Talk:Conestoga wagon

Conestoga wagon is currently a Transport good article nominee. Nominated by PrimalMustelid (talk) at 11:02, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

Short description: Type of covered wagon

United States: Old West Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject American Old West (assessed as Low-importance).

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Equine Low‑importance

	Horses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Old

Original article by Paul Schils from The Netherlands (09 Sep 2004)

Phantom redirect to Fr:Islam

Does anybody know why this page redirects to the French Wiki's article on Islam? I can't see anything in the code. This doesn't happen when one clicks on the current revision in the history, but it does when one clicks on a hyperlink to "Conestoga_wagon" in another article. --Adamrush 13:50, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The wagon does not need to be directed to this webpage. Although there are similarities like 4 wheels on the cart, a covered wagon is built differently and is used to carry people as well as products. For pictures of some covered wagons, visit some pictures of covered wagons that look differently. However, continued input is requested for this page from others. --Mcdav

Is this vandalism or just a goof?

There's some bad problems with the layout of this article but I have the flu and am too tired to fix them, so I'm just being lazy and tagging it. =/ 134.50.7.201 06:48, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing it. Looks like the Dec 17th edit DID add some useful information though, that should probably be readded. Maybe I'll try to remember to do it when I don't have a fever but it'd be appreciated if someone else would do it. >.<; 134.50.7.201 07:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

the diary

they had diarys that they made that told about there day and wat they did —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.108.244.154 (talk) 21:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

EDIT: I dont know exactly how I'm supposed to edit the pages properly, but I changed 7,300 in the text to read 5,300 because that is much closer to the actual conversion rate for 100 pounds for 100 miles into Kg-Km (5,273 would be more exact) - Bailen

stop redirect

'prairie schooner' gets redirected here, yet there is also Prairie Schooner. Perhaps the redirect should be deleted.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

serious, pervasive error (Conestoga vs. "Covered Wagon"

This article misunderstands the difference between a Conestoga and a prairie schooner. I suspect that further revisions will continue this error. NONE of the illustrations on this page are Conestogas. A Conestoga is a very specific type of heavy freight wagon with a curved bed. Prairie schooners were ordinary farm wagons, which had the lightness and durability necessary for a cross-country trip. Conestogas are associated with the 18th century and the East Coast; prairie schooners with the 19th century and the overland trails. For an authoritative discussion of the difference between the two wagons, restrict your Googling to authoritative Oregon Trail sites.Bentruwe (talk) 07:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, what is really needed is a separate page for covered wagons (includinging the "prarie schooner", with a link to this page), and this page should be modified to be specifically about Conestoga wagons (the heavy cargo wagons). -- Mshark 2008-07-24

I removed the references to westward expansion, the irrelevant photos, and added a paragraph, with reference, to the effect that Conestogas were not the same as prairie schooners. Not a very neat or tidy job, but at least it gets this whopping misinformation out of Wikipedia. --DPL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.228.152.241 (talk) 16:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Conestoga wagon/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: PrimalMustelid (talk · contribs) 11:02, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 00:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I aim to check this out this weekend. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima Just checking in, will you be able to start the review shortly? PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep! Was planning on starting today. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty, see you then. PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, ended up dealing with some other stuff tonight and didnt get around to this. Will be able to tomorrow. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I can wait for the time being. PrimalMustelid (talk) 12:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Lede quite solid. A bit on the larger size, but for an article this big it's all good.
Conestoga River isn't linked in the Origin section.
I feel the alternative name for covered wagons might go better in their first mention.
Description section extremely solid. Only possible change I'd make would be removing the subheading "General characteristics", as that's what would already be assumed by "Description" without a subheading.
I don't quite know what a running gear is - is there a good place to link it, or a way to shortly describe what that does?
Extremely minor but I'd just wikilink the "wagon jack" portion of the "Conestoga wagon jack" image caption
Production section good.
I feel there might be a bit too much context for what the Pennsylvania Dutch are here; I think that paragraph could be cut down to just a couple sentences.
Image caption beginning "The spread of railroads" should end with a period.
Whenever you have "(Town name), Pennsylvania", you should put a comma after Pennsylvania if it's not the end of a sentence.
Legacy section good.
- Implemented all of the above suggestions. PrimalMustelid (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images

All appear properly licensed. Not a requirement, but alt-text would be nice for accessibility reasons.
- Added alt text. PrimalMustelid (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Well formatted, with generally high quality sources all around. A couple inconsistencies:
- You use a different kind of ISBN, as well as a superfluous OL, for Smith (1988)
- Technically, Ellis et. al 2023 isn't a journal article, but a report.
- In lieu of an ISBN, maybe Reist (1975) and Shumway & Frey (1968) should be given OCLCs?
- You're not consistent about which journal/book sources have "retrieved on", and I don't think that's really something that gets used outside of website and online news sources.
  - Removed some instances of "access-date" and retained them in "other sources" where material is archived. I removed the OL for Smith (1988) but am unsure as to what I should do regarding the ISBN. Implemented everything else. PrimalMustelid (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A couple sources don't pass the sniff test.
- Clark (2017) isn't actually academically published, and I don't think Clark hits subject matter expert status; I don't think that's appropriate.
  - I decided to replace it with different verified citations in all but one area since he did cite his sources most of the time. I kept it in the end because he's the only person who touches on its 21st century relevance in some form, but I can remove that as well if you wish. PrimalMustelid (talk) 14:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ve
Spot check to come.