Talk:Johnstown Inclined Plane

History

The History section of this article was a copyvio from inclinedplane.com. The technical section of this article was a copyvio from inclinedplane.com as well. I've blanked both sections to fix the copyright violation, but someone should reword the article in their own words - not those of inclinedplane.com. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 18:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• Purely technical information is fact, and it's public domain under Feist v. Rural. I'm partially relisting.--M@rēino 18:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I added back in the history and a brief bit on the engineer, put in inline citations, removed the stubs, and updated the PA project tag here. Unfortunately, I also discovered the picture used is almost certainly copy vio, so I tagged that and listed it at WP:PUI. Anyone near Johnstown with a camera want to get a decent picture? ;-) Ruhrfisch 02:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

trails

i would like to add that while the website says the sculpture trail is to your left, it is actually to your right.

--Pndfam05 19:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC) I suppose right/left is determined by your relative location. If at the top, the sculpture is on the right. If on the bottom, the sculpture is on the left.

Haunted?

There was a mine at the bottom of the walking trail that blew up in the earlier part of the 20th century, killing more than 100 men. There are several local legends about the ghost of a coal miner dressed in 1900s gear who wanders the trail. There are also stories about the ghost of a young boy who was also killed in the mines. I think this is worth making into a new section on the Inclined Plane article, although nothing has ever been proved. If there are no objections, I'm going to go ahead and create this section. Thanks. SaintJimmy505 (talk) 17:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Anything like this has to be sourced to reliable sources - just adding something unsourced on a haunted funicular will get reverted pretty quickly, I'd imagine. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

"world's steepest vehicular inclined plane"?

The only source for this claim is the local travel section of a local paper's website, which claims that the Guinness Book of Records carries the entry, but I can find nothing at guinnessworldrecords.com. ASME.org carries a modified claim: "The Johnstown incline is among the world's steepest vehicular inclines": that looks to me like careful avoidance of an absolute claim. A brief look on wiki for places I know led me to one that is steeper (East Hill Cliff Railway, and that only claims to be the steepest in the UK): google brought others to my attention.

The counter-claim seems to be that this is the steepest funicular that can carry cars. This may well be the case, but is unclear. The phrasing is unclear (a plane is a two dimensional surface, an inclined plane is a two dimensional surface that is not horizontal, a vehicular inclined plane is a two dimensional surface that is not horizontal with transport on it: ergo, "vehicular inclined plane" describes any funicular"). The only site that has come to my attention that makes the explicit claim for Johnstown that it is the steepest funicular that can carry "independent" vehicles is its own website: that is not a RS. Kevin McE (talk) 07:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The term "funicular" is rarely used in this context (at least in the U.S.), as "incline" and "inclined plane" are far more in common in describing this type of railway (both of which are used as alternate terms in the funicular article). Though by your logic, any device capable of moving people is a people mover, even though that term generally refers to the automated trains; you'd be technically correct. Should it be clarified that, in this context, a funicular and inclined plane are the same thing? ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 16:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Accuracy of incline numbers given

I have calculated 70.9% (given in article) incline as closer to 35⅓°. I have also calculated 35° 28" (also given in article) as closer to 71.24% incline. Which one is it? Backspace (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The measurements are sourced from material produced by the operators of the incline. If they are inaccurate, I am not sure where you could find more accurate measurements, short of measuring it yourself. I did email the incline back when this article was promoted with the same concern and asking for clarification, but haven't heard back. Not sure what else to say, other than I went with what measurements verifiable sources had; anything else could've run a foul of WP:OR. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 19:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thirdly, the article states that the incline (hypotenuse) is 896.5 ft. long, with a vertical 502.2 ft. rise. Assuming that these numbers are accurate would give an angle of only 34.068°, or only 67.624% grade. It just gets more confusing. Backspace (talk) 21:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Johnstown Inclined Plane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110816064820/http://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communities/History/Landmarks/5579.pdf to http://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communities/History/Landmarks/5579.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

FAR Notice

• Springirth 2006 should probably be removed as an SPS (see this 2020 RSN discussion)
• Fountain 2007 should be treated as any other newspaper source
• Forte 1994 is based on tourist brochures and was written by undergrad students
• Ridership data needs to be updated
• The 2021-2023 restoration seems like an afterthought
• The CN tag needs to be dealt with
• The two file gallery under Use seems odd

-- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 15:25, 23 April 2023 (UTC)