Wikipedia:Peer review/Horseshoe Curve (Pennsylvania)/archive1

Horseshoe Curve (Pennsylvania)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because Horseshoe Curve is an important part of Pennsylvania history. It allowed quick [relatively] travel over the Allegheny Mountains for the first time. The curve became so vital to the industry of the United States that it was the target of sabotage by Nazi Germany in World War II. It's a unique bit of engineering technology and is still both a major rail line and, also, a tourist attraction. The eventual goal is FA and I believe it satisfies the required criteria, but any suggestions to make the article are better are most welcome.

Thanks, Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 20:20, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do FAs much, so my only question is the length: aren't both intro and body substantially shorter than FAs normally are? Nyttend (talk) 20:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- According to WP:Featured articles/By length, the shortest of all 3472 FAs is Tropical Depression Ten (2005); Horseshoe Curve would be around 3363rd. I do not believe an FAC can failed based on length (like DYK). The intro I can expand though, having realized I forgot some things that should be in it. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 23:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very good work so far. I would want good documentation for the claim about Nazi sabotage, which so far is lacking. The description of the funicular makes me want a photo, especially since the cars are painted with PRR colors, presumably PRR red. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Had photos of the funicular, added it to Commons; I don't think there is an opening in the article to place it. How is the info on Operation Pastorius lacking exactly? Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 21:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I suppose the sentence Targeted by Nazi Germany in World War II, Horseshoe Curve was and still is a major rail line in the lede without any inline citation drew my rather hasty observation about documentation. That sentence should be split, and recast with mention of Operation Pastorius. It turns out that there is a bad link in the inline citations, which can be corrected by not having the link, since the paper magazine can still be the source. In general, should the lede have citations, or should they all be left to the detailed sections later in the article? I will go look at the commons image of the funicular. Perhaps the funicular image and some details about it could go in the Railroaders Memorial Museum article. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fixed. Adding details on the visitors center, including the funicular, to the musuem article is a great idea. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 18:51, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - What about a terrain map showing why the curve was needed to get over the mountains? Where does the railroad go, exactly, going west? Also, what is the grade on the curve? And what is that pond in the middle of the curve? --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - A terrian map would be a good idea (maybe showing the route of railroad throught the mountains), but I have no idea how one would draw the map. The pond inside the curve is the first of three reservoirs that supply drinking water to Altoona. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 18:51, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - You or I could request a map from Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop, but they do ask for some possible sources, so we would need to look into that. I have seen terrain maps elsewhere in Wikipedia, but I am unsure about the sources. --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Look at [1] as a starting point for a map. --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - The map request is at Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop#Horseshoe_Curve_.28Pennsylvania.29. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Arsenikk ^(talk)

After reading the lead, I wonder what the curve radius and gradient is. Perhaps also mention it is double track.
- Added; actually, it is triple-tracked (used to be quad-tracked until 1981). Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think it's necessary to repeat the links from the lead in the first paragraph of the body.
- Removed. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No comma after "The curve itself,..." and probably also "itself" is redundant.
- Removed. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Using surveys done several earlier": several what?
Added missing word: years. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't need to include abbreviations after terms unless they are more commonly known by their abbreviation (such as FBI) or repeated later in the article. Specifically, don't need "(PennDOT)".
- Removed. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean with "The funicular is long..."?
- Removed, leftover from refactoring of sentences. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 20 needs an accessdate.
- Added. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty much what I can see in a short read-through; quite interesting article and I'm glad I read it. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More comments by DThomsen8 (talk)

There is a graphic at Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop#Horseshoe_Curve_.28Pennsylvania.29. This map does show where the railroad goes, but it does not do much to explain why the curve was needed.

Grade (slope) says that as a percentage, the grade is 100*rise/run, where according to the lede, the rise is 37 meters and the run is 720 meters (0.72 km * 1000). Therefore:

Percentage = (100*37)/720 = 5.1389% but the article says 2%. Please explain. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is very interesting, however, all the published sources say 1.73%. There must have been a different method of calculating the grade; either different measurements or a different forumula. A result of 5% wouldn't make sense as its difficult for a train to traverse. Saluda Grade—the steepest railway grade in the U.S.—is around 4.7%. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 00:19, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to research the numbers for the lede. I am sure the grade is no where near 5%, but you need numbers which work out to the expected 2% or less. What do you think of the draft map?--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've revised to numbers to ones that make mathematical sense. The original length only accounts for the center portion of the curve, and a USGS topo map indicates that the ending elevation was too high. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 14:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]