Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Johnstown Inclined Plane/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 04:07, 19 February 2011 [1].

Johnstown Inclined Plane[edit]

Johnstown Inclined Plane (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 17:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of the three in Pennsylvania, the Johnstown Inclined Plane is the only funicular you can drive on. Built after the flood, it fulfilled its purpose as a escape route for future floods twice—in 1936 and 1977—and is now, primarily, a tourist attraction. I believe the article to satisfy the FA criteria; thanks in part to both Dthomsen8 and Ruhrfisch providing helpful reviews of the article. In the spirit of full disclosure, I am currently a part of the WikiCup, though that isn't the primary reason for nominating the article. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 17:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support As noted above, I peer reviewed this and feel it meets the FA criteria. I made almost all of my comments in the PR (as well as a few fairly minor edits). The only other suggestion I have is to ask if it would be possible to identify the valleys seen in the panorama at the bottom of the article in the panorama caption? From looking at the USGS topographic map, it seems like the Stoney Creek valley is to the right, the Little Conemaugh valley is visible to left of center, and they flow together to form the Conemaugh River, which is on the far left. Very nicely done, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review - the article has six photographs, which are all freely licensed and by Wikipedia editors (two-thirds of the photos are by Niagara). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. As this is a wikicup-related nomination I won't vote yay or nay, but it's the kind of little article that I enjoy, so I will make a few observations:
  • Bethlehem Steel stopped supplying electricity in 1962, after which some work was done on the motors, so who supplies the electricity now?
  • I dunno...presumably the same people who supply electricity to the rest of Johnstown (most likely Penelec). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 19:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... ridership on the incline declined starting in the 20th century". That "incline declined" is rather awkward.
  • "Only one human fatality has occurred at the incline, which was determined to not have been caused by the incline itself." That's rather awkwardly written. The split infinitive ("to not have been") doesn't really work, and the which is relating back to the incline, not to the fatality.
  • "The cars are ... large enough to carry 65 people, 6 motorcycles, or an automobile." That's inherently ambiguous; I guess it means that the cars are large enough to carry 65 people and 6 motorcycles or 65 people and one automobile, but it could equally mean that the cars can carry 65 people and 6 motorcycles or one automobile (i.e., one automobile instead of 65 people and 6 motorcycles).
  • What about something like "65 people plus either 6 motorcycles or one automobile"? Malleus Fatuorum 20:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, now that I look at it, it's actually supposed read "65 people or 6 motorcycles or an automobile." I added "either" so that it now reads "either 65 people, 6 motorcycles, or an automobile", if that's any better. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 22:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Either" doesn't work, as that's a choice between two alternatives, whereas if I understand you correctly there are three alternatives here: people, motorcycles, one automobile. Malleus Fatuorum 23:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Two cars traverse the slope ...". From my skiing days, which I hope are not yet over, I seem to recall that traversing is to run across the slope, not up or down the slope. Is the meaning different in this context? Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malleus Fatuorum 15:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source comments – Did some spot-checking of the sources avaliable online and came up with several pointers.

  • The only close paraphrasing issue I see is that "With the construction of new roads and interstates" is identical in the article and reference 4. Other than that, there were no problems in this regard. Still, that is closer than you would likely want.
  • Reference 7 doesn't appear to contain anything about lighting, the first of two sentences it's supposed to cover. It's possible that I missed it, of course.
  • Reference 22 gives a date that conflicts with the article regarding when the plane re-opened from repairs. It says that the plane re-opened on April 14, while the article says it was closed through the 15th.
  • The Henry Fountain article doesn't say the Knoxville Incline was curved; after discussing its length, it says two different inclines had curves.

On the positive side, source reliability seems to check out okay. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. --PresN 22:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Images File:HistoricPlacesNationalRegisterPlaque.JPG appears to be attributed to the wrong source, File:P_train.svg lack information to verify it is in the public domain, an WP:OTRS ticket would go a long way to solving this. Fasach Nua (talk) 12:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mind you, those are portal link images and if there is indeed an issue with their sourcing here, then it must be an issue elsewhere, and {{Portal/Images/NRHP}} and {{Portal/Images/Trains}} should obviously be changed. It should probably be taken up with the relevant wikiproject, rather than here, as I really don't have control over which images were chosen for their respective portal links. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 14:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not get bogged down in Fasach's P_train crusade here. It's already discussed at another FAC which is the wrong place for it anyway. Fasach has not adequately explained why an OTRS ticket would change anything. - hahnchen 15:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited the file page for File:HistoricPlacesNationalRegisterPlaque.JPG on Commons to make the source clearer - JonahThunder took the photograph, but the plaque itself is the work of the NRHP and so is PD-USGov. I assume this is what Fasach Nua meant by attributed to the wrong source. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Query Interesting read, I made a few tweaks, hope you like them, if not it's a Wiki.... "With the growing popularity of the automobile and subsequent construction of new roads, ridership on the incline diminished starting in the 20th century." could do with greater clarity and perhaps rephrasing. Ideally one would like some more precise dates as to when ridership actually started to fall, and also more detail about the new roads. Is there information available as to how far apart the stations were by road when they were built and today? You've included current pricing which can be contentious per WP:NOPRICES, I think this might be one of the exceptions where pricing is relevant, but if so it would probably help if you could also source the original prices. You might also mention hours of operation - I'm assuming unlike the roads it isn't 24/7? Also is there any chance of a map? ϢereSpielChequers 16:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am happy with any edits that makes the prose read better. I have a source that says the incline was losing $25,000 by 1961; the same source also says it take 10 minutes to drive to the top of hill, but was in the 1967. I agree that this would be exception to NOTPRICES, as long as I didn't list them all out. I am not quite sure what you mean by "source the original prices". I could add the hours of operation, but they seem to change frequently depending on funding levels and time of the year. I could also make a map, but I'm not sure how informative/exciting it would be considering the incline only travels between two places. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:25, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was hoping for a map showing not just the railway but the road alternative, including perhaps the new road mentioned. Rivers and areas affected by the three floods would also be nice. The original prices I meant were those charged when it first opened. If it has different hours for a tourist season and out of season then I think that would be relevant if sourceable. ϢereSpielChequers 00:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that confused me, I wasn't sure I had mentioned the original fare or not. The 1967 source mentions that the fare was a penny in the 1920s. I am not all that familiar with Johnstown area but there appears to be no one road that made the incline obsolete (see Google Maps). Though a map of Johnstown showing the incline, major roads, rivers and floods would, indeed, be a good idea, but perhaps for the city article, instead. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For me the Google image gives a lot of context to the plane as there is no road alternative for quite some distance on either side. If either Millcreek rd or the one on the other side of the slopes hadn't existed earlier I could understand an even stronger need for the plane - so if a map that at least showed the nearest road alternatives was possible I think it would be a useful addition. But the 90 second/ten minute comparison does somewhat cover this, so I'm moving to support either way. ϢereSpielChequers 23:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support for Featured Article status. This article was very good when I did some peer review earlier in the year, and comments during the FA process have made it even better. Perhaps a map would be a reasonable idea, but the coordinates allow me to use Bing or Google maps look at where the incline is, relative to alternative roads and the nearby rivers. --DThomsen8 (talk) 18:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Very well-done! I made one small edit, but didn't find anything else to fix. I think it meets the FA criteria. --Coemgenus 15:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notes
    • WP:NBSP review needed
    • First thing I saw was
      Annual ridership 102,516 (2009)[1] 1.9%
    • in the infobox. First, I had to figure out what the green thingie was. I finally figured out it mean ridership had increased 1.9%, which leads to, "over what period"? When I went to the source, I couldn't find that info, nor can I find it explained in the text. This is the typical problem with infoboxes, as well as sourcing.
      • Have added that into the text plus a source and clarification, however, I presume WP:CALC will apply to the actual source of the percentage. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 21:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why a total of 966 steps? total is redundant. Why "However" they were removed? Stilted-- why not just "But"?
    • WP:OVERLINKing-- sample, gift shop?
    • WP:PUNC review needed, incline to "ride for fun, nostalgia and novelty." for the installation of a new 9,000-pound (4,100 kg) "hoist brake shaft".[23]
  • More review needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Sasata (talk) 00:42, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • 8-foot (2,438 mm) why convert to mm rather than cm?
  • "… the borough of Westmont, which is at an elevation of 1,693.5 feet (516.2 m) above sea level." seems odd to me to give the elevation for a whole borough with such accuracy. If it was one specific spot, ok, but is the whole borough known to be unusually level?
  • "Two cars traverse the slope, as one descends, the other ascends and acts as a counterweight." The first comma should be some other punctuation, like a semicolon or a dash
  • link winch
  • "The earliest example of inclines in the United States" Can we remove"example of" without losing meaning?
  • "Pittsburgh at one time also had "at least 17" inclines; some carrying passengers, others freight; two inclines (like the Nunnery Hill Incline) were curved." punctuation needs to be fixed, shouldn't have consecutive clauses connected by semicolons like this.
  • "On May 31, 1889, the South Fork Dam on the Little Conemaugh River, upstream of Johnstown, collapsed." It's somewhat awkward to have that single word isolated at the end of the sentence.
  • "… being one of the products Cambria Iron specialized in" noun + ing
  • "many of the tools needed in the construction had to handcrafted." ?
    • Not relevant? I can remove it. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, there was a word missing, but it seems to have been fixed now. Sasata (talk) 17:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why was the name changed from Cambria Inclined Plane?
  • "… the Johnstown Inclined Plane opened on June 1, 1891 and had cost $133,296 to build." Why "had" cost?
  • "The convenience the incline provided caused the population of Westmont to grow rapidly and made the borough one the country's first suburbs." Can population growth be linked so unequivocally to the presence of this contraption?
    • Yes, it can. ​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • The second cited source does not claim the population growth was directly a result of the Incline; it states the facts and lets the reader draw the inference for themselves. I do not have the first source, does it make the association so explicitly? Sasata (talk) 17:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Which source is that? The NRHP nomination form links it pretty conclusively (it uses the phrase "directly responsible"). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • No, that source says it was "directly responsible for Westmont becoming one of the nation's first residential suburbs", which is not the same as "The convenience the incline provided caused the population of Westmont to grow rapidly ...". Sasata (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • And the ASME document? It says,"It provided convenient transportation up Yoder Hill, connecting the valley floor to the new residential development of Westmont Borough. The move to higher land was encouraged and grasped with enthusiasm, especially with the trepidation of the Great Flood still fresh in the memories of survivors of the disaster. The construction of the Incline made this move possible." ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 16:27, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Sorry if I seem obtuse, but I don't see how what you have quoted is the same as "The convenience the incline provided caused the population of Westmont to grow rapidly". (italics mine) As written, the text attributes a direct cause-and-effect that the sources don't make. Surely other factors influenced population growth, such as economic conditions, birth/death rates, immigration/emigration, etc. This really only needs a small tweak in the wording to align better with the sources. I guess I have a problem with the word "caused"—something milder like "stimulated" or "encouraged" or similar seems more appropriate. Sasata (talk) 05:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
                • An elegant solution—replaced with "stimulated" (had to reword a bit to get it to make sense). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 18:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Only one human fatality has occurred at the incline, though it was determined that the incident was not caused by the incline itself." Leaves me hanging… so what killed them? And when did it happen?
    • The source doesn't say when, but that it says it "involved a truck". ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I checked the source; it appears to be on pages 3-4, rather than 1-2. Sasata (talk) 17:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Though there were two incidents in the 1920s when horses aboard the incline became spooked and leapt from the car onto the tracks below." This is not a complete sentence.
  • "… the Johnstown Traction Company operated transit buses from Johnstown to Westmont with the "fully loaded public buses" being "carried up and down" the incline." I didn't get the impression from reading about the size that buses would be able to fit in the tram… were they tiny buses?
    • Dunno, how big were '40s and '50s era buses compared contemporary ones? The incline's cars are 15 ft wide, 15 ft tall, 34 feet long, so logical they be slightly smaller than that. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it might be worthwhile to mention in the lead that the ride is 90 seconds; throughout the whole article I was wondering that until the last paragraph informed me.
  • Shouldn't the article mention the stone abutments at the base of the plane (and their height)? Another source I found said that Yoder Hill is about 530 feet above Stonycreek river, so are they are about 28 feet tall? This same source says the weight of each car is 92 tons, which differs somewhat from the articles 22 tons… what gives?
    • Typo? I'd trust the source published by the operator of incline rather than this one, not to mention it doesn't make too much sense considering 92 tons is over half the weight limit of the safety cable. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • about half the sources I've seen on Google Books (many are travel guides, I admit, but one was a National Geographic publication) give an incline of 71.9 degrees, the other half (and the article) give 70.9; is your source authoritative on this?
    • Again, the operator of the incline has 70.9. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Since so many sources give the (presumably) wrong value, a footnote might be useful to mention this. Sasata (talk) 17:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • If I knew the cause of the discrepancy, I would add a footnote, but to say there is mistake and not explain why doesn't seem all that helpful. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • It's not Wikipedia's place to say there was a mistake; rather, it should inform us that numerous sources give a different value than the "official" version given by the incline operator. Sasata (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Understandable, I'll add a footnote noting that 71.9% is also commonly cited as the grade. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 16:27, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does the Guinness Book corroborate the "world's steepest vehicular inclined plane" claim? What's next on the list (and its angle)?
  • Didn't want to mention one of the largest flags of the United States is visible from the top? How about the laser light show?
    • The flag isn't really at the incline, but located in the park across the street. I did not know about the laser show. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The floodwaters continued downstream and eventually reached Pittsburgh. From February 1938 to July 1953, the Johnstown Traction Company operated transit buses from Johnstown to Westmont with the "fully loaded public buses" being "carried up and down" the incline.[9][16]" It seems odd to me to have the two citations for this sentence placed at the end, because it's not easy to verify to whom the quoted parts are attributed. I checked for myself, and confirmed it was the New York Times article. But that left me wondering what was so particular about the wording that it needed to be quoted, instead of being expressed in your own words?
    • Removed the quote "carried up and down", but I'm going to keep the first one, for now. The second citation refers to the actual dates (I could move it to after the comma, but I rarely put citations in the middle of sentences)​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 18:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also from the NYT article, I found that it takes a car 10 minutes to ascend the hill, and thought this would be worthy to include in the article. Also, why not add that it broke even financially for the first time in 1965?
    • Added it as comparision to the incline's travel time. I could add when it broke even, but it doesn't say since when the last time (was it since it opened, since its peak, etc). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 18:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ok, enough nitpicking from me, I think the article meets FAC criteria. I still think it would be good to include the information about stone abutments when you can find a source for it. Sasata (talk) 03:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Johnstown_Inclined_Plane/archive1&oldid=1136096933"