Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/Pennsylvania Turnpike/archive1

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways‎ | Assessment‎ | A-Class Review

Pennsylvania Turnpike edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Withdrawn over concerns that this was becoming a peer review and that the review really needed to be restarted. No prejudice to a renomination once outstanding issues are addressed. --Rschen7754 22:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbox

Pennsylvania Turnpike (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
Nominator's comments: The Pennsylvania Turnpike is the first long-distance limited-access road in the United States that ultimately led to the creation of the Interstate Highway System. This article is well-researched and I think it can eventually become a FA.
Nominated by: Dough4872 22:25, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
First comment occurred: 00:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Review by Rschen7754 edit

Resolved issues
  • I plan to review this nomination. --Rschen7754 00:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Map
  • I would recommend putting some shields on the map for context.
  • I already put a request for the map to be fixed to include the extensions of I-99 and I-376. Added a request for shields as well. Dough4872 03:04, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
RJL
  • I would consider putting a line break before the references to fix the column width issue.
  • No periods in the notes column.
  • No capital P for proposed.
  • "Formerly called the Philadelphia Interchange" needs a citation.
  • Is the eastern terminus actually I-95 yet?
  • In New Jersey, the Pearl Harbor Extension of the New Jersey Turnpike is officially I-95 in the SLD even though it is not signed yet. Dough4872 03:04, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


General stuff
  • Please go through every paragraph and make sure that no two sentences start with the same first word or words in the same paragraph. Once you have done this, please post the diff so that I can check. --Rschen7754 07:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please audit your use of however, currently, today, and recently per the SR 56 FAC. --Rschen7754 09:58, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Map, again
  • How about them shields? How about some text for cities?
  • Still working on getting that done. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's something that you are able to do; I won't be removing this oppose until the map has them. --Rschen7754 18:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added text and shields to the map. There is a glitch however. Dough4872 02:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • The turnpike designation begins at the Ohio border in Lawrence County, where it continues as the Ohio Turnpike. - where the turnpike designation continues as the Ohio Turnpike?
  • Ditto for the next sentence - you just said it ended!?
  • It would utilize seven tunnels that were built for the abandoned South Pennsylvania Railroad in the 1880s - well does it?
  • the first long-distance limited-access highway in the United States that would spur the construction of other limited-access toll roads and the Interstate Highway System. - wording is ambiguous
  • such as reconstruction of the original section - vague
  • Oppose for now, based on the issues Fredddie has been finding. Will reconsider once his and my reviews are done and issues are addressed. --Rschen7754 05:10, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Holding for now pending resolution of Mitchazenia's issues. --Rschen7754 18:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by Imzadi1979 edit

Unless noted otherwise, the captions are ok.

  1. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike logo.svg should have its description page updated. Since the design is public domain, Vishwin60 never had any rights to release. At worst, the description is deceptive on that point.
    Removed unneeded licensing tags. Dough4872 18:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike map.png should have the GIS source(s) used to create the map added. The caption for the map is not a complete sentence and should not have terminal punctuation (aka a period) in that case.
    Fixed image caption. Contacted O on obtaining a source for GIS data. Dough4872 18:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Source for GIS data added. Dough4872 03:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Interstate shields at the bottom of the infobox should be replaced with text. If the concern is that the shields would not be used otherwise, then {{infobox road small}} should be used in the article to display them appropriately.
    Would you like it if I included IRS in the Delaware River Extension section for I-276 and in the History section for I-280? I think including the mini infoboxes look tacky and the shields better presented in the infobox browse. Dough4872 18:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The trouble is that you have two different styles, the 1957 variation and the current at 20px in height. One is three digits wide (25px) and the other is only 2 digits wide (20px), with the difference between state name and "neutered" shields. I know what the difference is suppose to be, but non-roadgeeks won't at that size. Also, icons are not a substitute for text; only text is a substitute for text. The icons either need text added next to them, or they need to be replaced by the appropriate text only. I still think that you should insert an IRS in the body of the article for each designation to offer the location/length/year(s) as appropriate for those designations. Imzadi 1979 → 00:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Added mini-infoboxes and removed shields from browse in infobox. Dough4872 01:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike westbound.jpg is GFDL, CC-BY 2.5, or CC-BY-SA 3.0.
  5. File:Allegheny Mountain Tunnel West Portal I76 Dscn7191.jpg is GFDL, CC-BY 2.5, or CC-BY-SA 3.0.
  6. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike westbound at US 222 exit.jpg is CC-BY-SA 2.0 by way of Flickr.
  7. File:PA TPK WB Whitemarsh Township.JPG released by nominator to PD.
  8. File:Paturnpiketicket.jpg has a PD photo, but I wonder if the ticket itself might attract a copyright. I doubt that it does, and the caption checks out. (It has full sentences, so the periods are correct.)
  9. File:PennaPike toll plaza.jpg is CC-BY-SA 3.0 and CC-BY-SA 2.5.
  10. File:PA TPK Willow Grove tollbooth.JPG is PD by nominator.
  11. File:Sideling Hill Plaza jeh.JPG is PD by another wikimedian.
  12. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike 70 mph 1942.jpg is PD as a work of the federal government.
  13. File:Rays Hill Tunnel - Andrew Carnegie - 1880s.jpg was created in the 1880s, but we need proof that it was published before 1923 for the license tag applied to be accurate. The source also needs to specific what print source was used to obtain this photo. In any case, that doesn't mean this photo isn't PD, just that we need to clarify why/how better.
    Mitchazenia scanned the photo from a copy Mitchell Dakelman (one of the authors of the Images of America book) had. However, nothing was said on whether this photo was published before 1923. I believe the photo itself is from the Pennsylvania State Archives. Dough4872 19:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed the photo for now until the copyright can be verified. Dough4872 02:54, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike in 1942.jpg is another photo that's PD because it is a work of the federal government.
  15. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike 1942 LOC.jpg is another photo that's PD because if it is a work of the federal government, however the FDP doesn't actually state this. I would suggest that {{information}} be used with full details filled in.
    Added information template. Dough4872 19:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. File:Laurel Hill Tunnel 1942.jpg is more PD-USgov.
  17. File:Rays Hill Tunnel at night 1942.jpg is another PD-USgov.
  18. File:Blue Mountain Tunnel viewed from Kittatinny Mountain Tunnel 1942.jpg is more PD-US-gov.
  19. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike westbound Lebanon County.jpg is CC-BY-SA 2.0 via Flickr.
  20. File:Pennsylvania Turnpike eastbound at Homewood Viaduct.jpg is CC-BY-SA 2.0 via Flickr.
  21. File:Delaware River Turnpike Toll Bridge.jpg is PD by a wikimedian; caption should not have a space en dash in the bridge name. I would suggest that the file size be set by adding |upgright since this is a portrait-oriented photo. (This would reduce the overall width because of the extra height involved.)
    Fixed. Dough4872 18:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. File:Sideling Hill Tunnel approach.jpg is PD by a wikimedian; FDP should be checked for categories.
  23. File:Abandoned Turnpike.jpg is PD by a wikimedian.
  24. File:PA TPK WB 0.5 mi to Norristown.JPG is PD by the nominator.
  25. File:PA TPK Virginia Drive slip ramp.JPG is PD by the nominator.

Just as a comment, I did upload File:St. John's Church Pennsylvania Turnpike.jpg, which is a photo I had of the church next to the turnpike. This photo may be a possibility to help illustrate that part of the RD. Imzadi 1979 → 03:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Fredddie edit

OK, I moved my section down so the other sections don't get lost. After nearly 2 weeks of reviewing, I have finally completed my review. There is some good news and some bad news.

First the good news. You clearly want this article to go to FAC. With the right amount of elbow grease I think it could. Speaking on behalf of the rest of the project (I can because others have said this on IRC), we want this article to become a Featured Article. This would be our first collaborative FA as a project.

Now the bad news. It needs a lot of work. This might sound mean, but this is another instance of a Good Article not being a good article. In all, I found 175 points that need work; some of them have more than one issue to work on. My review is over 22Kb of text. To save yours and my sanity, I won't paste it all at once.

Just a few formatting explanations first. I used two templates that you see on MoS pages, {{!xt}} and {{xt}}, and used them in a similar form. Your original text uses !xt while what I think you should say instead uses xt.

Here we go. –Fredddie™ 15:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that you can discuss the changes I'm suggesting. Since the goal of this review is twofold, 1) to get this article to and through FAC and 2) to make you a better writer, I expect something more than I don't like it. If you don't necessarily agree with something I would like to see or you need further explanation as to why I'm suggesting something, say so. –Fredddie™ 04:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First review from Fredddie

These are the two biggest issues I found in the article.

  1. You have a tendency to use <verb>ing; "-ing" is used 366 times in the body of the article. Not all of them need to be fixed, but I would revisit them all to make sure. The reason is that the verb you're adding -ing to would in some cases be a stronger verb for the sentence. For example:
    "The turnpike passes through the Appalachian Mountains in the central part of the state, utilizing four tunnels."
    "The turnpike utilizes four tunnels as it passes through the Appalachian Mountains in the central part of the state."
  2. Each instance of a clause starting with ", with" should be revisited. There are 52 times you use it. Here is an example:
    "The road was extended east to the Delaware River in 1954, with the bridge over the Delaware River finished in 1956, completing the mainline turnpike."
    "The road was extended east to the Delaware River in 1954. The mainline turnpike was completed in 1956 when the Delaware River bridge was finished."
    Got through making fixes to the lead and route description. Dough4872 16:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a good start, but these issues are in the whole article. –Fredddie™ 21:38, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have finished making fixes to the remainder of the article. Dough4872 22:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, looks good so far. Continuing with the review. –Fredddie™ 01:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead
  1. West and east ends are missing articles: "at the Ohio state line"
    Added. Dough4872 01:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. While correct, the sentence "The limited-access highway runs 360 miles..." is awfully long and should probably be split.
    Split. Dough4872 01:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's worse now than it was before. It's well documented that I don't like the word terminus when it comes to highways. A train station at the end of the line embodies a terminus better than a highway that begins and ends at the state line. If I-70 ended there, Breezewood would be a great example of a highway terminus.
    I was looking for something like "The turnpike designation begins at the Ohio border in Lawrence County, ..." –Fredddie™ 03:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Reworded to get rid of "terminus". Dough4872 15:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It's not exactly clear that I-70 and I-76 overlap each other and the turnpike for a while.
    Clarified. Dough4872 01:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    This, too, isn't much better. You wrote, "I-70 between New Stanton and Breezewood (concurrent with I-76), ..." Do you or anyone else think "I-70 and I-76 between New Stanton and Breezewood, ..." sounds better instead? –Fredddie™ 03:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed. Dough4872 15:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now, we get to the meat and potatoes of the review. –Fredddie™ 04:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Route description
  1. "rural areas of farms and woods" This is fluff. What other kinds of rural areas are there?
    In other states, rural areas could be deserts or grassland. This helps give an unfamiliar reader an idea of what the physical surroundings in Pennsylvania are like. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    But this is Pennslyvania, not the American Southwest. In the mini-lead, you could have a sentence or two describing the terrain of the route. –Fredddie™ 23:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Mentioned rural surroundings in mini-lead and cut down mention of farms and woods in route description. Dough4872 23:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "A short distance from the Ohio border, the road comes to the Gateway toll plaza in the eastbound direction."
    "A short distance from the Ohio border, the eastbound lanes come to the Gateway toll plaza."
    Changed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. You say "Pennsylvania Turnpike" a lot. 70 times in the RD alone! There are so many synonyms you could use (turnpike, route, road, tollway); I would replace at least 75% of them.
    Changed several instances. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not nearly enough. Perform a Ctrl+F just to see how many times "Pennsylvania Turnpike" is highlighted on the page. –Fredddie™
    Went through the remainder of the article and changed several instances. Dough4872 00:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    MUCH better. –Fredddie™
  4. 1,545-foot (471 m) long→1,545-foot-long (471 m)
    {{Convert|1545|ft|m|adj=mid|-long}} There are 8 others that need to be corrected as well.
    Fixed. I converted to meters instead of kilometers though as that is more standard when converting feet. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Good catch. –Fredddie™
  5. "...where it reaches Cranberry. In Cranberry, the Pennsylvania Turnpike..." Also for New Stanton, Donegal, Blue Mountain Tunnel. Repetition is the issue here.
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Can you really cite rural land and suburban development to the simplified turnpike map?
    It is cited to Google Maps. The simplified turnpike map is used to show the county line. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That's pretty weak. I suggest using a better map than the simplified turnpike map for showing where county lines are. –Fredddie™
    Used a state road atlas to cite county lines. Dough4872 00:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. I would revise the Warrendale toll plaza sentence to say the toll ticketing begins there.
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. In the context of roads, don't use interchange as a verb. (3 times).
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. "The Pennsylvania Turnpike resumes..." It ended?
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    ✗ Not done. –Fredddie™
    My bad. Got it this time. Dough4872 23:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. More farm field and woodland fluff.
    See above. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. "It is at this interchange that the roadway narrows back to four lanes and that I-70 forms a concurrency with I-76 on the Pennsylvania Turnpike." This sentence should be revised so "narrows" or "forms" is the main verb of the sentence.
    Reworded. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. I'm from Iowa so I know or thing or two about agriculture by default; what exactly is an agricultural area? I can list ten things off the top of my head.
    An agricultural area is an area with farm fields. I used this term to vary the wording. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Like I said, I was able to think of 10 things that could be an "agricultural area". You should be more specific. –Fredddie™
    Removed as i cut down on mention of farms and woods in route description. Dough4872 23:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. "Here, the road passes under the mountain in the 6,070 ft (1,850 m) long Allegheny Mountain Tunnel.[3][4][5]"
    1. Roads pass through tunnels. (3 times in the Irwin section alone)
    2. Does "the mountain" have a name?
    Varied wording. The mountain is called Allegheny Mountain. I used the generic term mountain to avoid "Allegheny Mountain" from being used twice in the same sentence. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. 3% grade doesn't seem steep enough to get a sign along the road. The lowest grade I've ever seen signed is 5%. Why mention it?
    It is the steepest grade along the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    ...So you should mention that. –Fredddie™
    Mentioned. Dough4872 00:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. What is an agricultural valley and how is it different from a regular valley? (3 times)
    A valley that has farmland in it. Worded to provide detail of what the valley is like. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It's using a big word to not really describe anything. –Fredddie™
  16. You should spell out U.S. Route 220 Business before using the abbreviation.
    Spelled out. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Is the southern end of I-99 also the southern end of US 220? It kind of reads that way.
    Reworded as to not imply that it is the southern end of US 220. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. "City of Altoona" "City of" is fluff unless you're talking about the city government.
    Removed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. "East of Bedford, the Pennsylvania Turnpike passes through the Bedford Narrows, a gap in Evitts Mountain, along with US 30 and the Raystown Branch Juniata River.[7]"
    1. How wide is Bedford Narrows?
    2. It passes through US 30 and the river?!
    The width of the narrows would not be the most relevant to the article. It was basically wide enough to hold the turnpike, a river, US 30, and a railroad line. Reworded as turnpike does not pass through US 30 and the river but rather parallel them through the narrows. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree. I think two sentences saying ""East of Bedford, the Pennsylvania Turnpike passes through a gap in Evitts Mountain known as Bedford Narrows. The turnpike, US 30, <the railroad>, and the Raystown Branch Juniata River all pass through the 0.5-mile-wide (0.80 km) (fill in with the correct width) narrows.[7]" would add some color to the article. –Fredddie™
    Reworded. I left out mention of the railroad since the tracks have been removed. Dough4872 00:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the railroad is worth mentioning. –Fredddie™
  20. You should probably mention the significance of Breezewood.
    I mentioned that I-70 has traffic lights along US 30. This detail would be more relevant for the Interstate 70 in Pennsylvania article. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. "Past Breezewood, I-76 continues along the Pennsylvania Turnpike, ..." Is I-76 or the turnpike the subject of this sentence?
    Reworded to make the turnpike the subject. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Are the rural areas or is the turnpike parallel to US 522? It's not clear.
    Clarified to say turnpike is parallel to US 522. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Kittatiny Mountain or Kittatinny Mountain?
    Fixed typo. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Who calls it "the straightaway"?
    The name was popularly used when the road was first opened. There was not a specific person or organization who coined the term. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Farther east→Further east
    Changed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. "East of Carlisle, the Pennsylvania Turnpike heads east through more farmland with some development as it approaches Harrisburg."
    1. I would drop the "East of Carlisle" and replace it with "As it approaches Harrisburg".
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    1. What kind of development?
    Residential and commercial, do not need to get too detailed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. "East of this, ..." this should be more specific. Same with "Past this," "Following this," and "With this, ..." later in the article.
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Does the turnpike go through Harrisburg? Around Harrisburg? The article doesn't say.
    Clarified that it passes to the south of Harrisburg. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Only the farmland is Pennsylvania Dutch Country? I'd get rid of "an area of farmland known as the".
    Removed. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  30. In this paragraph alone, you've said "crosses into X County" three times.
    Changed some instances. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  31. What is the Blue Route? Is that like Pittsburgh's color rings?
    The Blue Route is a common nickname for the Mid-County Expressway portion of I-476. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  32. I-276 just ends at the river?
    Yes, it ends at the bridge with the road continuing into New Jersey as unsigned I-95. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You really should explain I-276 ending at the river a little better
    Added some detail. Dough4872 23:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  33. "The Pennsylvania Turnpike is controlled by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission."
    "The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission controls the Pennsylvania Turnpike." (active/passive voices)
    Reworded. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  34. I would move the last paragraph to the top of the RD and use it as a mini-lead. I'd then add a sentence or two at the beginning describing the route in summary.
    Wrote mini-lead and moved last paragraph to beginning. Dough4872 17:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  35. We seem to have created a new repetition problem. "The road heads east again and passes under Kittatinny Mountain in the 4,727-foot-long (1,441 m) Kittatinny Mountain Tunnel. A short distance after exiting the Kittatinny Mountain Tunnel, the highway heads under Blue Mountain in the 4,339-foot-long (1,323 m) Blue Mountain Tunnel." I would double check all the tunnels. –Fredddie™ 23:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Varied wording of tunnels. Dough4872 23:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Features
  1. There should be a mini-lead for this section.
    Wrote mini-lead. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You can do better than that. There is no flow at all. The idea is to entice the reader to read the section. –Fredddie™
    Made some tweaks, including the addition of an introduction sentence. Dough4872 15:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    References? –Fredddie™ 23:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Added. Dough4872 00:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "With the ticket system, a motorist receives a ticket upon entering the turnpike at an interchange and pays the fare and surrenders the ticket upon exiting. If a motorist loses the ticket, the turnpike charges the highest fare to the exit where the motorist leaves."
    "Upon entering the turnpike, motorists receive a ticket that lists the fares for every exit. When exiting, the ticket is surrendered and the appropriate fare is paid. If the ticket is lost, motorists are charged the highest possible fare for that exit."
    Changed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Do tolls change every year? You should use {{As of}} for potentially-dated statements like "As of 2012, it costs...".
    Tolls do change every year. Added template. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. What's the average toll per mile?
    Added. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. You should inflate the 1939 tolls to today's dollars.
    Added inflation template. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "bonds to build the road and would be removed" →were to be
    Changed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "However, tolls continue to be charged to raise the money required to build extensions and to make improvements to the road.[20]"
    "Tolls continue to be charged today to pay for improvements to the turnpike system."
    Changed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. "The toll rate was about one cent a mile and the ticket system was used when the turnpike opened.[21]" The ticket system part seems lazily tacked on.
    Split sentence. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. What other roads had a higher rate?
    Added list of roads with higher rates. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Instead of listing the toll increases in just percentages, you should give rates as well. I'd go for the entire route, if possible. Then you should inflate those numbers.
    Added toll rates with inflations. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. In 1978 and 1986, tolls increases were planned. Did they go into effect?
    Yes, added details. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. There is no flow to the paragraph about toll hikes. I would probably split it into two and revise some of the sentences so they're not so dry.
    Split and revised sentences. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Don't call people humans, it's cold and heartless. I'd probably revise the sentences to say "Motorists originally stopped at booths to receive toll tickets from turnpike staff. In 1987, ticket machines replaced the workers.
    Reworded. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. "In 2001, it was expanded west to Carlisle,[43][44] and on December 15, 2001, was extended to include the entire length of the Pennsylvania Turnpike.[45][46]"
    "By December 15, 2001, E-ZPass could be used on the entire length of the Pennsylvania Turnpike.[45][46]" It sounds off to have a year for the Carlisle extension and then a specific date for the entire length.
    Changed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. "The strike lasted only seven days, with an agreement reached on November 30."
    "The strike ended after seven days when both sides reached an agreement on November 30."
    Changed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. You mentioned the turnpike commission is considering going all electronic. Then a few sentences later, you said they are indeed switching. This should be reconciled for consistency's sake.
    Fixed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. How much would a 76% surcharge be for the entire route?
    Added. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Are the callboxes at mile markers?
    Not specifically. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Instead of using it as an aside in the service plaza section, the emergency assistance section should mention the towing options available. That is, if they're still available.
    Mentioned towing options. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Roughly speaking, where are the service plazas located?
    They are throughout the state. The exact locations are shown in the exit list. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Service plazas were built as a result of food and fuel being scarce?
    There were not many resturants and gas stations near the turnpike when it was initially built. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. "The same year, Howard Johnson's contract expired, with Burger King replacing them at several locations.[77]" What?
    Removed sentence as it is excess detail. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  23. In this same paragraph, there was a nice flow up until you decided to ramp up the timeline. More than half of the paragraph was 1978−83. The rest of the paragraph is 1983−95. That's too abrupt.
    Split paragraph. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  24. "Sunoco will continue to operate the gas stations at the renovated service plazas." Future tense for something dated 2006?
    Fixed. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  25. You say "between <year> and <year>" seven times in this paragraph, many of which consecutively.
    Changed some instances. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. The plaza closures could be a separate paragraph.
    Split. Dough4872 00:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. No other issues with the radio section other than length. But I'm not sure if anything more can be added.
  28. No other issues with the speed limit section either. I would have rounded up 55 and 60 mph to 90 and 100 km/h, respectively. I'm not going to ask you to do it, but you can if you want.

Fix the mini-lead and then we'll move on to the next section. –Fredddie™ 04:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History

This, being the biggest section, had the most problems. –Fredddie™ 02:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  1. This section needs a mini-lead to so people will want to read the whole section. Even as I write this, I'm loathe to read it because it's tl;dr length.
    Added mini-lead. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I don't understand why European settlers are in the same sentence as Native Americans.
    The sentence is providing context of how settlers originally crossed the mountains in the state. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    But you don't say that. After your edit, it says the Europeans only followed wagon roads. That's it. Not only that, you don't really say why the Europeans are crossing the state. –Fredddie™ 03:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Only two sentences separate Native American trails and the Penn RR. Doesn't that seem like it's too much of a jump in time? You could at least talk a little about transport during the American Revolution.
    Added details about the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. And in the next sentence we're into the 20th Century?!
    The paragraph is providing an overview of important milestones in transportation across Pennsylvania. As such, there is a jump between events. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Fatalities are not necessarily linked to dangerous roads. You have to say how the roads were dangerous and why people died. Crashes? Careening off a cliff?
    Claified the roads were dangerous due to curves and grades. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm still left wanting more. You left a nice cliffhanger. –Fredddie™
  6. Who or what had grades of 9%? Is that steep?
    Clarified the highways have the grades. These grades are considered steep. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't say 9% is steep in the article. –Fredddie™
  7. Wouldn't the South Penn RR be better suited in the first paragraph? You glossed over railroad construction with two sentences about the Main Line of Public Works and Penn RR. In the second paragraph, you can tie it together.
    Moved the South Penn information to the first paragraph. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Much better up there. –Fredddie™
  8. It reads like Sutherland and Lecoq went to Patterson because he had proposed a resolution. If that's not the case, this sentence should be split in two.
    Split sentence. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    He is ambiguous. I think it should be Patterson instead of He. –Fredddie™
  9. More dollars that need to be inflated to today's dollars.
    Added inflation templates. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. "Patterson introduced Bill 211 to the legislature, which called for the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission to be established to build the road."
    "Patterson introduced Bill 211 to the legislature, which called for the establishment of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission."
    Changed. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Is the name of the chair of the commission really notable? You don't list any other commissioners from any other time period. (WP:UNDUE)
    The chair was important in the development of the highway. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't mention how he's important. Right now it seems his notability comes from being the first chair of the turnpike committee. –Fredddie™ 03:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    ✗ Not done –Fredddie™
  12. "In April 1938, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt approved the award of a grant for $24 million by the WPA for the construction of the Pennsylvania Turnpike, and the state also put up $29 million towards the project.[123]"
    1. We've established enough context to not label FDR as "U.S. President." President will suffice.
    2. Approved a $24 million grant
    3. Replace ", and" with a semi-colon
    Fixed. Dough4872 23:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. If FDR approved the grant, why did the WPA have to give the final OK?
  14. The sentence starting with "Meanwhile, " is incoherent.
    Reworded. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. At the end of the paragraph, I'm left wondering if all the institutions listed bought each other's bonds.
    ✗ Not done –Fredddie™
  16. I'm also wondering how much money was raised in all.
    ✗ Not done –Fredddie™
  17. Who is Roy Greene?
    The newspaper article does not say what his profession was. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    So why mention him by name? Is he notable? I'm guessing since you couldn't find his occupation, he's not. –Fredddie™
  18. Make sure the dates that need a comma after the year have one.
      Is this done? –Fredddie™
  19. "The first work to begin on the road was grading its right-of-way, which involved a lot of earthwork.[135]" When does road grading not involve a lot of earthwork? Was there an unusual amount of earthwork?
    Clarified. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Was eminent domain even a thing in the 1930s?
    It existed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. "Concrete culverts were built to carry streams and roads under the cut.[137]" So they had to cut even deeper to let other roads cross beneath?
    Yes, since the road was built on higher earth in the bottom of the valley. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. "A lot of work was also involved on building the Pennsylvania Turnpike up the 3% grade on the eastern end of Allegheny Mountain.[140]" A lot of work compared to what?
    This was the steepest part of the turnpike, so building it would be a challenge due to the slope. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    ✗ Not done. You didn't say this in the article. –Fredddie™
  23. "The base of Evitts Mountain was blasted in order to carry the turnpike across Bedford Narrows.[7]" Why was it necessary for the mountain to be blasted?
    The mountain face needed to be blasted in order to squeeze it through the narrows with the river, US 30, and the railroad line. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    ✗ Not done. So say it in the article! –Fredddie™
  24. "In New Baltimore, the turnpike commission had to purchase land from St. John's Church, which contained a cemetery. As part of the deal, stairways were built on either side of the turnpike to provide access to the church.[141]"
    "In New Baltimore, land purchased by the turnpike commission separated St. John's Church from its cemetery. Stairs were built on either side of the turnpike to provide access to both sides."
  25. "Lighting, telephone, and signal systems would also exist.[19]" I'd tack "in addition to lighting, telephone, and signal systems." to the end of the previous sentence and then get rid of this one.
    Combined sentences. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. "A total of 4.5 miles (7.2 km) of tunnel had been bored through the seven mountains." were
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. "As a result of the number of tunnels, ..." Fluff. You can say this more concisely.
    Removed beginning part of sentence. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  28. What design were the non-trumpet interchanges?
    They were irregular designs that do not really fall into a clear category. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Two sentences in a row end with the word interchanges.
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Is the level of guardrail detail necessary? If so, how did they compare to other guardrails of the day?
    I feel it is important to mention the guardrail detail as this was the first long-distance freeway in the United States and the guardrails did differ from the modern guardrails of today. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe it would benefit readers to know what was happening on other roads for comparison. –Fredddie™
  31. How large were the exit signs?
    ✗ Not done –Fredddie™
  32. Were billboards banned along the turnpike?
    Yes, reworded to make clearer. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Was there a chance trucks and buses wouldn't be able to use the turnpike?
    It had not been clearly established until this decision. The urban limited-access parkways that had existed before the turnpike did not permit trucks. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  34. I feel like the tunnel, bridge, and interchange paragraphs would be better suited in a Design subsection.
    Split into new subsection. Dough4872 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to issues in this section. –Fredddie™ 04:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History, part 2
  1. If it was concrete simply poured on the bare earth, was there any difference in design?
    It is basically the same except there was no gravel surface, which led to the pavement to deteriorate quickly. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "The opening was announced on short notice with no ribbon cutting or ceremony to be held.[162]"
    "The opening was announced on short notice; no ribbon cutting ceremony was held.[162]"
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Tons need to be converted to tonnes.
    Converted. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. "However, revenue would decline due to tire and gas rationing caused by World War II.[174]" during
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "It provided a direct link between the Mid-Atlantic states and the Midwestern United States and cut down travel time between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg.[20][177]"
    1. Mid-Atlantic and Midwestern states
    2. By how long did it cut travel time?
    Changed and added how long travel time was cut. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I would renamed the "Extensions built" subsection to "Extensions"
    Renamed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "The transverse joints on the pavement were also spaced closer together.[187]" How much closer?
    Added. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Cement cannot go on strike. Cement workers, however, can.
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Two sentences in a row mention the Philadelphia extension and Gov. Duff by name. Repetition.
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Why did the Bureau of Public Roads add the turnpike to the Interstate Highway System?
    Mentioned. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. "This proposal was due to the fact that the spurs of I-80S did not connect to I-80 in northern Pennsylvania." What do you mean by spurs of I-80S?
    I-80S had several spurs in southern Pennsylvania such as I-280 that did not connect to I-80 in northern Pennsylvania. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. "The renumbering was approved by the Federal Highway Administration on February 26, 1964." I thought AASHO did route numbering.
    The source says the FHWA approved Pennsylvania's proposed changes to the interstate numbers. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. There is an {{Infobox road small}} for I-280, but not for I-80S. How come?
    I-280 redirects to this article whereas I-80S doesn't. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Were the tunnels the issue or bottlenecks at the portals?
    Bottlenecks were the issue, fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. "The turnpike commission began studies in 1959 on how to resolve the traffic jams at the Laurel Hill and Allegheny Mountain tunnels, with studies for the other tunnels following.[229]"
    1. Turnpike commission repeats two sentences in a row
    2. "In 1959" "that year"
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. I don't like "As a result of these studies, ..." perhaps change it to "At the conclusion of the studies, ..."
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Maybe you can link to the Wiktionary defintion of bore. Not everybody will know that a bore is a tunnel.
    Added link. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Were the Allegheny Mountain and Laurel Hill tunnel projects combined? It reads like they were.
    They were separate projects but occurred at the same time. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. The bypass of Laurel Hill tunnel was chosen because it would be cheaper to construct than another tunnel and would be completed quicker to relieve traffic.[231]
    The Laurel Hill tunnel was bypassed because traffic would be relieved faster and less expensively than it would by boring another tunnel.
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. "The Laurel Hill Tunnel was bypassed by way of a deep cut to the north of the tunnel.[23][234] Groundbreaking for the new alignment took place on September 6, 1962. The bypass would feature a wide median and truck climbing lanes, with a 145-foot (44 m) deep cut dug into the mountain.[235]" The first and third sentences here should be combined.
    Combined. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Is that former SPRR tunnel the same one from earlier? You should mention that.
    Oh, you did, but in passing.
  22. "Following its opening, the original tube would be closed to allow it to be updated, reopening on August 25, 1966.[234][237]"
    1. Following its opening? What's opening, the old tunnel? Because that's what this sentence is about.
    2. "It" in the middle part of the sentence is unclear.
    Reworded. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Did you mention the potential Rays Hill/Sideling Hill bypass when you mentioned the tunnels being built? You should.
    Added mention earlier in history. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  24. "The cut over Sideling Hill was built to pass over the Sideling Hill Tunnel.[242]" passes
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  25. "The new alignment would come to its eastern terminus a short distance east of the Cove Valley service plaza on the original segment." ends
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. "The bypass of the two tunnels would have a 36-foot (11 m) wide median with a steel barrier in the middle.[75]" Did the bypass have the 36-foot-wide median and steel barrier?
    Yes. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. "The parallel tubes at these three tunnels would open on the same day as the bypass, with the original tubes subsequently getting remodeled.[230]" What bypass?
    Clarified. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  28. How wide was the median originally?
    10 feet, as mentioned earlier in the history. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  29. The New Stanton interchange required left turns across traffic on the turnpike? It's not exactly clear.
    Left turns across traffic on the exit rams, clarified. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  30. You said "providing access" in two consecutive sentences.
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Holographic road signs. Have you already mentioned what the signs were like?
    The proposed upgrade was to have holographic signs, which was considered a new innovation at the time. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  32. "a widening of the turnpike was necessary." "it was necessary to widen the turnpike."
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  33. How did the oil crisis affect the widening plans?
    It implemented a 55 mph speed limit that would not allow for a reconstructed 80 mph road to be built. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  34. In addition to I-80, did the oil crisis have a role in the turnpike's declining traffic?
    Yes, mentioned. Dough4872 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History, part 3
  1. "disagreements between Governor Dick Thornburgh and the turnpike commission members as well as differences between the commissioners.[257][258]" I think this can be shortened somehow, but I haven't figured it out yet.
  2. Why was the defense depot interchange not built?
    Clarified sentence. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. From where was the depot's connector road coming?
    Added termini of connector road. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. "In March 1989, the turnpike commission approved a contract for building the interchange.[265]" I know you're talking about the Blue Route interchange, but in the context of the paragraph, and since you've said interchange in every sentence thus far, someone might not pick up on this. I'd combine the two Blue Route sentences.
    Combined sentences. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Any clue which contracting laws were violated? State or federal? Do the cases have articles? (probably not, but you never know)
    Added some detail. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak. "In June, a losing bidder decided to challenge the turnpike commission, saying it violated female and minority contracting rules which require X% of workers to be women or minorities." is a much better sentence. Find out what percentage of women and minorities are required and then fix it. –Fredddie™ 00:35, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "When this interchange was relocated, the overhead interchange lights were a nuisance to nearby residents.[271][272]" Is this the new or the old interchange?
    The new interchange. Clarified. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The turnpike is inanimate; it cannot celebrate anything nor spend any money. The commission can, however.
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. You say "original section" in three consecutive sentences. "original section of the (Pennsylvania) turnpike" in two of those.
    Cut down on use. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. "The slated date for completion of the reconstruction between Irwin and Carlisle is 2014.[279]"
    1. You haven't mentioned this section needing reconstruction yet, so the reader doesn't know it's being planned.
    2. Shouldn't this be in the 21st Century section?
    The reconstruction is being done in small segments, with the 2014 date being when the entire length from Irwin to Carlisle will have been rebuilt. Moved to 21st century section. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. You say "reconstruct(ion)" in five straight sentences.
    Varied wording. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. "Plans were made in 1993 to build a direct interchange between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and I-79 in Cranberry Township.[280]"
    1. Shouldn't this be in the Late 20th Century section?
    2. You're going to have to remind us where Cranberry Township is.
    It is in the 21st century section since it was completed then. Clarified where Cranberry Township is. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Who agreed upon the new interchange design?
    Mentioned. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Where did the ticketing system begin before it moved to Warrendale again?
    It began at Gateway, as mentioned elsewhere in the article. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. "Marshall Township and Pine Township," "Marshall and Pine townships,"
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Why did those two townships want to prevent the toll plaza?
    Mentioned. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Again, you need to remind us where those townships are.
    Clarified. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Why was the Butler service plaza closed? Tolls aren't collected there, so it seems unlikely that Warrendale is the reason.
    The service plaza was at the site of the Warrendale toll plaza. Clarified. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oh, OK, the I-79 interchange opened in 2003. This paragraph is poorly constructed if it starts and ends with the I-79 interchange but doesn't talk about that interchange the whole time.
    The interchange project went hand-in-hand with building the Warrendale toll plaza. Since they are related, they are mentioned in the same paragraph. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. What exactly is a slip ramp? What purpose do they serve?
    It is a ramp that only uses electronic toll collection. Clarified. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. "E-ZPass only" is an adjective, it should be "E-ZPass-only".
    Fixed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. "having cost of $5.1 million." What?
    The Virginia Drive slip ramp cost $5.1 million to build. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. They were going to build a slip ramp at PA 252? You're introducing it by saying it was canceled.
    Fixed. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  23. "In 2009, the slip ramp project was put on hold due to engineering issues in widening an adjacent portion of the turnpike.[293]"
    1. What sort of engineering issues?
    2. an adjacent the adjacent
    The article does not mention the specific issues. Fixed wording. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  24. It is currently fall 2012. Did you use {{As of}} or similar template to avoid potentially dated items?
  25. "The proposed slip ramp is to cost $160 million." You don't know that for sure. It is projected to cost that much.
    Fixed. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. The Schyulkill River is in Philadelphia, right?
    At this point, it is in Montgomery County. Clarified. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Was the new Susquehanna River bridge a segmental concrete bridge, or was it only planned to be one?
    • This isn't an issue that needs to be fixed, only my curiosity. When they widen the turnpike, do they have to add a proper median or are they just tacking on an extra lane to each side?
    They tack on an extra lane to each side. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  28. In removing the steps to St. John's, how are they providing access to the cemetery?
    They did not say, I would assume there would be no access to the church from the turnpike. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  29. What do you mean by "level of service of the Allegheny Mountain Tunnel"?
    Fixed. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Is the turnpike commission planning on making the entire turnpike at least 6 lanes wide? That's kind of how it seems. Consider moving all of that into a Widening section.
    They are not widening the entire turnpike to six lanes, only the busier sections. Dough4872 00:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Change the I-95 interchange header to "Interstate 95 interchange project"
    Changed. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  32. I would move "In 1982, the federal government mandated that the interchange be built in Pennsylvania.[334]" to before "A gap exists in I-95..."
    Moved. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  33. "Construction on the actual interchange with I-95 will begin in 2013 with the flyover ramps between northbound I-95 and the eastbound Pennsylvania Turnpike and the westbound Pennsylvania Turnpike and southbound I-95 to be completed by 2018." Run-on sentence.
    Split sentence. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  34. What purpose will the parallel Delaware River bridge serve?
    It will carry more lanes of traffic across the river. Dough4872 22:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rest of the article

Since the remaining points are so few and the above is so long, I figure I might as well post the rest of it. –Fredddie™ 03:05, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exit list
  1. You're missing mileposts. Since you're only using one decimal place, you could use Google Maps to supplement the turnpike map.
    Added missing mileposts. Dough4872 23:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I was hoping for ranges. In the RD, you list lengths for all the tunnels and bridges, but you only list one singular point in the exit list. –Fredddie™ 01:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Added ranges of bridges and tunnels. Dough4872 22:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I suggest you explore the PennDOT GIS data to see if you can get more precise mileage data.  VC  18:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Unfortunately the GIS data does not show the ramps where they intersect the turnpike so using that to milepost the exits would be difficult. Dough4872 01:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn't use ramp intersections for anything unless no other data was available. I use centerline intersections and urge you to do the same. –Fredddie™ 00:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The GIS data doesn't show the centerline of the trumpet interchange intersecting the turnpike either. The data only shows the ramp from the intersecting road and has it dead end at the toll plaza, with the interchange between the ramp and the mainline turnpike missing. Dough4872 00:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have a link to the GIS data? I would like to see it for myself. –Fredddie™ 00:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    This is where you can download the GIS data from. Dough4872 00:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. At my last FAC, overlinking was an issue. I would remove as many extra links as you can. The easiest way is changing {{{city#|Foo}}} to {{{location#|Foo}}} in {{Jct}}.
    Removed excess links. Dough4872 23:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
References
  1. I'm not going to go through each one, and anybody can answer this, but are Dakelman and Cupper supposed to be linked every time they're referenced?
    The references link to the works cited section, which has the full citation. U.S. Route 131 has this. Dough4872 23:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I know how it works; I am asking from an overlinking perspective. –Fredddie™ 01:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not think it is overlinking, as when one clicks on any of the footnotes, they have a direct link to the full reference. Dough4872 22:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not think linking Dakelman and Cupper every time is excessive. I did something similar for U.S. Route 113 and I did not have any problems.  VC  18:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am ending my review early just so other people can jump in and not feel like their review is getting lost. I do plan on doing a second pass once everyone else is done. Right now, though, I am leaning oppose. There have been far too many times where I have asked for something, a weak change or reply was made, and I have had to clarify what I thought was a clear instruction. And then the change still wasn't made. –Fredddie™ 12:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: this review needs 3 more supports, the completion of Imzadi1979's image review, and a spotcheck for promotion. --Rschen7754 09:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Random thoughts by Mitchazenia edit

  1. Need to split up paragraphs something fierce. These paragraphs are humongous and are a prevalent issue through the entire article. My suggestion is what I do, no more than 6–7 lines in the editing window per paragraph. This includes all wikilinks, but not references.
    Split several paragraphs. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Erm, there are still a ton of splittings that still need to be done. I just want to clarify, on my screen, it's a 90x9099 (or whatever the max is) editing window with 6–7 lines. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Split more paragraphs. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Tunnels subsection should be necessary here. These tunnels are a significant feature of the Turnpike and deserve their own subsection.
    This could be an idea we can go with. However, we can possibly also incorporate major river bridges too as they are also important structures along the turnpike. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You get my point. It should exist. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Created subsection. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Lead could use some more thoroughness than this and needs to have smaller paragraphs.
    The lead is supposed to provide a basic summary of the article, so excess detail is not needed there. Split paragraphs in lead. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    What changes? I don't know where you changed things. There's more bloated paragraphs now than split. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Split the paragraphs up. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Location consistency in infobox please. You jump from near to in, and using different municipality levels.
    I use the common location for identifying the interchange, which is usually a nearby city/borough or unincorporated municipality. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It would be a preference to drop the unincorporated municipalities. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I would prefer to keep the unincorporated municipalities as they are more known to people. I would rather say the east end of the I-76 concurrency is near Valley Forge than in Upper Merion Township as the former location's name is more well known to motorists. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Expansion of emergency systems wouldn't hurt. Right now it's a lone paragraph that also needs some sentences merged to make sense and not have awkward cutoffs. Radio broadcasts also suffer from the same shrimpiness problem. I would look into merging them and expanding on it considering they are similar.
    I would not be opposed to combining the emergency systems and radio broadcasts sections as they are both short. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    My condition is that you expand on them. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Expanded and merged. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Exit 352: Is STREET ROAD the actual interchange name. I know from personal experience the exit has no name.
    The turnpike lists Street Road as the exit name in the toll calculator and toll book. It has been practice on new signage for the slip ramps to not include the formal interchange name. Despite this, we should continue to include the name indicated in the toll calculator and toll book. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Source should be next to the name then.Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Added source. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. All the Dakelman sources if possible should have Neil Schorr's name on it.
    I just included Dakelman in the footnotes since he is the first author listed. I have seen other example of footnotes for books with multiple authors that only listed the first author. However, I would not be opposed to changing the footnotes to say "Dakelman and Schorr". Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    They worked equally, and I am basing on personal knowledge of one of the two authors, on the book.Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed footnotes to read "Dakelman and Schorr". Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. New York Times citation formatting is very inconsistent. Please keep to one format (see Refs 207 and 208 as an example of the problem.)
    The reason for the formatting inconsistencies is that the template generates the date in a different place depending on whether or not there is an author for the article. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Location, location, location. There is no consistency here whatsoever when it comes to use of locations in citations.
    The infobox and route description use location based on proximity to incorporated towns and unincorporated places to give people an idea with familiar place names. The exit list uses cities, boroughs, and townships as it is standard to use the exact municipality here. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not what I meant. I want the citations consistent, not use throughout the article. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding the locations in citations, newspaper articles only have a location specified if the location is not in the title of the newspaper. Otherwise I felt it was redundant to have the location specified if it was already mentioned in the newspaper title. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Why is the PennDOT wikilink in Citation 350? It should be in Citation 2.
    Fixed. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Please check for consistency of this Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Checked. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. What is citation 3 media-wise? (book, pamphet, what?)
    Book. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Make sure that's noted. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not know if there is a parameter in {{cite book}} that can specify this source is a book. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. This is optional, but I'd make this 3 columns of a reference list. 2 columns of 175 is a bit much.
    Done. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Exit 25A became exit 20? What is this?
    Exit 20 is based on the milepost on I-476 since Mid-County is a mainline toll plaza on I-476. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. A section could be considered on EZ-Pass ramps considering Exit 320 opened last week.
    Split slip ramps into new section. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Expand on the opening please. How many people were there? Any politicians?
    As mentioned, there was not a formal ribbon cutting or ceremony as the road opened on short notice. Basically all that happened was motorists lined up to enter the new road at midnight. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Why was the concrete failing in 1954? What led up to this?
    Added. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. I would move around design and construction considering I feel they read backwards.
    Switched order. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Any update on the St. John's stairs?
    Nope, the stairs still exist. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    According to what? The article writes without update. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have not seen any newspaper articles about the steps being removed since the newspaper article was published. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Added updated source on removal of steps. Dough4872 03:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Why 3di mileposts in the infobox? Nowhere else in PA do we use this.
    The GIS data for Pennsylvania can get mileposts out to several decimal places. I figured to go out to 3 since that is a good standard used in other states. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Repeat, we've never done that anywhere else in PA. The most is 1 or 2di, which is what should be a general rule for every other article in PA (mainly 2di as a preference). Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Narrowed down to 2di. Dough4872 01:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. I would please check for WP:OVERLINK as a precaution using the general rule that one use after the first to guide the reader is your basis.
    I tried to avoid mentioning links more than once in the article. In Fredddie's review, I removed several redundant wikilinks in the exit list. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. As much as it might not be the best thing for the article, an "In popular culture" section might be useful here.
    I think this section would be too trivial for the article. These sections are frowned upon in other road articles. Dough4872 17:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I would look into it anyway. There is stuff talking about it. This isn't just a two lane road. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I find this comment quite ridiculous. --Rschen7754 21:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just some random thoughts for now. Will have more later. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 05:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing on:

  1. What were the initial projections for revenue in 1940?
  2. A little more specific on the Philadelphia extension's groundbreaking locale. York County is rather broad.
    The source only says York County. However, the turnpike passes through only Fairview Township in York County. Dough4872 02:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Groundbreaking for the Gateway–Irwin section needs expansion please.
  4. I've never heard of Edgely, PA, and I've been through there a lot, I'd highly suggest clarifying it's location.
  5. I would expand on design (mathematics and schematics) of the tunnel entranceways. They went through some radical revamps in the 1960s.
  6. New Stanton is missing cost, what type of interchange it was and is (not grade-separated mind you.)
  7. How significant (in numbers) were the difference with the I-80 opening?
  8. How was the anniversary noted? $300,000 is very vague.
  9. Cost for the Irwin–Carlisle reconstruction?
  10. I-79 interchange design? Cost?
  11. What were the costs on the original decking of the Allegheny Mountain Tunnel changes in 2001?
  12. How is it deteriorating? Also the sentence this is attached to reads rather awkwardly.
  13. Why was the widening pushed back a year?
  14. I would make sure that the exit numbers are mentioned in the slip ramps section.
    Added exit numbers. Dough4872 02:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Weren't services areas demolished for the new interchange or is that area I see on I-276 west just openings for the interchange construction?
    Clarification, what happened to those service areas?Mitch32(The man most unlikely to drive 25 before 24.) 19:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The Neshaminy service plazas were closed and demolished to allow for the Street Road slip ramp to be built along with widening the roadway to six lanes. This is mentioned in the service plaza section. Dough4872 21:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Any updates on the Norristown ramps?
    Nope. Dough4872 02:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    According to whom? Did you look? Mitch32(The man most unlikely to drive 25 before 24.) 19:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    There have not been any newspaper articles that have mentioned the project since then and the project site has no updates since then. Dough4872 21:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  17. I'm confused on what you mean above by why Exit 20 is present at 476. Shouldn't this be using 276's numbering?
    Exit 20 is the Mid-County toll plaza, which serves as both an exit off the mainline turnpike in addition to being a mainline toll plaza along the Northeast Extension. As it is located along the mainline of I-476, the toll plaza's number is based on the mileposts from that road, even in signage along the mainline turnpike. Dough4872 02:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  18. There is signage for Exit 359 on the Exit 358 ramps heading towards the bridge. What does Exit 359 represent and why is it not covered in here?
    Exit 359 is the number for the Delaware River Bridge toll plaza along the mainline turnpike. The exit number is not mentioned in the exit list since it is not an exit per se. Dough4872 02:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Gotta be mentioned somewhere. Mitch32(The man most unlikely to drive 25 before 24.) 19:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Added. Dough4872 21:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure I will find more. But here's more to handle. Also read above. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: it's clear that there is a strong consensus against promotion. ACR is not a peer review, and I have to wonder about the stability of the article when this many changes are happening to it that are related to comprehensiveness. I also have to wonder about the validity of any review that was conducted before such a substantial rewrite. Speaking for myself, I would feel uncomfortable ever supporting any article that was torn apart at the ACR stage like this article is; it's fairly easy for accidental errors to slip in with just a bunch of prose corrections, as I found out with my CA 56 ACR. I am also concerned with nominator's reluctance to work on the article; we are fairly understanding when real life gets in the way (such as the slowdown due to the holidays); however, that does not seem to be the case here. We expect nominators (and reviewers) to respond in a timely manner out of fairness to the nominators of other articles, and there is a lack of respect for that here.

Therefore, I'm proposing an early closure of this review, without prejudice for a renomination once the above issues are addressed. Speaking with my USRD "founder" hat on, I want to personally support every USRD editor who wants to get their first FA, and I know that other USRD editors feel this way. Speaking with my USRD "featured article writer" hat on, I don't think that this is a good choice for a writer's first FA, due to the broadness and complexity of the topic. I would recommend starting with a less complex road, bringing it through ACR and FA, repeating a few times, and then coming back to this. If there are no substantial objections I propose closing this on Friday sometime. --Rschen7754 06:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are no objections from me. –Fredddie™ 07:03, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would still like this review to remain open as I plan on returning to this article once I get back up to school later this month. Dough4872 22:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but my comments about stability still stand. --Rschen7754 08:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To add to this, you can still work on the comments with the ACR closed. After addressing all of Mitchazenia's comments, we will probably need to re-check the prose again, which means that we will need to start over. In short, if Dough4872 is practically rewriting the article, we really need to start the review over. Feel free to bring this back once the issues above are dealt with. ACR is not a peer review. --Rschen7754 07:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and close the review now. I will look at Fredddie and Mitchazenia's unresolved comments to fix the article and renominate at ACR once those issues are addressed. Dough4872 22:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Highways/Assessment/A-Class_Review/Pennsylvania_Turnpike/archive1&oldid=1138362941"