Talk:Wheeling Tunnel

This article is a good article. This means the community feels it is written well.

Comments

After a quick read I have these questions:

• Rebuilding - what was the purpose of the rebuilding? The article mentions new tiles, but I am sure there must have been more.
• NAACP - The article says they objected to routing the road over the top. I know almost nothing about this organization except for its role in voting equality. What is it doing being involved in the tunnel plans? --Peterdownunder (talk) 20:39, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully I've addressed both concerns with these edits. I added a few sentences about what the project entailed. I also added one about the NAACP's objections (that neighborhoods would be lost). Only (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• The twin tunnels use a total of 13,000 square feet (1,200 m2) of industrial tile to line the inside of the tunnel. Suggest rewording here. "Industrial" could be linked to wikt, "tile" could be linked. "Line" is also not simple in this context IMO.
  • Done. Someone had already reworded it to "Coat" instead of "line". I don't know if that is simply in this context either, though.
• Perhaps add the year when first constructed in the lead
  • Done.
• I'd suggest rewording lead from: The tunnels are 0.27 miles (430 m) long. They run though Wheeling Hill. Each tunnel has two lanes of Interstate 70 and U.S. Route 250. to: The tunnels allow Interstate 70 and U.S. Route 250 to cut through Wheeling Hill. Each tunnel has two lanes of each road. Opened in 1966, the Wheeling Tunnel cost $6.9 million to build. It was rebuilt between 2007 and 2010 for $13.7 million dollars.
  • Done.
• powerwash needs a wikt entry
  • Not yet done. I'll work with redlinks later one...just looking at grammar, prose, and content for now.
• The tunnels cost $6.9 million (equivalent to $48 million in 2011[7]) any way to put the ref outside the end )?
  • Nope, that's part of the template for conversion. Only way to change that would be to change the template.
• It totaled $13.7 million because of the delays what delays?
  • Added information about the delays.

Most obvious issues found. Albacore (talk · changes) 21:06, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• "The rebuilding cost of $13.7 million." - The "of" is unnecessary.
  • Removed.
• Perhaps in the introduction, you should include the date the tunnel was originally built? It seems odd to include the dates of the rebuilding and not the original build date.
  • Added.
• This is possibly just my being OCD/stupid, but why is the "3" in "3 months" an Arabic numeral while the "eleven" in "eleven months" is spelled out?
  • Fixed.

In general there aren't any major errors in grammar - most of my comments are just nitpicking. (: [+piccolo] 00:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments on Rebuilding

The rebuilding section needs to be tightened up. Passive sentences can and should be rewritten with active cause and effect structure for clarity and simplicity "were caused by" "was found".

One word choice needs a fix: "The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and other groups were against this plan because houses would be removed." Where were the houses going to be removed to? I guess from the context they are actually going to be demolished or destroyed, right?

This sentence is unclear, "The tiles used in the tunnel before that were made by a now-closed company in Cleveland." Better to describe all of the tiling and retiling in time order, not out of sequence. More later. Gotanda (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I think I have fixed the issues. Only (talk) 13:14, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Question(s)

Just a quick question - in the 'overview' section, there is a sentence that reads 'The Wheeling Tunnel is sited between exits 1A and 1B on Interstate 70 and U.S. Route 250.' Is 'sited' simple? Could we do without it? --Orashmatash 19:36, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

 Fixed - --Orashmatash 21:53, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Re PGA Missing Refs

Refs 9 and 16 are deadlinks 404 error. Gotanda (talk) 01:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Number 16 works (the Wayback machine one), but the original is gone, as it says in the ref. πr² (talk • changes) 01:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Weird. 16 gave me a 404 the other day at work, but seems OK now. Wayback Machine taking a nap? But number 9 is still 404 and should be replaced for GA, right? Gotanda (talk) 03:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

 Fixed. Added the archive link for the 9th reference. Anything else? Only (talk) 11:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Is cut through simple?
  • Go for cut.
• The lead is quite short...
  • Did my best to expand it some but can't think of anything else to add.
• These two highways run on the same road - run in this context/meaning isn't simple/what you would think of first.
  • use for run
• The following sentences seems to be the same info as the intro. Why say things twice?
  • What following sentences? Following what?
• right lanes are used - passive.
  • tweaked
• I like the fact you've tried to explain the accel. decel. in brackets, however are the phrasal verbs speed up and slow down the simplest we can do?
  • Can you think of anything else? Because that's the best I've got.
• industrial tile was used - passive.
  • Don't know who the subject is here so keeping it passive.
• coat as a verb isn't that simple. Cover maybe (probably not the best either), or another verb.
  • Cover.
• The price fact appears in the intro... Once is enough, surely.
• The same as to $48M - the same as - also you might want to say why (I.e. inflation/link to an article which explains why currencies aren't worth the same as years ago).
  • Really don't think it's worth a full explanation in the parenthesis here.
• Broke ground not simple.
  • started construction? but that's not truly the same meaning
• contract was given to - passive.
  • fixed
• construction was stopped - passive.
  • fixed
• fans were put in - passive and not simple. Installed maybe, or another word.
  • installed is fine...no clue on subject so keeping passive
• rebuilding of the eastbound - rebuilding the eastbound sounds better to me.
  • It makes more sense with the "of." It'd have to be rephrased to "While rebuilding the eastboard tunnel..."
• Link tiles.
  • Already linked in previous section.
• That also delayed - I think this would sound better here.
  • fixed
• because of the problems - Not clear at first which you are referring to. I'd use these instead of the.
  • fixed
• to just build the road over Wheeling Hill - a instead of the.
  • fixed
• Building that new road would remove - Building the new road would have removed.
  • fixed
• and other groups - vague.
  • removed
• the new road was cancelled - passive.
  • fixed
• Rebuilding the eastbound tunnel started again in July 2008. word order is awkward. Needs shuffling around.
  • I don't see what's awkward here...added an "of" between rebuilding and the, though. That should help.
• the westbound tunnel was also closed overnight for rebuilding. - passive and only instead of also (ambiguous otherwise).
  • added the only, but not fixing the passive.
• cameras were added. - passive.
  • Not sure of subject, keeping passive.
• The whole tunnel was also cleaned - passive.
  • not sure of subject.
• rebuilding was finished - passive.
  • fixed
• The westbound tunnel was closed - passive.
  • fixed
• totaled - totalled.
  • Isn't "totaled" USEng? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
    • True, my spelling app came up with it because it is set to BReng. Yottie ^=talk= 11:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I know it's not always easy to change the passive, but in the ones I found I think it is. The article is rather short (circa 3000bts), the lead is too. Not sure how it's made GA on enwp, but it has. I'm not too happy with short articles becoming GAs, but if that's the only issue, then I won't oppose it for that reason. Yottie ^=talk= 13:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Not sure I understand the concern with the "passive", "The westbound tunnel was closed..." (for example) is completely fine.

I'd agree with Yottie that editors can and should change many of the passive constructions in the article. Gotanda (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Then I suggest you both help fix them up. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed it the best I can. Some passives need to remain unless a subject can be identified. If you can find one for them, by all means, please fix them. As for length, as has been discussed on other GA and VGA discussions, length should not be a factor in considering appropriateness for GA or VGA. Length is not one of the criteria. Please let me know if there are other issues. Only (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)