Talk:Aqueduct Walk

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. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by JustARandomSquid (talk) 10:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Aqueduct Walk

• ... that decades before Aqueduct Walk (pictured) became a New York City park, the poet Edgar Allan Poe frequently walked along its route? Source: Old Croton Aqueduct Walk (PDF) (Report). New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. April 16, 2024. pp. 18-19
  • ALT1: ... that it took eight and a half years to design a bathroom restroom for a New York City park (pictured)? Source: Trager, Cara S. (February 16, 2015). "Lost in green space: Long-promised park improvements still remain undone". Crain's New York Business. Vol. 31, no. 7. p. 3. "After nearly eight and a half years, for example, the design phase of the bathroom on the Aqueduct Walk on Aqueduct Avenue East at 182nd Street was finally completed in January."
  • ALT2: ... that a New York City park (pictured) was built atop an active aqueduct? Source: Old Croton Aqueduct Walk (PDF) (Report). New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. April 16, 2024. p. 5; "Riverdale". Yonkers Statesman. February 21, 1930. p. 4.
  • ALT3: ... that a New York City park (pictured) runs along the city's original aqueduct? Source: Old Croton Aqueduct Walk (PDF) (Report). New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. April 16, 2024. p. 5.
  • ALT4: ... that Aqueduct Walk (pictured) became the Bronx's first New York City scenic landmark exactly 50 years after the city's first such landmark was designated? Source: Moloney, Síle (April 19, 2024). "LPC Designates Aqueduct Walk as Bronx's First Scenic Landmark in Unanimous Vote". Norwood News
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ardfry House
  • Comment: The image is optional.

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 772 past nominations.

Epicgenius (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2026 (UTC).

• I'm not going to formally review this (I have a little bit of a COI, having worked on the map and a little image tweaking), but I do want to suggest that the photo chosen isn't going to be a great image at the MP size. File:NYC Parks Bronx Aqueduct Walk IMG 5076 HLG.jpg (which I've re-uploaded with a tighter crop) is a simpler composition and would work better. RoySmith (talk) 12:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 02:21, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - ?
• Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article was expanded more than fivefold on January 9, nominated within seven days, and has since achieved GA status. Length and sourcing are adequate. The article is neutral in tone and no plagiarism was detected. All of the proposed hooks are interesting. ALT0 states "decades", and the corresponding prose states the Aqueduct Walk became a City Park in 1940, and that Edgar Allan Poe frequently walked along it in the 1840s, which would be nearly a century. Decades is still technically correct, but almost a century might be more accurate. ALT1 uses the word "bathroom", but the corresponding prose uses "restroom". The prose is also inconsistent in usage of bathroom/restroom. More consistency is suggested, since these English language variants might come up at errors. For ALT2, please clarify which sentence in the article supports the hook. In the "Conversion into park" section, the closest wording I find is "since the right-of-way still carried an active water line". For ALT3, which sentence(s) specify that the old Croton Aqueduct was the city's original/first aqueduct? For ALT4, which sentence(s) specify that it was the Bronx's first New York City scenic landmark? All images used in the article have a public domain license on the Commons. Any of the nominated images could be used and would enhance a hook. The QPQ requirement is complete. Overall the article is in good condition with only minor clarifications needed for hooks ALT1, ALT2, ALT3, and ALT4. Tentatively approving ALT0. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 02:36, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Flibirigit, thanks for the review.

• For ALT1, bathroom and restroom are synonymous; I doubt that such a minor deviation would be ERRORS-worthy, but I have made it consistent nonetheless.
• For ALT2, the LPC says that "The public walkway is on top of the Old Croton Aqueduct, an engineering marvel constructed in 1842 which brought the first direct supply of water to New York City. Almost immediately after its completion, the trail of the aqueduct became a beloved open space for New Yorkers. In 1930, it came under the control of the New York City Parks Department, which created and has maintained it as a public park." and that "the Old Croton Aqueduct stayed in service alongside the New Croton Aqueduct until 1955" (p. 5) But I don't know if it verifies that this section of the aqueduct was active until 1955 (it was, but it might be considered synthesis to use the sources for the aqueduct on the park's article).
• For ALT3, "an engineering marvel constructed in 1842 which brought the first direct supply of water to New York City" (p. 5; above). The text in the article is "The aqueduct opened in 1842, supplying fresh water to New York City;[7][8] it was the city's first direct freshwater supply.[6][27]"
• For ALT4, "The Aqueduct walk is the first scenic landmark in the Bronx, and the twelfth scenic landmark citywide. The announcement of the designation of the Aqueduct Walk also marked the 50th anniversary of the designation of Central Park as the first scenic landmark in 1974." The text in the article is "Aqueduct Walk was designated as the Bronx's first official scenic landmark on April 16, 2024, coinciding with the 50th anniversary of Central Park becoming the city's first-ever scenic landmark.[5][27]" Epicgenius (talk) 00:29, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Will continue reading through this tomorrow. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

I hope to complete this by Monday. Life has been very busy. Flibirigit (talk) 15:37, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

No problem. Given that I've been very busy as well, there's no rush. Feel free to take your time. Epicgenius (talk) 15:58, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Will finalize this tomorrow. Sorry, I was away from the computer almost all day. Flibirigit (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Approving ALT0, ALT1, and ALT4. ALT0 was approved as my initial review. ALT1 now has consistentent wording, and verified by the source. I'm still unsure on exactly which sentence(s) in Aqueduct Walk support ALT2, so I cannot approve it. For ALT3, it seems like the reader has to assume "direct freshwater supply" equals an aqueduct, as opposed to a well or an aquifer which can also be direct. Is there a more convincing wording somewhere? I could revisit ALT2 and ALT3 if a clarification is provided. For ALT4, I adjusted the wording in the article to make it more clear exactly which sentence supports the hook. The attached source verifies the claim. The nominated article adheres to all other DYK criteria. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 03:29, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Of the hooks you approved, ALT0 and ALT1 are my favorites, but I would not mind ALT4 either. For the other two, I think we can just strike these, as they were intended as backups in case the other three had issue, Epicgenius (talk) 18:14, 18 February 2026 (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:Aqueduct Walk/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 05:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Bneu2013 (talk · contribs) 01:18, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Starting review. Will have my first comments very soon. Bneu2013 (talk) 01:18, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: - I have posted my first comments. More to follow soon. Bneu2013 (talk) 21:16, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: - I've addressed just about everything. It should be good to go once you fix all remaining issues. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

@Bneu2013: Thanks for the review. I have addressed all of the below. Epicgenius (talk) 15:06, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

I'm going to do the lead last, since I will have had a better chance to read over the article. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

• In the location parameter in the infobox, should "The Bronx" be changed to "West Bronx"?
  • Done. - EG
• I think the sentence "The park also includes basketball courts, a restroom, playgrounds, and a plaza." is satisfactory, but you could add some links here.
  • Done. - EG
• Consider adding a descriptor in front of Gilmore David Clarke, such as "landscape architect". I'm not sure he's well known outside of New York City.
  • Done. - EG

Description

• Another section of the aqueduct's route in Van Cortlandt Park and Westchester County is also used as a trail, the Old Croton Aqueduct State Historic Park. - change to something like "Another section of the aqueduct's route in Van Cortlandt Park and Westchester County is also used as a trail, and is called Old Croton Aqueduct State Historic Park." or "Another section of the aqueduct's route in Van Cortlandt Park and Westchester County, the Old Croton Aqueduct State Historic Park, is also used as a trail."
  • Done. - EG
• Not a requirement, but suggest ordering references 21, 18, and 23 for consistency with the rest of the article.
  • Done. - EG
• Is there an article, such as a neighborhood, that "10468" could link to?
  • Yep, I linked it. - EG
• which runs next to or above the tunnel - just to confirm, this is the embankment, not the retaining walls, right?
  • Yes. I reworded it to clarify that the embankment is specifically above the tunnel. - EG
• Parts of the retaining wall date to 1930–1940, shortly after the park was established, while other parts of the retaining wall date from the original aqueduct's construction in the 1840s - in the preceding sentence "retaining wall" is plural.
  • Fixed. - EG
• Could you be more specific about what the "brick drain" is? Is this a brick plaza that the water from the spray showers drains onto?
  • I've reworded this a bit. Unfortunately, other sources don't mention this brick drain - EG
• Is Morton Place part of Aqueduct walk? The sentence beginning with Near the south end of the park suggests it could be, but the succeeding sentences suggest otherwise.
  • Yes, it is. However, it is not connected to the rest of the walkway. - EG

History

• Does "wells-and-cisterns" need to be hyphenated?
  • Nope, I removed it. - EG
• Again, not a requirement, but suggest flipping refs 50 and 7 for consistency.
  • Done. - EG
• Was the Aqueduct Walk section that opened in 1841 a public park then?
  • No, it did not. The park wasn't formally established until 1930. - EG
    • Okay, I guess that means people started using it as a walkway even though it wasn't officially a public park. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:28, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
• Suggest changing "was passed in May" to "was passed two months later".
  • Done. - EG
• When was the bill approved by the mayor and vetoed by the governor?
  • I've attempted to clarify this, but sources are a bit unclear on the timing of these two events. The sources (even contemporary ones) say only that the state bill was vetoed sometime in 1895. - EG
    • If you can't find it, then leave as-is. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:28, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
• aqueduct's right-of-way in 1929, dividing the right-of-way it into four plots.
  • Done. - EG
• Was the New York City Department of Water Supply, Gas and Electricity the successor agency to the one that built the aqueduct?
  • Yes, it was. - EG
• Add inflation adjustment for $160,200. Also, who was Connors?
  • Fixed both. - EG
• Flip refs 16 and 2.
  • Done. - EG
• Inflation adjustments for remaining pre-21st century dollar figures.
  • Done. - EG
    • Did you forget?
      • @Bneu2013: The inflation figures are placed in the Notes subsection for the sake of readability. I have added another inflation figure that I forgot about. Epicgenius (talk) 05:24, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

  Ok, looks like I missed that. Article looks good, so I will pass. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:34, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

• obtained $307,500 from the U.S. government - what specific agency of the US government?
  • Unfortunately, I could not determine which agency funded the project; the source doesn't say much, and I couldn't find another source. - EG
    • If you can't find it, then no problem. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
• Was Ferrer's claim that one of the park's play areas was rebuilt in 1996 correct?
  • Yes, it was. - EG
• Is The Bronx Times the same as Bronx Times-Reporter?
  • Looks like it (the website domains are the same). Thanks for finding the link. - EG
• Maybe high use despite their "unkempt pockets" would read better as "high use despite its "unkempt pockets""? I haven't read the source.
  • The current wording is correct, since "their" refers to a plural, "several [parks] in New York City". - EG
    • Okay, wasn't sure. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
• Why did the design work for the restrooms take eight and a half years?
  • Sadly, the source does not say, and I couldn't find other sources that provided information about that, either. However, city government projects sometimes do take this long, as they are sometimes stuck in limbo. - EG
    • Makes since. I think it's likely that the project was proposed, then abandoned for some years in favor of other projects, before resuming. That's also common with public infrastructure projects. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
• Oxford comma after "United States Army Air Forces".
  • I added the comma after "veteran". - EG
    • I should have read this more closely. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Civic groups and exhibits

• When was Friends of Aqueduct Walk established and when did they start their activities.
  • Unfortunately, this information is not available on any of the databases I searched. Since it's not a nonprofit, I could not find it on any of the nonprofit lookup sites (e.g. ProPublica). This topic was actually rather difficult to find sources for; in many cases, I could only prove that something existed, not when or why it happened. - EG

References

• Lowercase "THE CITY" in citations 2 and 111, per WP:ALLCAPS.
  • Done. - EG
• Add |via=Google Books to citations 8, 54, 69, 70.
  • Done. - EG
• Add |via=Newspapers.com to citations 13, 55, 58-61, 63-65, 67, 68, 74, 83, 93, 95-98, 100, 101, 108.
  • Done. - EG
• For all articles retrieved through Newspapers.com, ProQuest, etc., make sure page numbers match those of the original publications.
  • I've already done this for ProQuest, and I've now done this for newspapers.com as well. For newspapers.com, the page numbers are generally accurate, except for the Daily News - the scanned page numbers tend to be way off, since the original page numbers are not digitized and they scan multiple editions all at once. - EG
• Add |via=Internet Archive to the McNamara source.
  • Done. - EG

@Epicgenius: - looks like everything's good to go once you finish the pre-21st century inflation adjustments. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:56, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I've addressed the final remaining point (the inflation figures are in footnotes). – Epicgenius (talk) 05:25, 24 January 2026 (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.