Palace Car, was in the last car of the Express. The Senator was burned beyond recognition and was only able to be identified by his pocketwatch and some senatorial papers in his pocket.
http://myinwood.net/the-spuyten-duyvil-railroad-disaster-of-1882/
(Railroad Stories magazine, December 1935)
I only add this because the two accidents seem to have occurred in practically the same exact spot, which I find interesting. Also, further up on the talk page is a note about the Did You Know page, stating that the 2013 accident of the commuter train "caused the first passenger deaths in the railroad's history". Unless this Did You Know sentence only includes the Metro-North Commuter train, it wasn't the railroad's first passenger fatality.
(I've never submitted anything to Wikipedia before, so I hope I've done this right.)
Sosew ( talk) 07:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, there have been some recent developments regarding William Rockefeller, the engineer involved in the crash, so I have been helping to keep the relevant part of the page, "Legal actions", up to date. I welcome constructive help in this regard too. TH1980 ( talk) 23:05, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
@ Daniel Case:Please don't WP:ABF. As for the victim list, sorry for the wrong link, the correct page is WP:Victim lists. To summarize, victim lists clearly show a systematic coverage bias, and adding details about the victims (as a form of WP:MEMORIAL) does not add anything relevant to the article, unless said victims already have an article of their own, in which case it is appropriate to discuss it in both articles (the incident and the victim's page). Is it really relevant that one of the victims was a recent Korean immigrant, or that one was from Montrose, New York? No. The position of the victims, on the other hand, informs as to the violence of the incident.
For example, compare with the recent derailment in Taiwan. We don't have a victim list, yet it does not remove anything from the article. 107.190.33.254 ( talk) 13:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
I can see that you're upset about people including it in the Taiwan crash article. But going around and changing other articles because you're not getting your way on one is, unambiguously IMO, disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, which forfeits a good-faith assumption on my part.
I will nonetheless commend your attention to the discussion that does matter in this instance], in which a proposal to formalize the position of that essay did not find consensus; what did was "that these scenarios should be handled on a case-by-case basis" as I wrote in my edit summary.
If, having read this (which I will assume you did, per WP:BLANKING, if you delete the warning I left on your talk page), you revert again anyway, we will be discussing this at AN/I, or more accurately we will be discussing how you have handled this.
I also wonder why this TekSavvy account from Quebec just pops up in late September, suddenly seeming incredible knowledgeable about policy and insisting that they are a "regular". Are you perhaps someone who got banned/indefblocked before? Daniel Case ( talk) 14:48, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Frankly, I agree with the anon. This victim list is too detailed for an encyclopedia. It reads like a newspaper story profiling the victims that would have been published a day or two after the crash as a follow-up story. Unsurprisingly, that's exactly what the references used for the list are. I think it should be removed as well. oknazevad ( talk) 14:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
3O Response: I'd like to point out that
WP:NOTMEMORIAL/MEMORIAL and
WP:VICTIM both refer to stand-alone articles about victims. They don't have anything to say about lists of victims within an article on a notable subject.
Wikipedia:Victim lists is an essay, not a guideline or policy, and does not appear to be an accurate reflection on such. While essays often give good general editing advice, they may also represent minority opinions and following such advice is entirely optional.
Looking at the needs of this specific article, I don't really see the relevance of the descriptions, one of which had no inline citation. The four fatalities doesn't seem excessive, and if just listing their names it could be done inline. (The side quote boxes are discouraged per
MOS:BLOCKQUOTE for accessibility.) Could say that the fatalities were all adults, rather than specifying ages. I would suggest keeping the Vivian Yee reference in case readers are interested in reading more about the victims. This is a non-binding third opinion. While I hope it is helpful, you have no more obligation to follow it than you do to follow the advice of an essay. –
Reidgreg (
talk) 20:43, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Vami IV ( talk · contribs) 17:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
In reviews I conduct, I may make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use Done,
Fixed,
Added,
Not done,
Doing..., or
Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —
♠Vami
_IV†♠ 17:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
The one other thing I'm wondering is if we could do better than my Inkscape-made map of the accident site (that big black block is supposed to be an "N") ... actually, the question wouldn't be can we do better, it's how. Maybe we could use that mapping technology we didn't have back then (or in the infobox at least), but OTOH it does seem like quite a few other train wreck articles have maps like these showing not only the vicinity but where the cars came to rest. Daniel Case ( talk) 17:21, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Just my experience. Daniel Case ( talk) 00:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
[...] with delays due to reduced speeds and activity in the accident area.Insert an "albeit" before "with".
The next morning, many of the 26,000 who commute to the city via the Hudson Line were tolerant of the inconveniences and detours in stride.Recommend abridging this to "many of the 26,000 commuters going to New York City via the Hudson Line [...]"
"We're living like kings and queens" compared to the grieving families of the dead.Especially rubs me the wrong way. The abundance of weasel words is also undesirable.
Some commuters temporarily switched to buses, or drove themselves.Combine this with whatever becomes of paragraph 3.
In mid-March 2014, the agency released its report to Congress on the results of Deep Dive. Metro-North, it said, had a "deficient safety culture." The FRA identified "three overarching safety concerns:No citation given.
From the train event recorders, it determined [...]Who/what is "it" here?
[...] a New Windsor man who had been on the train filed suit. Eddie Russell [...]Is Russell the New Windsor man?
Rockefeller, who retired on a full disability [...]When did he retire?
[...] sued the MTA for $10 million [...]When?
References are credible. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 18:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Article passes CopyVio scanner. No disambiguation links are present. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 17:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Images are relevant to the article and free/tagged. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 18:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
@
Daniel Case:, @
Dadgeoff:
just edited the article, saying Article incorrectly described Linda Smith as uninjured in one sentence and then said that she was one of the injured in the very next sentence. There were more sources that described her as being injured, and the source on the sentence for her being injured seemed to majorly be about her sister's passing, and the link is currently nonfunctional for verification.
Do you have any idea whether this is the case? I hope you are doing well. Thanks.--
Kew Gardens 613 (
talk) 14:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() | December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment has been listed as one of the
Engineering and technology good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: May 21, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 27 December 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Can we come up with a better title, one that is more user-friendly? Most people in the general public do not know the term "Spuyten Duyvil". Most will try "2013 New York City train derailment" ... or "2013 Metro North train derailment" ... or "2013 Bronx train derailment" ... or some such. Few will know the very specific title of "Spuyten Duyvil". Thoughts? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro ( talk) 21:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Shall I create a new request right now? George Ho ( talk) 20:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Next several days are busy for me; I would cancel other activities if my pix were really valuable. Good thing I'm not trying to make a living as a news photographer. Must get a bigger camera for the occasional long-range work like this. These two are uploaded exactly as the camera made them, and I inserted one. Other retouchers ought to crop, increase contrast, etc and maybe they'll think I inserted the wrong one. I hope to retouch and upload a few more before Sunday's road trip, but they will be even less relevant than these. Jim.henderson ( talk) 00:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
And we might as well get a Commons category set up soon, too. Daniel Case ( talk) 01:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
It seems that ATC was operational on other parts of the Metro-North line, but not at this curve. It would be interesting to know why. This curve seems to be a prime candidate for ATC protection. -- Westwind273 ( talk) 19:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was not moved. -- BDD ( talk) 23:27, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment → ? – 2013 New York City derailment or December 2013 New York City derailment I prefer. The current title is too specific and NYC-biased. George Ho ( talk) 09:32, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Here's a few photos of the July 2013 freight derailment that took place before this one, just in case anyone is curious. --------- User:DanTD ( talk) 20:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
< http://new.mta.info/news-metro-north-permut-giulietti/2014/01/10/mta-announces-new-president-metro-north-railroad> (Link to MNRR press release on Permut's departure)
I believe that Permut's retirement and departure is significant enough to merit mention, as a result of Metro-North's bad year. I understand if people disagree with me on this. Northeastern292 ( talk) 03:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Northeastern292
Alvar☮ 13:48, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
There was another accident in almost this exact spot on the night of January 13, 1882. The Western Express from Chicago to NYC stopped suddenly because a passenger pulled on the stop cord. The Tarrytown Special, also heading south, couldn't see the stopped train because of the curve of the tracks. The Tarrytown smashed into the last car of the Western Express, which was then pushed into the next car forward. The two cars caught on fire, and despite efforts to quell the flames with river water and snow, eight people died and nineteen people were injured. Webster Wagner, Senator of NYS and inventor of the Wagner Sleeping Car and Wagner Palace Car, was in the last car of the Express. The Senator was burned beyond recognition and was only able to be identified by his pocketwatch and some senatorial papers in his pocket.
http://myinwood.net/the-spuyten-duyvil-railroad-disaster-of-1882/
(Railroad Stories magazine, December 1935)
I only add this because the two accidents seem to have occurred in practically the same exact spot, which I find interesting. Also, further up on the talk page is a note about the Did You Know page, stating that the 2013 accident of the commuter train "caused the first passenger deaths in the railroad's history". Unless this Did You Know sentence only includes the Metro-North Commuter train, it wasn't the railroad's first passenger fatality.
(I've never submitted anything to Wikipedia before, so I hope I've done this right.)
Sosew ( talk) 07:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, there have been some recent developments regarding William Rockefeller, the engineer involved in the crash, so I have been helping to keep the relevant part of the page, "Legal actions", up to date. I welcome constructive help in this regard too. TH1980 ( talk) 23:05, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
@ Daniel Case:Please don't WP:ABF. As for the victim list, sorry for the wrong link, the correct page is WP:Victim lists. To summarize, victim lists clearly show a systematic coverage bias, and adding details about the victims (as a form of WP:MEMORIAL) does not add anything relevant to the article, unless said victims already have an article of their own, in which case it is appropriate to discuss it in both articles (the incident and the victim's page). Is it really relevant that one of the victims was a recent Korean immigrant, or that one was from Montrose, New York? No. The position of the victims, on the other hand, informs as to the violence of the incident.
For example, compare with the recent derailment in Taiwan. We don't have a victim list, yet it does not remove anything from the article. 107.190.33.254 ( talk) 13:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
I can see that you're upset about people including it in the Taiwan crash article. But going around and changing other articles because you're not getting your way on one is, unambiguously IMO, disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point, which forfeits a good-faith assumption on my part.
I will nonetheless commend your attention to the discussion that does matter in this instance], in which a proposal to formalize the position of that essay did not find consensus; what did was "that these scenarios should be handled on a case-by-case basis" as I wrote in my edit summary.
If, having read this (which I will assume you did, per WP:BLANKING, if you delete the warning I left on your talk page), you revert again anyway, we will be discussing this at AN/I, or more accurately we will be discussing how you have handled this.
I also wonder why this TekSavvy account from Quebec just pops up in late September, suddenly seeming incredible knowledgeable about policy and insisting that they are a "regular". Are you perhaps someone who got banned/indefblocked before? Daniel Case ( talk) 14:48, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Frankly, I agree with the anon. This victim list is too detailed for an encyclopedia. It reads like a newspaper story profiling the victims that would have been published a day or two after the crash as a follow-up story. Unsurprisingly, that's exactly what the references used for the list are. I think it should be removed as well. oknazevad ( talk) 14:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
3O Response: I'd like to point out that
WP:NOTMEMORIAL/MEMORIAL and
WP:VICTIM both refer to stand-alone articles about victims. They don't have anything to say about lists of victims within an article on a notable subject.
Wikipedia:Victim lists is an essay, not a guideline or policy, and does not appear to be an accurate reflection on such. While essays often give good general editing advice, they may also represent minority opinions and following such advice is entirely optional.
Looking at the needs of this specific article, I don't really see the relevance of the descriptions, one of which had no inline citation. The four fatalities doesn't seem excessive, and if just listing their names it could be done inline. (The side quote boxes are discouraged per
MOS:BLOCKQUOTE for accessibility.) Could say that the fatalities were all adults, rather than specifying ages. I would suggest keeping the Vivian Yee reference in case readers are interested in reading more about the victims. This is a non-binding third opinion. While I hope it is helpful, you have no more obligation to follow it than you do to follow the advice of an essay. –
Reidgreg (
talk) 20:43, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Vami IV ( talk · contribs) 17:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
In reviews I conduct, I may make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use Done,
Fixed,
Added,
Not done,
Doing..., or
Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —
♠Vami
_IV†♠ 17:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
The one other thing I'm wondering is if we could do better than my Inkscape-made map of the accident site (that big black block is supposed to be an "N") ... actually, the question wouldn't be can we do better, it's how. Maybe we could use that mapping technology we didn't have back then (or in the infobox at least), but OTOH it does seem like quite a few other train wreck articles have maps like these showing not only the vicinity but where the cars came to rest. Daniel Case ( talk) 17:21, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Just my experience. Daniel Case ( talk) 00:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
[...] with delays due to reduced speeds and activity in the accident area.Insert an "albeit" before "with".
The next morning, many of the 26,000 who commute to the city via the Hudson Line were tolerant of the inconveniences and detours in stride.Recommend abridging this to "many of the 26,000 commuters going to New York City via the Hudson Line [...]"
"We're living like kings and queens" compared to the grieving families of the dead.Especially rubs me the wrong way. The abundance of weasel words is also undesirable.
Some commuters temporarily switched to buses, or drove themselves.Combine this with whatever becomes of paragraph 3.
In mid-March 2014, the agency released its report to Congress on the results of Deep Dive. Metro-North, it said, had a "deficient safety culture." The FRA identified "three overarching safety concerns:No citation given.
From the train event recorders, it determined [...]Who/what is "it" here?
[...] a New Windsor man who had been on the train filed suit. Eddie Russell [...]Is Russell the New Windsor man?
Rockefeller, who retired on a full disability [...]When did he retire?
[...] sued the MTA for $10 million [...]When?
References are credible. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 18:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Article passes CopyVio scanner. No disambiguation links are present. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 17:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Images are relevant to the article and free/tagged. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 18:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
@
Daniel Case:, @
Dadgeoff:
just edited the article, saying Article incorrectly described Linda Smith as uninjured in one sentence and then said that she was one of the injured in the very next sentence. There were more sources that described her as being injured, and the source on the sentence for her being injured seemed to majorly be about her sister's passing, and the link is currently nonfunctional for verification.
Do you have any idea whether this is the case? I hope you are doing well. Thanks.--
Kew Gardens 613 (
talk) 14:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)