Talk:Trucking industry in the United States/GA2

GA review #2

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   See below

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   See comment in another section...

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   See below

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   See below

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Section 1

• Solitary years should not be linked per MOS:UNLINKYEARS.
• Convert 15 mph to metric using {{convert}}.
• "The years of World War I (1914-1918) had a large impact on truck use and development. " -- kind of a generic, make more specific.
• "The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 began the construction" -- I advise using "authorized", the act didn't actually do anything.
• Check to see if non-breaking spaces exist between numbers and units.
• "romanticized" certainly does not need to be wikified, and that sentence most certainly needs some sort of a reference to an authorized cultural source.
• "By the start of the 80s, the trucking phenomenon had jumped the shark," -- avoid euphemisms, choose different words
• "In the trucking industry, there is an adage: "If you bought it, a truck brought it."" -- Something about that sentence just doesn't seem right. Maybe "The importance of the trucking industry is communicate by the industry adage..."
• "CMVs can be of varying shapes and sizes, everything from 10,000 lb pickup trucks assigned to haul specialized or small quantities of freight, to 20,000 lb straight trucks (box trucks), all the way up to 80,000 lb, 60 ft long 18-wheelers." -- some convert units required, remove the word "everything"

Section 3

• "In the trucking industry, given the limitations on truck weight and size, increased productivity comes from two sources; fewer empty miles and less time waiting between loads. Traditional freight brokers were people who acted as intermediaries to manage the coordination of information and freight, helping independent drivers or companies match loads with available empty trucks. New types of electronic brokers are threatening the future of traditional brokers, by offering increased efficiency and competitive pricing through volume discounts. In shipper-driven brokerage substitution, the internet enables shippers to post loads and solicit competitive bids directly from carriers. The traditional freight broker has no role in this scenario. Instead, shippers function as their own brokers, dealing directly with freight companies." A little buzzwordish (did not pass the "did my eyes glaze over halfway through the paragraph" test). This paragraph requires further discussion.
• The list in the "Exhaust emissions" really should be summarized and turned into a paragraph. The opposite viewpoint should be declared explicitly in that section ("Environmental organizations / scientific community argues that exhaust emissions do such and such...")
• "Drivers are no longer required to find the nearest public phone in order to relay information regarding their load status, it can be done quickly without ever having to leave the truck cab." -- needs to be broken up into 2 sentences, or use a semicolon.
• "According to a report by an industry group, there would be disastrous consequences if truck traffic were completely halted due to a national emergency or disaster. Soon after truck traffic was stopped, there would be significant shortages of necessary supplies across a wide range of commerce and industry. Many hospitals have moved to a just-in-time inventory system, this means that essential basic supplies such as syringes and catheters, are not ordered until the supplies are depleted. Within 24 hours, hospitals across the US would be unable to provide adequate health care. Nursing homes lack warehousing capabilities, and would be unable to feed residents after 24-48 hours. The nation's busiest gas stations require deliveries of fuel several times per day, while the average station receives fuel every 2-3 days. Fuel shortages would begin almost immediately in busy urban areas. Grocery stores would be exhausted of perishable food items within 2-3 days. On average, trucks deliver shipments of chlorine to water treatment facilities every 1-2 weeks, and supplies of clean drinking water would run dry in 2-4 weeks." This whole paragraph needs to be examined to see if it's appropriate for an encyclopedic article.

I have addressed this paragraph - if you have concerns, please let me know. —Rob (talk) 16:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Section 4

• "The idea of shore power was transferred to the trucking industry, and now there are companies such as IdleAire and Shorepower who provide shore power to diesel trucks. IdleAire also provides access to internet, cable television, and land line phone services." Avoid external links in article text.
• "With today's demand for "just in time" freight, shipment by rail cannot meet the rapid and flexible demands of America's modern industry." Triple-sourced but still biased. Rewrite to be less biased.

• Still have issues with this particular sentence. I'll take a look at it. —Rob (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Conclusion

Okay, I've listed my concerns after the first read. It's a long article, so I may have missed a few things, and I may have had problems with things that aren't actually problems. Let me know what you think. —Rob (talk) 19:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I've given it another quick once-over... I'll be hanging around doing some edits, too. —Rob (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Response

Well first of all, let me start by saying I'm glad to see you again. It was a pleasure working with you last time, I couldn't ask for a more thorough reviewer. Looks like this article needs more work than I thought... you make a lot of good points, and to be honest I knew "jump the shark" wouldn't fly, but I tried! In regards to some of the more major concerns...

1. Section 3, the part where your eyes glazed over, I agree it is kind of buzzwordish, I remember was tired when I wrote that part and I didn't work on it as much as I should have. I will fix it!
2. Again in section 3, I'm not sure what you mean by expressing the opposite viewpoint of the exhaust emissions section. Should I provide arguments that exhaust emissions aren't that bad?

• Well, no... just make it explicit who says emissions are bad. If you're trying to express change of something in an article (in this case, exhaust emissions), it's best to define what is taking place first. As it is, in that section, everything I know about exhaust emissions appears to have taken place from June 2006 afterwards, which obviously isn't the case. —Rob (talk) 21:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

1. Also in section 3, you express concern over the "industry shut down scenario." Should I summarize this into one or two sentences or remove it completely? I think it is slightly relevant, but perhaps highly unlikely to ever happen.

• I might just remove it entirely. Comparatively little time should be spent discussing a hypothetical situation. —Rob (talk) 21:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

1. As far as your other points they all seem like legitimate concerns and are mostly minor fixes which hopefully shouldn't take too long. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 20:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Update: I have addressed all of the concerns except the exhaust emissions, which will take a little more time. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 21:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to mention, that I'm not sure converting the list in the exhaust section would be any better conveyed in prose. Unless you want me to remove most of the items and only mention the major points. Also, the issue of trucks being used more than railroads... I don't see how such a statement is biased given the facts. Transportation stats show trucks haul more freight than any other mode by weight, and it is triple sourced... I fail to see how that is biased. Third, I converted the paragraph of the shutdown scenario to remove any mention of "disastrous consequences" to simply making points about how often these places require deliveries. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 03:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll be working on what stands out to me today here... my priority currently would be clearing this off the list. Thanks for your edits! —Rob (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that was quick. I have made the edits. Drop a message if you think the edits are appropriate, or if I've changed something substantial in the article that should not have been changed. Thanks! —Rob (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Very good, even though I protested some of the changes I think it worked out for the better. All the changes were appropriate, and overall I think its readability has improved. Thank you! --ErgoSum88 (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

All right, I'll pass the article then. Thanks! —Rob (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)