`  After review I regret very much that I cannot support this as an A-class at present. It's a strong article, well-researched and sourced, with lovely photography. But it falls short for the following reasons:  *No route description section: It would be a few paragraphs long and would give nice background to the reader, helping to give context to the somewhat fragmented presentation of information like trailheads and bridges elsewhere in the article. Just about every other article we have on a linear route of some type (road, hiking trail, etc.) describes what the route is like.And in that context a map of the trail's current route would be helpful. The map lab could make a free, readable one from existing information.  *Too much information: One of the pitfalls of extensively researching a topic for a Wikipedia article is that you put so much effort into doing so that you feel you've got to show your work to justify it. This article gives us a great deal of information about bridge dimensions, construction dates, sale dates, how much (unrounded, yet!) someone owed in back taxes, where companies were located, and so forth. After reading it, my brain hurts.  A lot of it isn't directly relevant to the story of the rail trail.And another effect, which to be fair, I got reamed over for myself once, is that there are a lot of footnotes breaking up the sentences, hampering readability.You've gotta keep the end result in mind when you do research. Example story: back in college, one of my English professors told us once about a research project he'd been part of, a paper on the letters of some of the pre-Raphaelites. One of them made a passing reference to some recent event that sounded like an earthquake (when translated from Italian, their preferred language for correspondence), and he was delegated to find out whether there really had been one, or it was just some poetic flourish (the sort of thing they were known to do). There was nothing in any official records ... well, earthquakes are somewhat rare in Britain and they didn't keep good records since they didn't expect them. He looked through English newspapers archived in the school library from the date in question (consider how most 19th-century newspapers read ... not easy) and found nothing. But just to be sure, he scanned the next few days for any delayed reportage. Instead, he found a batch of letters to the editor from people asking if other people had felt the same tremor. He found these in multiple newspapers, and brought the cites back to his group. The end result was this footnote: ``There was, in fact, an earthquake on that day``.  *The gallery section. Not really in keeping with policy. Per it, most of these, the ones taken by rock nj, can be moved to Commons ... some might even be used to illustrate the route description. Even without them, there are definitely enough there to sustain a Commons category for the rail trail.  I would be glad to write a route description section, move images to Commons, and otherwise help make these improvements. The good news is that the article we want is here—we just need to edit our way down to it. However, if I were to assume a more active role, someone else would have to make the A-class approvals (or, better yet, we could skip that and go straight to FAC). Would that be OK?   `