Gowanus Canal is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
	Gowanus Canal has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 19, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted September 14, 2005 Good article nominee Listed July 10, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept January 9, 2017 Good article reassessment Delisted July 1, 2018 Good article nominee Listed A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 24, 2018. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that New York City's Gowanus Canal is so heavily polluted that Enterococcus, which is found in human fecal matter, has been detected at more than 100 times above safe levels? Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

New York City Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Superfund Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Superfund (assessed as Mid-importance). Rivers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Transport: Maritime This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Maritime task force. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 17, 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This article nearly made it to featured on its submit to FAC; I think a few relatively small improvements could ensure an easy and successful resubmit.

• The purview of this article should be a little clearer; exactly how far should it go beyond the canal to cover the surrounding neighborhood?

As it stands now, the article addresses not only the canal itself, but also the industry and community around it. I think the latter is just as interesting, if not more.

• Association with the mob and body dumping- is it real or just urban legend? (but even urban legend deserves to be covered)

I added some references to books and documentaries that expand on this a little bit more. This is one of those things that most likely did happen, but is perpetuated as an "urban legend" today.

• Modern community development- the "cruises", the Canoe Dredgers, artists etc. (I'd also like to have more on that funeral director's ideas)

I added links to the Gowanus Canoe Dredgers, the Urban Divers, and Gowanus Artists, as well as mentioned them in the article. --Howrealisreal 21:37, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about references to the Canal in pop culture, etc? For example, They Might Be Giants references it in their Venue Song "Brooklyn" singing, "Let's celebrate Brooklyn now, even the Gowanus Canal."72.130.21.164 23:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Waterfront infrastructure context- piers, Erie Basin and Atlantic Basin (I'll be submitting a new short article on Atlantic Basin soon.)
• The introduction should probably be somewhat longer; this would also solve the problem of the canal crossings image.
• I've heard that the canal once acting as a definite border between the Irish and Italian neighborhoods; how else has it acted as a border rather than a means of connection?
• barge activity - I think the last vestige has been regular semi-weekly oil shipments in recent years

These are just some semi-random ideas; what do others think?--Pharos 21:23, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article could be greatly improved if the lede mentioned its length and width at its widest point.Frank Lynch (talk) 18:55, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The Gowanus Canal Legend question and answers see http://brooklyn.about.com/od/historicbrooklyn/tp/Gowanus-Canal-Truth-Or-Fiction-That-Bodies-Were-Dumped-Here.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.72.154 (talk) 18:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I bicycled over the canal this afternoon on the 9th Street bridge, on my way from Flatbush to the Columbia Street Pier and Plymouth Church. Oil refinery? I don't recall seeing one anywhere in NYC, much less one between Sunset Park and Red Hook. There's an oil terminal or two, if not on the canal then less than a mile to the southwest, but they just pump fuel out of barges and pump it into trucks. There's no fractionating column, catalytic reactor or other sign of a refinery. Jim.henderson 01:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. LuciferMorgan 02:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As best I could I revised to use in-line citations. --Howrealisreal 21:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice the reference to oil refineries has disappeared, but the article still has a link to gas meaning gasoline. Isn't this improbable in a place that never had regular freight rail service? Bayonne makes gasoline, or formerly made it, but Bayonne has rail freight. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jim.henderson (talk • contribs) 04:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Must mean the three manufactured gas plants (syngas) that were on the Gowanus. The Metropolitan Gas Light Company site is the current Lowe's and Pathmark. The Citizen Works parcel is the "Public Place" site (between Huntington, Smith, 4th Street, and the canal); a housing development has been proposed for this space. The Fulton Municipal Gas Company site is the Thomas Greene Park and playground. These are pretty much brownfields now and there's debate about the past and ongoing remediation efforts. [1][2]--Howrealisreal 23:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Gowanus Canal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment. This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I do however have some general comments and two specific points to go with them (See below). Firstly, some quite large sections of this article are very sparsely sourced and should have a lot more. Secondly, most of the web sources are improperly cited (see citations section below). Thirdly, parts of this article assume a familiarity with Brooklyn that a lot of readers don't have. Consider rephrasing and explaining a bit more.

• "The canal was also the first site where chemical fertilizers were manufactured." - worldwide? In America? In New York? where?
• I have added a ^{[citation needed]} tag to the article concerning the mafia association. This should be quite simple to sort out.

The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 14:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

The internet inline citations used in this article are improperly formatted. Internet citations require at the very least information on the title, publisher and last access date of any webpages used. If the source is a news article then the date of publication and the author are also important. This information is useful because it allows a reader to a) rapidly identify a source's origin b) ascertain the reliability of that source and c) find other copies of the source should the website that hosts it become unavaliable for any reason. It may also in some circumstances aid in determining the existance or status of potential copyright infringments. Finally, it looks much tidier, making the article appear more professional. There are various ways in which this information can be represented in the citation, listed at length at Wikipedia:Citing sources. The simplest way of doing this is in the following format:

<ref>((cite web|(insert URL)|title=|publisher=|work=|date=|author=|accessdate=))</ref>

As an example:

• <ref>((cite web|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/3859|title=Avoiding a Thirty Years War|publisher=www.discovery.org|work=[[The Washington Post]]|date=2006-12-21|author=Richard W. Rahn|accessdate=2008-05-25))</ref>

which looks like:

• Richard W. Rahn (2006-12-21). "Avoiding a Thirty Years War". The Washington Post. www.discovery.org. Retrieved 2008-05-25.

If any information is unknown then simply omit it, but title, publisher and last access dates are always required. I strongly recommend that all internet inline references in this article be formatted. If you have any further questions please contact me and as mentioned above, more information on this issue can be found at Wikipedia:Citing sources. Regards

((geodata-check))

Please note that the coordinates in this article need fixing as 40° 40′ 22.8″ S, 106° 0′ 10.8″ E is in the ocean W/SW of Australia, not New York City

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.212.215 (talk • contribs)

Coordinates in the article are currently at 40°40′23″N 73°59′49″W / 40.673°N 73.997°W / 40.673; -73.997. This is in New York.

40° 40′ 22.8″ S, 106° 0′ 10.8″ E are the Antipodes, you must have clicked on that link on the geohack page. -- User:Docu

Aww ... someone took out the sentence about groups trying to develop the Gowanus into a Venice of New York and that it was led by a funeral director. It was colorful and (knowing NYC's notorious real estate mongers) might even be partly true. Angry bee (talk) 04:33, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i'll try to update the article, but at leas wanted to get this noted.

NytImes ran an article on upcoming improvements to the Flushing Tunnel and the pump system that have the potential to further increase water quality. Link here:

NY times 2011-02-23 Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.162.118 (talk) 06:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is an franco-german film about this part of the harbour:

• Claudia Müller, Claudia Steinberg (Dir.): New York - Stadt am Wasser. De, 2012, 44 Min

Look at the mediathek: Info des produz. Senders arte.tv, 2015 jan. --Asdfj2 (talk) 17:30, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gowanus Canal

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delist It is not really the purpose of this process to reassess old good articles that the nominator still thinks meet the criteria. The criteria have not changed that much since 2008 and we barely have the volunteer power to assess current ones. Still it is here and has been commented on by editors so we may as well follow though with the reassessment. Unfortunately this must be delisted at this point. There are currently 5 citation needed tags and all are to statements that fall under the 2b criteria. These have been present since the review started and have not been address (the article itself has had only one edit in the last month). AIRcorn (talk) 06:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating the article about Gowanus Canal for Good Article criteria again. The last time it was reviewed was in 2008, wherein it passed the criteria. The article has changed significantly since then. Thus, it should be updated to the 2017 Good Article standards, which is why I am requesting a community assessment. Just to clarify, I want this page's Good Article status to be kept. epicgenius (talk) 00:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Has a copyvio with this site, whole paragraph copied: http://www.gowanuscanal.org/history.html Kees08 (talk) 07:09, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also with this site: nytimes.com/2013/09/27/nyregion/as-cleanup-plan-is-set-for-gowanus-canal-violations-continue.html

I am placing the Good Article tools template here so I can more easily see what the possible issues with this article might be. Shearonink (talk) 06:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that didn't work - I'll have to create the tools another way. Shearonink (talk) 06:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I ran the Checklinks tool on the refs. Some of the refs are no longer valid or aren't completely correct: please see Checklinks. I also ran the copyvio tool. I agree with Kees08, there is a copyright violation with a 2013 New York Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/27/nyregion/as-cleanup-plan-is-set-for-gowanus-canal-violations-continue.html where almost all of a single paragraph is reproduced within the WP article. I did a simple search of the paragraph that appears in the New York Times article:

They are mostly companies and a few government entities like the City of New York and the United States Navy, for ship work that polluted the canal. Many of the original businesses that once operated side by side along the canal have since merged, changed names or moved away, including Brooklyn Union Gas, which eventually rolled into National Grid; Continental Oil; and Standard Oil. When companies have been sold or merged, the successor company as well as the current property owner assume the liability. Companies that produced or transported the hazardous substances are also considered responsible.

The paragraph did not appear in the Wikipedia Gowanus Canal article until after the New York Times published its piece in 2013. (and, yes I did go back and manually check by date)

...like the City of New York and the United States Navy, for ship work that polluted the canal. Many of the original businesses that once operated alongside the canal have since merged, changed names or moved away, including Brooklyn Union Gas, which eventually became a part of National Grid, Continental Oil and Standard Oil. When companies have been sold or merged, the successor company as well as the current property owner assume the liability. Companies that produced or transported the hazardous substances are also considered responsible.

Since the source is clearly-given as the New York Times it would appear to me that the writer-editor neglected to put the New York Times story into their own words rather than running afoul of any copyright issues - I mean, they didn't try to conceal the text appearing in both articles. As Kees08 states above, there is also another issue with the gowanuscanal history website, but in my experience with these types of cases it is usually a case of the other site copying from WP without attribution. Someone who has more technical expertise than myself will have to see which came first, the WP article or the Gowanus Canal History site. In the case of the NY Times article, the apparently plagiarized text has got to go - adjusted, deleted or whatever. It cannot stay in this article - if it does, the article fails #2D of the WP:GA criteria. Shearonink (talk) 07:32, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I admit I am unfamiliar with the usage of the External media template, which places external links within the main article text. It does trouble me that the Lavender Lake link is to the full Alison Prete documentary (can we do that in WP? - link to a full movie?) and the 2 TEDxGowanus links are also to 2 full TED talks, while the other is to a proposed usage of the Canal. I am uncertain as to what exactly these links provide that is not already in the article. I am also concerned that directly linking to the 2 TEDx talks on YouTube - where outside ads appear - creates a somewhat iffy link to outside commercial interests, when the Links appear within the main article text. The Alison Prete documentary is hosted on Vimeo and contains no ads. I am not sure but I do not think it would be as much of an issue if the links were presented within the External links section at the end of the article. Shearonink (talk) 07:32, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Shearonink: Thank you for the feedback. I will need to fix the links and the copyvio tomorrow. Maybe that "copyvio" could be a failed paraphrase... but in any case, I need to reword. I'll also work on the external ted talks. epicgenius (talk) 03:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    My thanks also to Kees08. epicgenius (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Shearonink: Thanks for the question on the External Media template. This is one of those things that goes way, way back on Wikipedia, and IMHO is grossly underused. If Wikipedia is to use video, which is a pervasive modern form of communication, often the only alternative is to use this template. Some basics:

• WP:External links specifically mentions the external media template (see footnote 2) and exempts it from the usual restriction that ex links have to be in the ex links section. The template itself says that it should be used in the body of the text, where the media would be used if there were not copyright restrictions keeping it off of Commons.
• WP:EL also gives as What can normally be linked

"3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues" and length or other reasons.

• WP:Video links (an explanatory supplement) also address this and the file size as well

"Because the Commons and Metawiki have a 100MB limit on files some files are added to YouTube for use in Wikipedia that are gathered from United States government sources such as the National Archives by WikiProject FedFlix or other projects. These files can be used on Wikipedia articles if available. ... ((External media)) can be used within the body of an article when media is necessary but not available through free or fair-use rules."

The key restrictions that are on the use of this template are that

• We're not linking to a video that is violating copyright laws
• It's not an advert, promotional. It should be reasonably neutral.

I think these videos all qualify.

Last, we have to say "What does this add to the article?"

IMHO - a huge amount. Most of us don't see sites like this and a simple photo is sorely lacking when we can see the site from multiple angles, at different times of the day, with different affected people explaining their views. If a picture is worth a thousand words, any one of these videos is worth a million.

BTW TEDx talks are a pretty common use of this templet. Imagine seeing a simple photo, then add on a 1 minute voice recording. That tells you a lot about the person. Now compare that to a video showing them walk, talk, and maybe even chew gum for 15 minutes, propounding on a topic that they are passionate about, and which they a considered an expert on. No contest is there?

Hope this helps.

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 20:27, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gowanus Canal. 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/20061108111448/http://www.global-habitat.net/ to http://www.global-habitat.net/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

“What a piece of work is Man, How noble in style! How like a god, or an angel....” And how abject is the ungrammatical mess a colleague left behind as the foundational sentence of the article. I’ don’ matter none, whether its creator was the first, or a later, editor of the article, bcz it’s terminally ambiguous in syntax. Nor does matter how long it’s festered here. A tireless editor has come across it. Either of us may breath its last before the other, but the strugqgle is worthy of the candel that ‘twill take.
--JerzyA (talk) 22:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/framework-for-gowanus-canal-consolidates-years-of-visions?utm_source=Next+City+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a836de59f9-Issue_273&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fcee5bf7a0-a836de59f9-43969129

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Gowanus Canal. 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/20170110020116/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160801/gowanus/gowanus-rezoning-on-table-again-as-city-launches-planning-study to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160801/gowanus/gowanus-rezoning-on-table-again-as-city-launches-planning-study
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20171026053948/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20171025/gowanus/gowanus-canal-superfund-cleanup to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20171025/gowanus/gowanus-canal-superfund-cleanup
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170104235911/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20150416/gowanus/city-building-90-curbside-gardens-help-clean-gowanus-canal to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20150416/gowanus/city-building-90-curbside-gardens-help-clean-gowanus-canal
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170106173230/https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160229/gowanus/52-million-project-reduce-gowanus-flooding-begin-soon to https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160229/gowanus/52-million-project-reduce-gowanus-flooding-begin-soon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161027164606/http://gothamist.com/2013/10/13/photos_my_canoe_ride_on_the_toxic_g.php to http://gothamist.com/2013/10/13/photos_my_canoe_ride_on_the_toxic_g.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151223123327/http://gothamist.com/2007/04/19/brooklyns_sludg.php to http://gothamist.com/2007/04/19/brooklyns_sludg.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 04:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gowanus Canal/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ceranthor (talk · contribs) 20:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this in the next few days. ceranthor 20:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceranthor: Thank you for taking up the review. Have you been able to look through the article yet? epicgenius (talk) 21:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Yes, sorry for the delay. I will post my comments shortly. ceranthor 16:26, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

• "It continues to be used for incidental movement of goods and daily navigation of small boats, tugs and barges." - what does incidental mean here?
  • I changed to "occasional". epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "Despite the heavy pollution, its proximity to Manhattan and upper-class Brooklyn neighborhoods is attracting concerted waterfront redevelopment along the Canal" - I'd rewrite as "the Canal's proximity"[...] is attracting concerted waterfront redevelopment"
  • Done.

Course

• "The Gowanus Canal begins at Butler Street." - which is where?
  • Clarified.
• "The pump station at 201-234 Butler Street," - what's a pump station?
  • A sewage pumping station.
• "There is a very short tributary to the east" - cut the word "very"
  • Done.

History

• "built and operated the first tide-water gristmill patented in New York at Gowanus on land patented on July 8, 1645" - very wordy, and need to cut the use of the word "patented" twice in such close proximity
  • Fixed. The second "patented" should be "deeded". epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "negative artificial selection slowly reduced the size of the bivalves.[21]" - might help to explain how negative selection acted, just by briefly but clearly clarifying for the lay reader unfamiliar with evolutionary theory
  • Done.
• "The valley's watershed is approximately six miles square" - needs a convert
  • Done.
• "Industries, which needed water for processing, transport, and disposal of wastes, tended to locate along the shoreline.[22]" - tended to locate? should be "were usually located" or something along those lines
  • I replaced it with "clustered".
• "the industrial sector around the canal grew substantially over time to include stone and coal yards; flour mills; cement works, and manufactured gas plants; tanneries, factories for paint, ink, and soap; machine shops; chemical plants; and sulfur producers, all of which emitted substantial water and airborne pollutants.[29][16] " - switch refs 16 and 29
• "The area the sewer ran through was known as "The Flooded District".[38][32] " - same note as above; switch the order of the refs
• "Compounding the problem, area property owners sued the city for damages related to the flooding issues that plagued the canal.[38][32]" -same note
• "During the 1900s, up to 700 structures were built in South Brooklyn every year.[15] " - just the first decade, or throughout the entire century?
  • First decade. I thought that was obvious from context, but apparently not. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "which provoked the installation of a flushing tunnel that was 12 feet (3.7 m) across.[44][29]:4 (PDF p. 7) The Butler Street Pumping Station, a Beaux-Arts structure at the canal's inland end, opened on June 21, 1911.[45][1]:167 The new flushing tunnel connected to the Pumping Station.[44][1]:168" - bunch of instances where the sources need to be switched in order
  • I have done all of the switching. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental cleanup

• "The next year a sewage pipe was installed within the Flushing Tunnel, but according to a New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP) engineer, it failed "almost immediately" due to bad installation" - perhaps a direct citation after a direct quote?
  • Done. The citation was given at the end of the next sentence, but I duplicated the citation after the quote anyway. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "The plan is to cost $506 million and should be completed by 2022. The plan divides the canal into three segments. The upper segment runs from the top of the canal to 3rd Street. The middle segment runs from 3rd Street to just south of the Hamilton Avenue Bridge. The lower segment runs from the Hamilton Avenue Bridge to the mouth of the canal. The plan entails removing contaminated sediment from the bottom of canal by dredging, capping the dredged areas and implementing controls on combined sewer overflows to prevent future contamination. It also involves excavating and restoring approximately 475 feet (145 m) of the former 1st Street Basin and 25 feet (7.6 m) of the former 5th Street Basin.[69]" - this needs more varied sentence structure
  • I combined the four sentences about the separate sentences into one, and also fixed the tense. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "The first step in the plans is dredging, scheduled to begin in 2016. The second is to lay down one of two different proposed "caps". One cap over the still-polluted canal bed would be made of concrete. The second would have a layer of clay to absorb pollutants, then a layer of sand to act as a buffer, and finally a layer of rocks to anchor that floor.[71] " - more varied sentence structure
  • I combined the two final sentences. The last sentence is repeated further on, so I eliminated some extra words. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "Work on the cleanup process began in October 2017.[75][76]" - combine with the previous paragraph
  • Done.
• "The EPA will remove approximately 307,000 cubic yards of highly contaminated sediment from the upper and middle segments and 281,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment from the lower segment." - conversions?
  • Done.
• "among over 30 companies" - more than, not over
  • Done.

Redevelopment

• looks good.

Current usage

• "over 1,000 people " - more than, not over
• "logging over 2,000 trips on the canal." - same as above
  • Did both of the above.
• "The NY Harbor report for that same year showed the Gowanus to have the highest level of pathogens in the entire harbor.[102]" - this comes abruptly following the previous sentence
  • I moved it below, to the "Scientific measurements" section. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "In November 2006, HABITATS, a festival dedicated to "local action as global wisdom", celebrated the Gowanus Canal with environmental conferences, collaborative art, educational programs and interactive walks around the area.[104]

The canal has been the home to various arts organizations. Issue Project Room once organized art events in a converted silo along the bank of the canal.[105] The Yard, an outdoor concert space, opened in the summer of 2007 near the Carroll Street bridge.[106]" - these can be combined into one paragraph

• • I did that, plus updated the info about the Yard. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• "Due to inclement weather, he postponed his swim." - why is this mentioned at the end? also, not sure it's entirely worth mentioning
  • Removed.

Water quality

• " iridescent sheen suggestive of oil, PCBs, coal tar and other industrial wastes." - forgot the serial comma after coal tar
• "Photographers, including Steven Hirsch, have captured artistic images of the canal.[115]" - who is Steven Hirsch? why do we care?
  • Removed.
• cement, oil, mercury, lead, multiple volatile organic compounds, PCBs, coal tar, and other contaminants. - the articles linked here should be linked at their first mention rather than here
  • Done.
• "It had kidney stones, gastric ulcers and parasites." - need a serial comma
  • Done, and I fixed a bunch of other serial commas as well. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Popular culture

• Looks good.

This is in good shape. Once these are fixed, I can post my reference comments. ceranthor 17:19, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

epicgenius, not sure if you saw, but I've posted some starting comments. ceranthor 14:45, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceranthor: I was away for all of yesterday, and so I just saw these comments now. Thanks for the comments, I'll address them soon. epicgenius (talk) 16:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceranthor: I have addressed all the comments above. epicgenius (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Passing it now. ceranthor 22:46, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: This article is really well done. It should be a Featured Article! Yoninah (talk) 21:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: Thanks. I can't do it now, because I'm going to be busy until September, but I'll probably think about nominating it as soon as I can afterward. epicgenius (talk) 23:53, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Congratulations on doing such a great job and sticking with it to get it to GA! Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 00:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mary Mark Ockerbloom: Thanks! I thought your expansions of the article last year were good, too. It probably wouldn't have been able to reach GA without these additions. epicgenius (talk) 01:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate the effort put into this section, I just removed it from this page. It is a pretty long list of deaths, suicide attempts, and other incidents in the canal (and this only spans 1882-1921!). Per WP:NOTTRIVIA, we really shouldn't be including this list of incidents here, and we don't need to list each and every single person who jumped in the canal, or drowned, or was rescued. It tends to attract unnecessary trivia and many of these news articles are short one-sentence mentions.

Below are the list entries that I removed. Feel free to discuss each incident on a case by case basis; if it's notable, it can be restored. epicgenius (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of incidents that were removed

• 1882 at an ungiven date a woman is reported to have unsuccessfully tried to commit suicide by jumping into the Gowanus Canal; ^[1]
• May 10,1892 Canal boat "Alpha" sunk in canal with a cargo of coal.^[2]
• July 24, 1900 a man is rescued after he tried to commit suicide by jumping into the canal.^[3]
• December 31, 1903: a dredge found sunk in canal; an unnamed engineer/nightwatchman missing and believed drowned on board^[4]
• December 2,1904 unknown John Doe found dead in canal ^[5]
• February 8. 1905 a Policeman rescues a man who had fallen into the canal. ^[6]
• December 19,1908 Missing man from New Jersey found dead in canal^[7]
• December 9 1920 NYPD Officer Daniel Grennan accidentally drowned in the canal^[8]
• July 25, 1921 car accidentally drove into the canal; car and two deceased occupants recovered^[9]
• Feb 14, 1983 a former basketball player/taxi driver dies after accidently driving into Gowanus Canal^[10]

I reverted this edit that was made today. On the whole, this entire edit needs discussion because it is trying to cram many major changes into a single edit. Since this is a good article, i think any major rearrangement of the article should be discussed here first.

Here are my objections in particular:

• The proposed lead is too detailed and yet it fails to cover many of the major aspects of the article.
  • There are six lead paragraphs, yet the first lead paragraph is only one sentence about its geographical location. The text Once a vital cargo transportation hub, the canal has seen decreasing use since the mid-20th century, parallel with the decline of domestic waterborne shipping. It continues to be used for occasional movement of goods and daily navigation of small boats, tugs and barges. - this provides vital context to the rest of the article - has been removed.
  • The lead contains excessive detail about the history, with numerous syntax/grammatical errors. For instance, In 1848, the Brooklyn Common Council issues an engineering report in conjunction with plans by Daniel Richards for the drainage of 1700 acres of land between Brooklyn’s Court-Street and the Fifth-Avenue, Warren-Street and Gowanus Bay. The plan authorized construction for a 100 foot wide, 1.5 mile long canal, with the banks of the canal set at 4-feet above high water level with a canal depth of 5-feet below low water mark. In this way the upland “meadows will gradually become more firm”. The goal of the development scheme was to have an engineered drainage basin which would allow for building on the upland meadows and provide a navigable water way which would serve as the end of the New York State Erie canal transportation route. If this text is included at all, it should really be included in the "History" section. At most, the lead would have one section.
  • There are four paragraphs, out of six, devoted to history. I don't think this is an appropriate representation as it gives undue weight to the history of the canal.
• The references in the body sections are being removed and replaced with direct external links, in violation of Wikipedia:External links. Example: By the 1990s, it was recognized as one of the most polluted bodies of water in the United States. And after of century of local community activism calling for the cleanup of the canal, in 2009, New York State invited the federal EPA in to assess the situation. With overwhelming community support, the EPA designated the Gowanus Canal a Superfund site in 2010. In 2013 the EPA issues a Record of Decision, a court order which delineates what the polluting parties must do to remediate the situation. Again, this has a lot of tense problems.
• I am concerned that the editor in question, FROGGowanus, may have a conflict of interest. The following text was added: Following the conclusion of the DEP USA Project study, a group of stakeholders formed an activist civic organization, Friends & Residents of Greater Gowanus (FROGG). In 2006 FROGG, acting in conjunction with Community Board 6, submitted a grant application to New York State for Brownfield cleanup planning grant for "Gowanus Canal Corridor AQUATIC BROWNFIELD & UPLAND BROWNFIELD AREA".
• I think the removal of the text about EPA cuts in 2017 needs to be discussed. There was no discussion of the removal of sourced content in here. epicgenius (talk) 15:50, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: Thanks for the thoughtful post. I'm inclined to agree with you. About the direct external links, you're right, but that's not a big deal, in the sense that it's easy to fix. About the other stuff, yes, changes of this magnitude should be discussed here first. @FROGGowanus: Hello. I see that Epicgenius has already posted on your user talk page about conflict of interest. Such editing by involved parties is allowed, but generally discouraged. The "conflict" is that if you have a stake in the subject matter -- a dog in the fight, so to speak -- then it's harder to make changes to the article that are neutral and objective, which is the goal on Wikipedia. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 00:08, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]