User talk:Epicgenius

This is Epicgenius's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83: 7 days

Archives

Archive links by month

Other talk pages:

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 7 days are automatically archived by .

Very important userboxes

MORE

This user has more userboxes.

This user has an alternative account named Accessedgrant.

END

This user has no more userboxes.

Top | Talk (new message) | User page | Contribs | User log

Click here to scroll to the bottom of the page.

dyk

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

Hey, Epicgenius! So here's the thing about dyk: if you haven't created preps, you have no idea what prep-setters and admins at dyk do or what challenges they face. Many editors who are regular nominators and reviewers think they'd be willing to admin, but have never filled preps, and when they become admins and start moving preps to queues, they quickly realize they didn't know what they were volunteering for. A prep-setter doesn't just create a balanced set. They also do a quick re-review on many of the hooks; you get to know whose hooks you don't have to review too heavily, but you always have to at least go check for a recent edit war or tags. If the nominator or the reviewer are new or known to be sloppy, you'll have to do a full re-review of that hook. Often prep-setters have questions they have to ask at the hook, and they deal with pushback from noms/reviewers/passersby for that. Then once you've finished a prep you have to deal with fallout at DYK talk and ERRORS. Admins do the exact same thing -- a re-review, because prep-setters miss things too, then the move (fairly simple), posting questions at DYK talk and pinging involved parties, dealing with pushback from them, and finally any fallout at ERRORS when someone finds an error you missed. So if you think you would be willing to admin at dyk, definitely go fill preps for a while to see if you like it or not. Some people love it -- I did, and I like adminning there -- but not everyone is cut out for it. It's a high-visibility job. People catch your mistakes, and the only way to prevent that is to catch other people's mistakes first. —valereee (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Valereee, thanks for the advice. That is good to know. I think this sort of stuff should be enjoyable for me, even if a bit difficult. I just read the project page on prep areas, and it seems a bit difficult to get a good balance on hooks. epicgenius (talk) 15:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's one of the most fun parts of setting preps. The thing to do for your first prep is pick the bottom empty set (which right now gives you three days to fill it but normally six days.) Count to figure out whether the image hook needs a bio or a non-bio (it alternates by day). Go find one, vet it, and transfer it. That'll let the other prep setters know you'll fill that set. Not that they or an admin won't move stuff in and out if they need it or think another set is better for that hook, but in general one prep-setter works on a set. Then start putting the puzzle together -- no more than four bios (alternating in the set with non-bio), no more than one music/science/military/whatever subject. Not too many from any one country, though 2 - 4 USA hooks will be necessary. A balance of geographical area, not all from English-speaking countries. A balance of long and short. And of course a quirky. It's an art. Don't be afraid to trim or tweak hooks, but read the nom first if you do, as there may have already been discussion. Keep on top of talk in case someone asks a question about one of the hooks in that set, because some people won't realize they need to ping you as the promoter. :) Ping me any time, and Yoninah will often leave pointers on how to improve at your talk. When she stops, you know you're getting near the point of competence. :) —valereee (talk) 15:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 ☎

Subway articles

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

Once again, very impressive work on very important station complex and line articles. There is more to be added about the change in BMT plans re:Canal Street. Eventually, Clark Street Tunnel should be its own article. Also, the citations for IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line are really messed up and include self-published sources like nycsubway.org, and there is more history that could be added. A lot of my older GA nominations should be looked at again for things like this. Also, for Union Square, it is worth mentioning the impromptu 9/11 memorial, and the post-2016 election post-it notes (https://mashable.com/article/power-of-post-it-note-protest-subway-therapy, https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/post-it-notes-left-union-square-election-preserved-article-1.2913344, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/12/19/post-election-subway-therapy-sticky-notes-taken-down-but-not-thrown-out/, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/nyregion/subway-election-therapy-wall-sticky-notes.html). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kew Gardens 613, the pleasure is mine. I do agree that the Clark Street Tunnel should get its own page in the future. I've also noticed that there's a lot more that can be said about the Broadway-Seventh Avenue Line, especially its construction, and will have to work on it gradually. The biggest mess, though, is the Canal Street article - there are a lot of details about the BMT station that are just not mentioned at the moment, and the article in general needs more refs.

As for the Union Square station, the article already mentions both the 9/11 memorial and the post-it wall (the second paragraph of 14th Street–Union Square station#Artwork). I thought one paragraph would be sufficient, seeing as how the artwork was not sanctioned by the MTA but seems to be covered by multiple reliable sources. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree. I missed it somehow. Don't forget the Stantec studies, like the one that found making Clark Street accessible was infeasible, and which provides some sourcing for station layout (i.e. platform length/width). Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It also is probably worth mentioning the 1990 fire in the Clark Street article. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 15:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and can get around to that soon. In the meantime, I was looking at the study for Union Square, which says: This technology does not meet ADA standards, and since there is currently no technology that does, there is no fully accessible solution for the southbound platform. We are including an option for providing elevator service to this platform in this report with the understanding that this will not provide a fully accessible solution at this time. So I suppose this means the southbound platform can get an elevator, it just won't be ADA-accessible because gap fillers, by their very nature, are ADA-inaccessible. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Also, unrelated, but the 1990 Clark Street Tunnel fire was very notable, and there were major reports done on fire safety/communication, etc. in its aftermath. It would warrant an article of its own. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also think the 1990 Clark Street fire should get its own article. (I think the fire happened just east of the Clark Street station, though, not in the tunnel under the river.) In terms of recent NYC Subway disasters, the fire has had at least as much of an impact as the 1991 Union Square derailment or the 1995 Williamsburg Bridge subway collision did. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also-the provisions in the Eastern Parkway Line used for the Clark Street Tunnel connection were initially intended for a line over the Manhattan Bridge. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting. If we can find a reliable source for this, I could add it to the Borough Hall or Eastern Parkway Line articles. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen reliable sources for this-if you cannot find them, I can look for them after I get my final paper for the semester done today. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started a draft Clark Street Tunnel article here: User:Kew Gardens 613/sandbox 7#Clark Street Tunnel. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 14:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this article before? Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kew Gardens 613, I have, but thanks for clipping it. The first part of that source seems to largely duplicate the New York Herald Tribune ref that's already in the Fulton Street station article. But it has some info that isn't mentioned in the NYHT source, specifically the 535-foot length of the station. The second part of the source could be used for the Broad Street station article though. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding work on the article. We really shouldn't be using The Station Reporter as a source. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is stuff to be added about flooding/water intrusion problems at Canal. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 17:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was a report put out. I found two articles I had clipped (https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-new-york-times/98305321/, https://www.newspapers.com/article/times-union/99774843/) Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I've noticed quite a bit of info about how Canal Street's proximity to the old Collect Pond contributed to tons of water problems there. I can add these sources in later. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a paper, not a report. I haven't found it online. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found it. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This journal is a great source for construction details. I found one article with details on underpinning and other aspects of subway construction from 1919, one on sewer siphons, SI transportation, and Columbus Circle construction Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's very interesting. I might have to look through this journal to, um, shore up some architectural articles as well. That Canal Street article was really detailed, and I expect the others will be no different. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also one on train dispatching, the Manhattan Bridge Plaza, and the ENY tunnel Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for spamming here, but also Joralemon, and here, excavation, the Atlantic Av improvement, and Brighton Line improvements Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I will just add all these links to a subsection of User:Epicgenius/sandbox/to do, where we can both track it easily. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Signaling, car design, and ventilation, and IRT track design as well Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is this thorough masterpiece on Dual Contracts construction. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bumping thread for 30 days. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bumping thread for 60 days. Epicgenius (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bumping thread for 360 days. Epicgenius (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC) – Epicgenius (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kew Gardens 613, by the way, we might want to flesh out User:Epicgenius/sandbox/article-draft1, my sandbox on the Manhattan Bridge subway closure. I'm planning to bring the Manhattan Bridge article to GA, which will probably require condensing the Manhattan Bridge#Trackage history section, and the closures are a notable topic that I've been meaning to finish writing about for a while. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:12, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius I have been very busy, but, when I have a chance, will try to get back to this. Amazing work on all the bridge articles. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 13:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 2025-2029 Capital Program recently came out. Some articles may need to be updated to reflect this. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updating the complex articles (since they are all extremely short)

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

1 World Trade Center

Needs history section
Needs design section, which I will write shortly
Needs destruction section
"List of tenants" may need to be split to a separate article due to length
"92nd Floor" section needs removed and incorporated into above "Destruction" section

2 World Trade Center

Needs history section
Needs design section
Needs destruction section
Potentially needs rewrite, after reading it I spotted a few errors

3 World Trade Center

Actually has a history section, but needs expanded
Rewrite Destruction section
May need a "design" section

4 World Trade Center

Has history and destruction sections
Both need expanded
More images needed

5 World Trade Center

Half of the article is about 9/11, meaning half of the article is about 1 day when the structure existed for 31 years
Needs a design section
Either the gallery section needs removed or expanded to comply with MOS, it's currently just 3 images chilling around

6 World Trade Center

7 World Trade Center

Needs architecture section
Needs more history pre-2001
The destruction section may need to be summarized per WP:SUMSTYLE

I added the above subheaders just in case we need a list of things to do. :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 16:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod: Thanks for starting this section. I might move this to User:Epicgenius/sandbox/to do when we're done figuring out what to do (since idk where else to put it). Epicgenius (talk) 16:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Construction of the World Trade Center has some info about the Twin Towers' structural design, so we can copy some of the relevant info into these articles. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FAC mentor

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived until 18:58, 20 February 2026 (UTC).

Hello Epicgenius! Congrats on your recent election. I was wondering if you'd be willing to mentor me on a Featured Article Nomination. Looking over the articles I've created, I think First Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota) may have viability for a nomination - while it is short, I do believe it to be comprehensive of the subject. Please let me know if this is something you'd be willing to do. Thank you! ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 21:13, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Darth Stabro, thanks, I appreciate it. Sure, I can probably take a look within a week. I do have one question, quickly skimming the article - is anything known about the first cathedral's architecture? – Epicgenius (talk) 21:56, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: I think to say it had any architecture other than "fairly simple log cabin" would be a stretch, from what I know (unlike the other log cabin I've written an article about). However, I'm no expert in log cabin architecture. I don't recall seeing anything about that when I wrote the article, though it's been a year now; I imagine I would have included it had I seen anything. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 22:04, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Nonetheless, I would double-check to see if there's any information relating to the chapel's architecture, congregation, clergy, etc. However, as this subject is fairly old and no longer exists, I agree that there may not be much in that regard. Maybe the only thing that's actually missing is some info about how it relates to the second, third, and current cathedrals of Saint Paul. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:10, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will look into it a bit and see if I can find anything. As far as clergy goes, the only clergy who served at it were Lucien Galtier and Augustin Ravoux, mentioned in the article, before it was retired and became a school. Re: your second point, if you'd like it more fleshed out than what's in the second-to-last paragraph of #History, I can certainly do that. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 22:15, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the only clergy who served at it were Lucien Galtier and Augustin Ravoux,
That makes sense, thanks for clarifying. I only skimmed the article, so I missed that. Once I take a closer look at the article later, I'll post other feedback on the talk page. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:17, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

Would you be willing to do a Revdel on this edit? (It's already been deleted.) It seems potentially libelous to me. Thanks for looking into this. BartlebytheScrivener (talk) 23:24, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@BartlebytheScrivener, thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have revdeled the edit. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:27, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and prompt response. BartlebytheScrivener (talk) 03:02, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on moving forward on Wikipedia

Hi Epicgenius; From your previous GAN nominations and reviews for FLW which went fairly well. It occurred to me that you might be a good choice if you have enough strength for possibly considering closing the Page Split discussion on the Trump Talk page which comes up on 30 days over the next day or two. For full disclosure, I'm a participating editor there and cannot do the close myself; and also, that Page Split discussion is a bit fragmented across 3-4 separate threads there since RedRose helped to convert it from its prior RfC format into the current Page Split discussion format. It needed to follow the correct reading of the limits of RfC rules. Possibly you could take a look since you are more experienced at this sort of material than most at Wikipedia for this sort of close. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ErnestKrause, thanks, I appreciate it. Unfortunately, as for closing that particular discussion, I have to decline. I already have a lot on my plate, and recently I haven't had too much time to devote to WP. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:06, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Farnsworth House has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Farnsworth House has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Pencilsforall -- Pencilsforall (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your work on High Bridge (New York City)

Kudos on your work on High Bridge. If it helps, I have an extra copy of Koeppel's book Water for Gotham: A History, which seems to be a small reward for all of your work. Alansohn (talk) 15:36, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Alansohn, thanks, I appreciate it. Thanks for the offer as well. That book might be helpful - I've heard that it has some detail about the bridge's construction. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:44, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A remarkable level of detail about the history and construction of the aqueduct in general and of the bridge in particular, the kind of which would be invaluable to your work. The bridge itself was one of the last things to be built of the system and one of the most contentious. Koeppel goes through all of the political and hydraulic complications that led to the decision to build it as a high arch bridge. Send me an email message if you'd like the copy. You've earned it! Alansohn (talk) 15:59, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Opera Lot for Eastern Airlines Building

Thanks for working on the Rockefeller Center page! The revision that I made was because the empty lot was on the southern block of Rockefeller Center and the AP building is on the northern lot. The sentence that I modified implied that the AP building occupied the lot that was reserved for the Opera. The lot that was reserved for the Opera is where the Eastern Airlines building is now. Hawkinsw2005 (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawkinsw2005, I see, thanks. You're right, I got it mixed up - the opera house was supposed to be at 10 Rockefeller Plaza. I'll self-revert. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:07, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS!! You really are awesome and epic! Hawkinsw2005 (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Hubert H. Humphrey Building

On 22 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hubert H. Humphrey Building, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the legislation to rename the Hubert H. Humphrey Building after U.S. senator Hubert Humphrey was cosponsored by every senator except Humphrey himself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hubert H. Humphrey Building (2nd nomination). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hubert H. Humphrey Building), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

— Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:03, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your split request at History of the Staten Island Railway

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Closure requests#Talk:History of the Staten Island Railway#Article split that you might be interested in. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:41, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Aqueduct Walk has passed

Your good article nomination of the article Aqueduct Walk has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Bneu2013 -- Bneu2013 (talk) 05:42, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Potential FA nomination

Since you have experience with articles about public parks, I thought I'd let you know about something I'll be working on soon. I've had the idea for a few years to promote Bicentennial Capitol Mall State Park to a featured article. My goal now is to promote it so it can appear as Today's Featured Article on its 30th anniversary. This is also part of a larger idea I've had for some time to promote articles in the Tennessee State Capitol complex to GA, and create a good topic. Since I promoted the article to GA almost three years ago, I have acquired a book written by one of the architects of the park, and I think this goal is now feasible. I'll be starting soon, although I have a few other projects I'm working on now that I'd like to finish first. That being said, would you happen to have any suggestions for improving this article. Would you also be interesting in reviewing it when I nominate it for FA candicacy? Bneu2013 (talk) 05:47, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bneu2013, thanks for bringing this up. Sure, I'd be interested in providing feedback. I can take a deeper look later, but at a quick glance:

The Park history section has a few parts that feel like WP:PROSELINE writing (e.g. On X date, Y happened). I would mix up the sentence order a little, and/or provide more details as to the park history, which can mitigate this somewhat.
I'd also recommend expanding the post-opening history. Two paragraphs are given over to planning, and one is given to construction and post-opening; people at FAC may point to this as lacking balance, as a result.
A map of the different features, while not necessary, may be helpful for the Description section.
Bicentennial Capitol Mall State Park, commonly known as Bicentennial Mall, is an urban linear landscaped state park in downtown Nashville, Tennessee - Per MOS:FIRSTLOCATION, it is generally recommended to include the country after the city and state name, for articles about physical structures. I mention this only because an FAC was recently archived after gaining five opposes because someone refused to add "United States" after the state name.

– Epicgenius (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 311 and 313 East 58th Street

On 25 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 311 and 313 East 58th Street, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that two rowhouses survive amid skyscrapers in Midtown Manhattan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/311 and 313 East 58th Street. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 311 and 313 East 58th Street), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 00:02, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]