Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Steamtown, USA/archive2


 * 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 GrahamColm 12:37, 28 April 2012.

Steamtown, USA

 * Nominator(s): Ishtar456 (talk) 15:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because...I feel it exemplifies the very best of Wikipedia. I respond very quickly to criticism or questions, but please keep your wording kind. This is the the second time I have nominated this article for FA. The first time was in September, 2010. I withdrew the nomination because of image issues which I believe are resolved. Ishtar456 (talk) 15:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Oppose . The lead does not satisfy WP:LEAD. The leading section is a summary of the article. It should not contain anything not mentioned in the main text. Please, expand the main text with the information that is summarized in the lead. Ruslik_ Zero 11:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Response I honestly believed that the lead was a reflection of the article.  You tasked me to outline the entire thing here.  While doing so I found there was, in fact, a section of the history that was missing.  The problem occurred because my research went well beyond the history of Steamtown in Vermont and overlapped with its formation into Steamtown National Historic Site.  I ended up dividing the history that I wrote between the two articles and neglected to leave some important parts in this article.  I neglected to acknowledge that the two would have to overlap.  It was actually an easy fix.  I entreat you to view the changes I have made to the article and also check out the outline and I think that you will see that the lead now is a summary of the article.  Thanks--Ishtar456 (talk) 21:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, now I support. Ruslik_ Zero 11:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC) Oppose for now pending citation cleanup. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * "When it was retired in 1953, having been replaced with diesel power, No. 15 was put into well-protected storage until it was purchased by F. Nelson Blount in 1959." - source? DONE
 * "This locomotive was on static display for some time in the 1990s at Valley Railroad in Essex, Connecticut, but as of July 2010, it is awaiting restoration in a storage facility" - source? DONE.
 * For newspaper sources, newspaper name should be italicized and article title should not
 * Use consistent punctuation for footnotes
 * FN 11: page(s)? Well, I don't know, and I don't have the book, but I found the fact in an obituary and added the citation. Do I scrap the book reference because I do not know the page? I hate to scrap a book for an obit., but like I say, it has the fact.
 * Be consistent in how page numbers are notated
 * "Steam Locomotive dot Com" is not the correct publisher name
 * FN 37: publisher?
 * What makes this a high-quality reliable source? I actually found it to be a very reliable source. Becuase of the nature of the subject (not something that would be on the cover of Newsweek)  I felt that relying on RR enthusiasts, like this one, to prove the most up-to-date info.  When I am done with all the citations, I will look into finding some other sources, but I think of this one as a gem. never mind, I had it backed up with a newspaper article.  I put it in the external links section.  This?  this is a messed up link, have not had a chance to fix it yet, but will soon.
 * Don't notate titles in all-caps
 * Be consistent in whether you provide locations for books and newspapers or not
 * Response: Thank you for taking the time to do this source review. All of these issues will be addressed (one way or another), hopefully this evening.--Ishtar456 (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I did not quite make it tonight. I have cleaned up (and accessed) all the citations up to 35.  I have 14 more to go.  I took out one of the locomotives because the citations were all books with no pages.  Some day I hope to fix it, but I took it out for now.  I stated in the article that this was probably not going to definitive.  I plan to have all the issues address late on March 14. --Ishtar456 (talk) 00:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have gone through every single citation and used the citation tool (which I did not have when I wrote this) to re-write them. Every single online source has been accessed in the last two days.  Some of the details have been updated. I had to ditch two locomotives due to citation issues.  I do not think that there are currently any issues with sources at this point.  Thanks.--Ishtar456 (talk) 23:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've struck my oppose and will take a close re-look at sourcing in the morning. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I returned one the the locomotives that I pulled earlier. I have straightened out the citation problems it had.--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Updated source review
 * FN 5, 12, 47: page(s)? If you don't have pages because you're not citing the original, indicate what work this was quoted/excerpted/cited in
 * 12 has been removed and two other citations now cover the facts cited.
 * 5 and 47 are newspapers that no longer link. The news template does not allow for a page.  If I put the page number in these two, will I then be inconsistent because the dozens of other newspapers I used that still have links also do not have page numbers? I have them-I put them in originally, but the citation tool does not allow for pages in newspapers.
 * cite news? It should allow pages, at least according to its documentation. If you're using RefToolbar (there are several citation tools, not sure which you're referring to above), you may need to show extra parameters to see it. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


 * FN 3: publisher/work? Done
 * Use dashes for ranges I have dashes in the ranges, don't I?
 * Hmm, thought you hadn't but can't find anything now. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Check for minor inconsistencies like doubled periods I found and removed one case.
 * There are a few others - ex. FN 47. They're caused by a template glitch. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Still there. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in whether you provide locations for books or not I corrected the one case I found.
 * Be consistent in how you notate the publisher of Age of Steam Roundhouse - you've got several variations I found only one variation and changed it.
 * FN 31 vs 34? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 31 vs 33 vs 34? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you again for taking the time to do this. I fixed wonky #33. I also went back and restored all the page numbers for all the newspapers (including the two offline). There were some cases in which the newspaper article was transcribed into a webpage (like #4), so no pages were available. In those cases I cited them as if websites. I hope now that you can say there are no source problems so that maybe the rest of the review can proceed. --Ishtar456 (talk) 12:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * FN 44: formatting. Done Nikkimaria (talk) 02:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, a few other formatting things seem to have gone wonky - for example FN 33. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I'm not sure how, but you seem to have doubled ISBNs on some refs, ex FN 43. 43 also has locations where other books do not, and page notation is wrong. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I know how I did the double ISBNs-all taken care of. I am staring at number 43 and I do not see the location.  I know I took the city name out of one of them a while ago, because I could not find the city for the other.  I am not seeing a city name now. And I do not know what is wrong with page 78.  What do you mean?  I might be ready to throw in the towel.  Thanks for your patience.--Ishtar456 (talk) 14:34, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I guess I thought Hinckley was part of the name of the publisher. It is gone now.  I guess that means way back when there were only two books there and the other one said London, I was all set, but I removed it per your review.  I have added a few books since and left off the cities because I thought I had none for that one so now I am starting to feel like I am going in circles.  I really do not see what is wrong with the page. I hope this long source review does not discourage anyone from actually looking at the content of the article. --Ishtar456 (talk) 14:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * While the source formatting is not perfect, I see no reason why this review cannot proceed as normal. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Image Review Images check out OK, although I wonder why the blurry 1974-era pictures are being used. Are there no better ones available of those particular locomotives?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, how I agree with you. I used to have some really beautiful photos on this article, but even though I had the photographer's permission (vie email) I somehow screwed up the licensing. The photographer emailed me about a year ago and said that he would upload them himself, but I never heard from him again.  So I am using the old Instamatics that I took when I was 11.  I have since become more suave and I now send the link to the commons when I make such requests, that is how I got the great photo of CPR 1246.  I had to make requests to about 12 different photographer to get that and not all the engines were as frequently photographed at that one.  The infobox photo, that I took, has already been on the mainpage on DYK.  Right now, I either have to use my ok photos or have none at all (for those engines)  I rather have them there.  I rather all the photos on the article were taken at the VT location, but I have stooped to using some from the current site.--Ishtar456 (talk) 21:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, though I'm a bit surprised that more aren't available considering the large number of rail fans out there.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There certainly are a number out there, on rail fan pages, but to use them without permission would be "fair use" and I'm not going there again...--Ishtar456 (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And quite rightly, but I'm just surprised that they haven't uploaded their pics onto Commons, or at least Flickr.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:31, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * At least 80 photos are out there. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

It regards to the photos on Flickr: They were taken at the Scranton location. For this article, if I think that VT pics would be better. There are a lot out there (much more than 80) but they are not in public domain. There is not anything on Flickr that I could not get from the government site, but I don't want the article to be too heavy with Scranton photos. I continue to pursue VT. images. And I also don't think my photos are that bad. Besides, not all the engines are even at Scranton. Most of my photos are of engines that were sold. --Ishtar456 (talk) 10:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Personally, I don't care at which location the photo was taken provided that it's of the machine at the time that it was owned by Steamtown or its successor. Why isn't there any history of the Shay pictured in the infobox? Are there any other missing locomotives owned, past or present, by Steamtown? And be consistent in how you caption the pictures; ca. or Ca.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I do not think that there could ever be a definitive list of everything that was ever owned by Steamtown. Different pieces came an went at different stages of the history (as the article explains). The most recent trend is to repatriate pieces to their original region or country and sometimes replace them with pieces from the Scranton area. Although that is not for them to do, since the ones that run the best are Canadian. The list on this article is certainly not definitive, but more of a sampling. But you have a point about the shay. I will fix the CA.s right now.--Ishtar456 (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Image update, I was just about to call it a night when I got an email from a photographer with 5 new images for the article. Enjoy.--Ishtar456 (talk) 02:05, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: I have added some wonderful new photos.  I have added the history of the Shay. And I restored some text that was edited out (several hundred edits ago) that explained that the list was not exhaustive.  The person who deleted it thought that the wording was not encyclopedic (wish they had mentioned that to me instead of just deleting it, because I did not see that it was gone and it was important).  I have re-worded it.  I am not quite sure if there are any source issues at this point.  I feel I have responded to everything that has been pointed out to me.  I am hoping this review progresses.--Ishtar456 (talk) 00:57, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Good, you might consider writing a comprehensive list of locomotives owned by Steamtown and linking back to the main article. But that's a later project.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't have a reliable source for that. The best I would be able to do would be a rail-fan website.  If that is acceptable I would do it.--Ishtar456 (talk) 00:56, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Comments  on prose and comprehensiveness (spotcheck not done) I've begun reading through and will make straightforward copyedits as I go. Please revert me if I inadvertently guff the meaning. I'll jot queries below: Casliber (talk · contribs)


 * Big Boy weighs 1,250,000 pounds - + metric? done Thanks for the review.--Ishtar456 (talk) 13:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Blount used No. 15 first for static display at Pleasure Island, - should that be "a static display"?


 * wikilink "flue" and "culvert"


 * Big Boy has remained out-of-doors since its arrival at Scranton, where it is still on display as of March, 2013 - 2013???


 *  The oldest locomotive ever operated in the United States in the Steamtown collection, it is the "oldest genuine Union Pacific in existence and the only Union Pacific 4-4-0 in existence". - could be rewritten and de-quoted. The first senetnce makes it sound like it was oldest locomotive ever operated in the United States and it happens to be in the steamtown collection...? Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I fixed those issues and struck them out here.--Ishtar456 (talk) 09:24, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I just noticed some additional source review comments, made on March 18, and fixed them. I struck out everything that has been fixed so there is no confusion.--Ishtar456 (talk) 09:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So, as far as I can see, the lead is ok, the images are okay, I am pretty sure the citations are ok, and the prose is good. What next?--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: One of my old blurry photos got 8004 views on the main page on DYK. So two of the old ones have already been on the main page. Just saying. Anything new with this review?--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Support Comment , Some minor suggestions. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 02:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Could a metric conversion for board feet be added?
 * Referring to the photo of the Meadow River Lumber Shay in the infobox might be considered a self-reference to avoid as the term "infobox" is unique to Wikipedia.
 * There's a category on Commons that probably could be linked to in the article.
 * Thanks for your comments. I fixed the metric conversion and nixed the infobox reference.  I also added several of the photos to the category you suggested, but since it is a commons category, it does not link to the article itself.--Ishtar456 (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Added a Commons category to article. Changed to support per comprehensiveness. I like you go into details on individual locomotives in the collection. Niagara  ​​Don't give up the ship 18:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Delegate notes -- Hi Ishtar4, this nom looks promising, however:
 * Five citations in the very first sentence? That really makes it painful to read. It's generally down to the main editor's choice whether to cite information in the lead or leave the lead source-free and pick it all up in the main body, in this case you really should be opting for the latter method. Either that or recast the first sentence to employ just one or two citations at the most.
 * Didn't see a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing above, so we'll need to organise that unless you can point to one in another recent FAC of yours. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. This article is actually a repsentitive of a number of firsts. It was one of my first articles, it was my first DYK, and it is my first FAC. It has not had any spotchecks done. When they are done, it should be noted that the principal source for several of the individual locomotives (Chappell) is in public domain as it was research done for the National Historic Site. Even so, I paraphased the information I used from that source and when I did not feel I could do so adequately, I quoted. I have moved the citations out of the lead. I am feeling very hopeful that this will pass soon. Take Care, --Ishtar456 (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It should be fine, given a clear spotcheck. Just one other thing, at the end of the History section you say Many of the pieces of equipment that did not meet the report's recommendations were sold or traded[28] for pieces that had historical significance to the region -- For completeness, that last clause re. historically significant pieces should be cited. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That citation has been added. Thanks again.--Ishtar456 (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Comment, leaning toward oppose. This is obviously good, thorough work, but I have some concerns regarding the prose. I don't know if it's just me, but I'm seeing a lot of redundancies and some style inconsistencies (have only checked the lead):
 * "following his death" I was confused as to whose death for a second, writing "Blount's death" might be more practical
 * The sentence already says Blount. he is the only person mentioned in the sentence, so I do not see why it would be hard to figure out that "his" referred to him.  I have rewritten the sentence, by I don't see why I would say "Blount twice in the same sentence rather than use a pronoun.


 * I personally don't see a need to wikilink to Vermont, but if you prefer having the link it might be better to link to Bellows Falls and Vermont separately in the opening sentence.
 * I do think this is picky. Bellows Falls is a town and Vermont in a state and the article is talking about state regulations in the sentence that the state is wikilinked.


 * "some of the collection" feels like a word is missing here. Would "part of the collection" work better?
 * changed to "some pieces of the collection were."


 * "to Scranton, Pennsylvania in" needs a comma not only before but also after "Pennsylvania" (the way you formatted location-state names in the opening sentence was correct)
 * Done


 * "Steamtown, USA continued to operate in Scranton but, failing to attract the estimated 200,000–400,000 visitors that were expected, it was facing bankruptcy within two years, and more pieces of the collection were sold to pay off debt." a bit of a run-on sentence, and it doesn't read too well. The first part is a bit redundant; I think you can tighten this considerably.
 * I don't see the redundancy, but to keep it from being a run on changed it to "After the move, Steamtown, USA continued to operate in Scranton but it failed to attract the estimated 200,000–400,000 visitors that were expected. Within two years the tourist attraction was facing bankruptcy and more pieces of the collection were sold to pay off debt."


 * "In 1986, the United States House of Representatives, under the urging of Scranton native, Pennsylvania Representative, Joseph M. McDade," lots of commas; how much of the information on Joseph M.McDade is relevant here?
 * McDade is important because a book, which got a lot of attention will be written after the establishment of the National Historic Site, that will accuse Steamtown of being the most glaring example of Pork barrel politics in the history of the USA.  I took out some of the commas.


 * "voted to approve the spending of $8 million to study the collection and to begin the process of making it a National Historic Site." a lot of redundancy, could be tightened considerably (e.g. "approved $8 million to study the collection and to make it a National Historic Site.")
 * "at a total cost of $66 million"
 * "had conducted" why the sudden switch-over to the past perfect tense?
 * "still remained"
 * "Aside from providing concise histories of the equipment, the report also made recommendations as to whether or not each piece belonged in the soon-to-be government-funded collection. " here, "also" is redundant to "Aside from"... can we make this sentence more succinct without losing any meaning? I'm not quite sure what to gather from "concise histories of the equipment", either.
 * "several more pieces" → several other pieces?
 * I feel that "... while several other pieces have been sold or traded and are located in various locations throughout the United States and Canada" says the same as "... several more pieces have been removed from the collection" earlier, just in more detail. Maybe we could combine or reorganize these two to improve the flow?

Some of these may seem nitpicky, but the prose could benefit from some cleanup and tightening.  Auree  ★ ★  21:15, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for you comments. I made several changes which I think improved it.  I just don't know what to make of your not knowing what to make of "concise histories".  The study served two purposes 1. It yielded concise histories of each piece of equipment and 2. made recommendation as to whether or not each piece should remain in the collection (as historical significance to the region was a criterion.)--Ishtar456 (talk) 22:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I reread that bit, and I think my previously reading it out of context is what made it a bit unclear. I'll strike out that bit of the comment. (:  Auree   ★ ★  23:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

This being my first FAC, I am not sure how this works exactly, but to date there are on this review three "support" and the comments "leaning towards oppose" have been stricken, so I wonder if this will pass or just sit here forever. Can anyone say?--Ishtar456 (talk) 12:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Spotchecks
 * Article: F. Nelson Blount was killed when his private airplane hit a tree during an emergency landing, in Marlboro, New Hampshire, August 31, 1967.
 * Source: F. Nelson Blount, millionaire industrialist, was killed Friday when he tried to land his single engine plane in a field and smashed into a tree. Blount, 49, was pronounced dead at the scene. He was the sole occupant of the plane.
 * Article: Even in its best year, 1973, the Vermont location had attracted only 65,000 visitors.
 * Source: ...against its "best-year" total in Bellows Falls of 65,000 in 1973.
 * Article: In February 1982, the headlights, handrails, and cab roof of 1293 were damaged when the roof of a Steamtown storage building gave way to heavy snow.
 * Source: On February 4, 1982, the locomotive was in the Steamtown storage and shop building when it collapsed at 7:45 a.m. under an unusually heavy load of several feet of fresh wet snow, damaging the upper parts of the locomotive, including such features as headlights, handrails, cab roof, and the like.

No issues. Graham Colm (talk) 12:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you.--Ishtar456 (talk) 14:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.