Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hillsgrove Covered Bridge

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 User:SandyGeorgia 18:12, 13 September 2008 [1].

Hillsgrove Covered Bridge[edit]

Nominator(s): Ruhrfisch ><>°°


Hillsgrove Covered Bridge has had a very helpful peer review (thanks to Dincher and Brianboulton) whose suggestions for improvement have all been addressed. I believe this article, which follows the FA models of Cogan House Covered Bridge and Forksville Covered Bridge, meets all of the Featured Article criteria. This is a self-nomination in that I have made most of the edits to the article, but I have sought feedback from many and have received positive comments. This is a quite interesting bridge and I hope the article does it justice. Thanks for any feedback, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support another excellent article about a hidden corner of Pennsylvania. Dincher (talk) 00:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words, peer review, and support, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because Ruhr hasn't answered the questions. :) Images are all free, author and source and licenses present and proper; image criterion passed. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for the image check - as noted elsewhere I am a bit uncomfortable answering the questions as I thought the focus would be more on PR than me, but I will try to do better soon, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have answered the questions - it was an actionable request at FAC after all ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC) from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs):[reply]

  • "Despite these restorations, as of 2006 the National Bridge Inventory found it to be "Functionally Obsolete", with problem foundations and railings, and only a 16.5 percent structural sufficiency rating." I find only to be a rather POV word.
  • "March 14 1847," Comma after 14.
    • Thanks, but someone else has already fixed this, perhaps Tony who fixed some date links I had missed before (thanks Tony!) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The village of Hillsgrove is where the first settler in what is now Sullivan County, Daniel Ogden, built a cabin circa 1786." This sentence needs some rearranging.
    • Changed to "The village of Hillsgrove is where Daniel Ogden became the first settler in what is now Sullivan County, circa 1786." Hopefully this is better - suggestions welcome too. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps wikilink condemned in the 3rd paragraph of "Overview"?
  • "In 2001, Pennsylvania had more surviving historic covered bridges than any other state, with 221 remaining in 40 of its 67 counties." With + -ing is almost always an awkward construction, use a semicolon instead: ""In 2001, Pennsylvania had more surviving historic covered bridges than any other state; 221 remained in 40 of its 67 counties."
  • "In 2008, the sides are unpainted, but the portals are painted red." I think this sentence means to say "As of 2008"?
  • Two of the five bridges that remained in 1954 were razed by 1970, when PennDOT considered..." I assume that PennDOT stands for Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, spell it out and wikilink since this is the first instance of the word.
  • "The rafts ended when the eastern hemlock were all clearcut." What does it mean by "ended"?
    • Thanks, changed to "The raft era ended when the eastern hemlock were all clearcut.", hopefully this is clearer? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "$.30"—This is the first instance of currency, specify that it is US$.
  • "It was one of only two bridges in Pennsylvania and 43 nationwide selected for the program that year." It's that "only" thing again...
  • "In addition, the sufficiency rating of the bridge structure was only 16.5 percent,[a] the foundations were 'unstable for calculated scour conditions', and the railing 'does not meet currently acceptable standards'." That last quote uses a different tense from the rest of the sentence. Perhaps shorten the portion of the direct quote and change the tense: "In addition, the sufficiency rating of the bridge structure was only 16.5 percent,[a] the foundations were 'unstable for calculated scour conditions', and the railing did not meet 'currently acceptable standards'."
    • Thanks, changed to your version minus the POV "only", Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Its overall condition was deemed "basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrective action", with an and the estimated cost to improve the bridge of was $108,000."
  • "The NRHP form was prepared by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC), which surveyed county engineers, historical and covered bridge societies, and others for all the covered bridges in the commonwealth." Other what?
    • Thanks, Ref 12 says "A survey form and inquiry letter were developed and mailed to county bridge engineers, historical societies, members of the Society of Industrial Archeologists, the Theodore Burr Bridge Society and numerous others." Suggestions for better wording welcome, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The article uses primarily the NBI and NRHP data, as they are national programs." "uses primarily"-->primarily uses. Is there a source for this statement?
    • Switched to "primarily uses", thanks. Since the word "National" is in both the program titles, I thought it did not need a ref. If the question is does the whole sentence need a ref, then I have none - there are four published reliable sources for the dimensions, none of which entirely agrees with the others. When I wrote this, I had to decide which length to put in the infobox and lead and what data to include in the discussion, and this is my attempt to explain why I chose the National Bridge Inventory data (and the National Register of Historic Places width). The same sentence is in the two model FAs (will change them to "primarily uses" soon). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any reason for the one external link to be a full citation?
    • I like to give full credit - this is a great resource on Covered Bridges and I appreciate the authors' work. Also fully cited as the EL in the two model FAs.

Dabomb87 (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)))}}[reply]

  • Thanks very much for your careful reading of the article and helpful comments, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I made substantial comments at peer review, most of which were acted on. Those that weren't were adequately answered. The above tweaks have undoubtedly improved it further, and I have no hesitation in supporting an article which is soothingly untopical - and interesting, too. Brianboulton (talk) 10:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words, peer review, and support, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Current ref 13 (Sullivan County Industries) is lacking a last access date. (Yep, picky, I know)
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed now - thanks very much! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I have reviewed the article with regard to all the FA criteria. It is well-written, engaging and of a professional standard. The are no issues with the images since the Ruhrfisch clearly had a pleasant day producing them himself in the Summer. The sources are reliable and equally importantly, well used. I had a couple of questions and these have been addressed. Thanks once more for a charming, relaxing and entertaining article. Graham Colm Talk 16:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC) Comments [reply]

  • Should this The Hillsgrove bridge has a load-bearing Burr arch sandwiching multiple vertical king posts, for strength and rigidity, be "The Hillsgrove bridge has load-bearing Burr arches' sandwiching multiple vertical king posts, for strength and rigidity" and is a tense shift needed in the sentence beginning "Pennsylvania...", the latter half of the sentence refers to the present day. Should there be a "the" before "weather"?Graham Colm Talk 14:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your copyedits earlier. I have changed the first sentence to The Hillsgrove bridge has load-bearing Burr arches sandwiching multiple vertical king posts on each side, for strength and rigidity. I assume the sentence starting with Pennsylvania is Pennsylvania had the first covered bridge in the United States, and the most such bridges from the 19th century to the present day. (there is also one later, but no it has no verb tense shift). Technically the reference only covers to 2001, so it could be Pennsylvania had the first covered bridge in the United States, and the most such bridges from the 19th century to 2001. The problem is that it makes it sound as if the situation changed in 2001 (but it has not). Suggestions are welcome - perhaps splitting the sentence somehow? I added "the" before weather. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • What about: Pennsylvania had the first covered bridge in the United States, and has had the most such bridges since the 19th century? Brianboulton (talk) 18:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I like it and see that GrahamColm has already made the change - thanks to both of you! I was drawing a blank, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments Another excellent Pennsylvania article. Possible "Current covered bridges in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania" FT?
  • In 1973, it was the first covered bridge in the county to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). "Was" → "became".
  • All three Sullivan County covered bridges were built in or circa 1850 with Burr arch trusses. "or" is redundant.
    • The problem is different levels of certainty for the three bridges. Forksville was built for certain in 1850, Hillsgrove is "in 1850" in half the sources and "circa 1850" in the other half, and Sonestown is just "circa 1850". I was trying to get this across, but see where it is confusing. I would be OK with All three Sullivan County covered bridges were built circa 1850 with Burr arch trusses. Is this OK? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, the maximum load posted on the bridge itself is only 3.0 short tons (2.7 MT). Link short ton.
    • I linked it at the first instance (sentence before this one). Since it is a {{convert}} template, I also had to link MT (metric tonnes). Is that OK? Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just my personal opinion, but as the description info has little to do with the history, should it be moved to its own section?
    • Thanks - my thought is that the structure described is the historic structure: back in 1850 Sadler Rogers chose to build a Burr Arch bridge against the side of a mountain, with a gap below the eaves for light and maybe some windows, etc. The two model FAs follow this organization. I will move it if you want though, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good otherwise. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks very much for your helpful comments and careful eye, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The scrollboxes are hard to read through: what's the point, and what's going to happen when 1) every FAC gets dozens of them that I have to scroll through and 2) then someone adds a comment or Support or Oppose declaration to the bottom of one that I miss? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and queries A fine article, three questions
  • Burr arch truss Capitalisation differs from the linked article. Assuming yours is correct, should that article be moved over the redirect to Burr truss and lower cased?
  • It was inconsistent in this article - thanks for pointing this out. I am not sure what to do for the other article. I checked the external link and it capitalizes "Burr Arch" in a title but uses "Burr arch" in the text (and does not use "Burr arch truss" although it makes it clear that the Burr arch is a type of truss). Zacher's book and the Evans' book both are similar, although only Zacher's book uses the phrase "Burr arch truss" in the text that I saw. In any case I changed the infobox so it now reads "Burr arch truss bridge". Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Functionally Obsolete - should this be capitalised?
This also came up at peer review - it is so capitalized in the original, so I am reluctant to change it here. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rinkers Covered Bridge - should there be an apostrophe? just checking
  • Thanks, one of the oddities of modern American English place names is the tendency to drop possessive apostrophes - see Larrys Creek for example. The only reliable source cited that mentions this alternate name (the Evans' book) spells it this way. A Google search also turns up many more "Rinkers" than "Rinker's". Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

jimfbleak (talk) 12:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your kind words, helpful questions and support Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Where are the page numbers for the books used, such as "Pennsylvania's Covered Bridges: A Complete Guide"? Gary King (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for pointing this out - I will fix it asap for those books where page numbers are readily available (some book sources are known to me only via versions on the internet where pagination is not given). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have added page numbers to the books by Evans and Zacher, as requested. Refs 9, 13, and 19 are book sources, but are only available on the internet without pagination. If needed I can go to a library that has old copies of refs 9 and 19 and look up pages, but it may take a few days. I do not know of a print source for ref 13 currently. Is this OK, or should I prepare for a library road trip? Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I should have been more specific; I meant specific page numbers for every time the book is used. The primary reason that I ask this is because otherwise, it will be difficult to trace the reference back to the book to the correct page, if no page is given. Gary King (talk) 02:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I will split up the Evans 2nd edition cites, but is Zacher 2nd ed. (3 pages cited) OK as is? Also do you want me to try and find print copies of the internet only books without pagination (please say no ;-) )? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose three pages is okay; page ranges must use en dashes. If the internet-only books have all of the text online, then that's fine as it can be searched. Gary King (talk) 04:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will fix the references in the next 12 hours, just busy in real life right now. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have split the Evans 2nd edition ref into three refs: 1) the page on just this bridge, 2) the three pages on the three Sullivan County bridges, and 3) the pages from the introduction on covered bridges in general. The internet refs are full text and can be searched online. I have spot checked the print versions of the Sullivan County and Lycoming County histories against the electonic versions and they were accurate. Please let me know if this satisfies your objection, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's good enough. My primary issue was just giving an entire book as the reference when it is extremely difficult for other people to find the right page in the book. Gary King (talk) 03:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for pointing this out, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Dabomb87 (talk · contribs):

  • Sorry for this, but after reading Wikipedia:MOS#Currencies, I found that the $ sign should not have a link to the US dollar article since "it is generally unnecessary to link the symbols of well-known currencies." Also, it's probably understood that the currency is US dollars since this is a US related article. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for letting me know - I have removed the link (which leaves the direct quote unchanged, which I prefer anyway). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:02, 11 September 2008 (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/Hillsgrove_Covered_Bridge&oldid=1088118307"