# Talk:Red Caboose Motel

This review is transcluded from Talk:Red Caboose Motel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Wasted Time R (talk · contribs) 19:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Some writing and MoS issues in the text, see below
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
One cite misidentified, variety of newspaper sources not ideal, see below
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Some undue weight needs addressing and/or reorganization needed, see below
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
One image should be added, see below
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
An interesting subject, but some aspects need attention
Re writing and MoS issues:
The lede should state briefly that despite the motel's name, not all the cabooses in it are in fact red.  This change over time is covered later in the text – The exteriors of each caboose were painted ... – but it would be useful to state up front.

done, stated in lead
originally named the Red Caboose Lodge – when did the name switch?

there is no source that discusses the name change. It is "observed" that newspapers from about 1972 always say "Motel" instead of "Lodge". I don't want to put any WP:SYNTH in the text, but added this as a note.
I'm not sure where you get the 1972 switch from.  For example, for the year 1980, Newspapers.com has 15 hits for 'Red Caboose Lodge' and 16 for 'Red Caboose Motel', even.  From what I've seen I think you can legitimately say it was called Lodge at the beginning, Motel in the 21st century, and in between both names appear to have been used to refer to it.   Wasted Time R (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
You are right, I should not have said "only" starting in 1972. It was originally RCL - we know that from the corp filing and the history pamphlet he published. The note I added says the place was "operated" as the RCM from around 1972. I think this is correct, for example this is a help wanted ad for the RCM in 1972. I think Denlinger switched the name in the early 70s.  Some of the newspaper hits in the 80s for RCL are because that was the name of the company and reporters were using the company name in some articles about the septic problem and such matters, not the dba name. Also, it appears he never re-issued the history pamphlet with the new name, so yes - RCL was still in use too. I adjusted the note accordingly (and moved it).
The "History" section would better be called "Origin", as there are later sections which give subsequent history of the motel and its operation.

done
Denlinger, who became a "tourism industry legend", – according to whom? A tourist official, a newspaper reporter, himself?

not clear, it was in a newspaper article but not really clear if the reporter was saying that or it went further. I reworded the sentence a bit.
... the railroad's "rolling stock graveyard" in ... – I don't think the quotes are needed here, or if they are, just around 'graveyard'.

moved quotes to around 'graveyard'
Note 'a' should be brought up into the article text itself, since it represents yet a third variant of the origin story.

not done. I don't feel comfortable doing that, again WP:SYNTH. There is no source covering this - I found the 1967 registration of the name RCL in a search of Penn state business database. This is borderline OR as it is.
Well, it's either OR/SYNTH or it isn't – I don't think calling it half-a-SYNTH and sticking it in a Note is an approved technique :-)  Opinions will vary but I think this is acceptable to use in the text.  This is clearly the same entity, since Denlinger's and his wife's names are on it, and so it's another piece of history you are presenting and readers can evaluate it as they see fit.   Wasted Time R (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, I pulled the note into the text and reworked that section accordingly.
At some time in 1969 prior to the unexpected January 4 phone call, ... – this wording presupposes that the first of the original stories is the true one.  Better would be to say something like "Regardless of how the idea came about, Denlinger searched for a property ..."

reworded this
A railroad post office car and baggage car and 19 additional cabooses were added in the 1980s. ... The town granted permission to add eight cabooses in 1984, ... – the sequencing here isn't clear.  Are the 19 new cabooses before, after, or part of the 8 cabooses?

There is no sequencing. A P.O., baggage, and 19 more cabooses were added in the 80s. One source said the town granted permission to add 8 cabooses in 1984. That is all I know. The 8 could have been the first 8 of the 19, the last 8, or somewhere in the middle. I reworded to clarify.
The new owners, who had not previously been in the hospitality industry, ... – the article gives the name of all the previous owners, why not these current ones?

Named them also.
Re sourcing issues:
The motel has been called "world famous" – according to whom?  The source is a book about car culture, not trains?  That's a little strange.  And if this place is so famous, why did no Wikipedia article about it exist until July 2020?

It is a motel, where people drive to in cars. Unique motels are very much a part of car culture. The "world famous" claim  is corroborated by the other coverage following clause.
fn 13 says it is from the Pittsburgh Press, but the clipping is actually from the Sunday News in Lancaster.

A copy/paste error in the ref section. The Pittsburgh Press article was used earlier in the article. I think the refs are all straightened out now.
A large number of the sources are from Lancaster newspapers.  They are okay to use, but the level of interest in the subject would be indicated if other newspapers wrote about the motel.  Are there stories available in Philadelphia papers, or Harrisburg, or Scranton, or ones in Delaware or Maryland?

There probably are. In addition to books and websites I used newspapers in Lancaster, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Scranton,  Indiana, and USA Today. As I recall, there were reprints of at least one Sunday-type "feature" article around the country but I certainly didn't cite the same article reprinted in different papers. There are probably more in some of the places you mentioned, but I am limited to what the newspaper.com archives.
Re level of coverage:
Some of the lengthy descriptions, such as the derailing problems when the cabooses were first being delivered, seem more oriented towards train buffs than general readers.  Well, I guess that's true of Wikipedia transportation articles in general.
I think the "Incidents" section is undue weight as it stands.  Any facility of this size that has been in business for 50 years is going to have had a fire or a leak or a sewer problem or an electrical problem, etc during that time.  As it stands, this must be the longest description of any septic system struggle in all of Wikipedia.  I notice that the all the sources for it are Lancaster newspaper ones.  Local papers tend to cover some local stories exhaustively, but did any papers outside the area cover this?
Instead, I think that these incidents should be merged in with the "Ownership" section to form a "Later history" section.  Because it sounds like the 2002 septic failure is part of what led to the 2003 sale and perhaps the bankruptcy?  That would make it relevant to the history of the motel.  But otherwise there is too much detail here.  And there's nothing that indicates that the two fires were of any real significance.

I removed the fires and the septic story is now integrated into the later ownership section, some detail moved to notes or removed.
The "Media coverage" section seems unconnected to anything else.  When did these media features appear, early after the motel opened or steadily throughout its existence?  I would try to integrate this section into a "Later history" section as well, or maybe add it at the end of the "Design and Operation" section.

I expanded this a bit.
From a business perspective, there is a gap in the narrative.  The motel is apparently popular when it first opens in 1970 and stays popular enough that it expanded during the mid-1980s.  What happens after that?  Was it still in good shape when Denlinger sold it in 1993?  Then by the early 2000s it is in trouble - was that solely because of the septic issues, or had it become less popular for people to stay at?  Do any sources say what the occupancy/vacancy rates were during any of these periods?

I agree, but I don't have any sources on anything else. I included everything I could find in newspaper articles available on newspapers.com. There may well be more written in some hospitality industry publication, but nothing I could find online.
I gather from sites like this one that there are other hotels around the world that are converted from rail carriages.  Do any of them pre-date the Red Caboose Lodge?  Or is it the other way around?

most of these are not relevant. Some are railroad-themed places, or overnight train excursions. the following offer lodging in train cars:
The Antlers Inn in Texas is a tourist hotel built in 1901 and re-opened in the late 90s. Most rooms are in the hotel or surrounding cabins, but there are also three cabooses.
The Santo Express in South Africa uses coaches, not cabooses and opened in mid-90s.
The Featherbed Railroad B&B in California has 9 cabooses, dating from mid/late 90s.
The Aurora Express B&B in Alaska has 5-6 cars, one is a caboose.
The Old Railway Station in the UK has lodging in a former station and four coach cars.
None are as old or big as the Red Caboose.
Re images:
There is an image on Commons from 1996 – Image:Strasburg - Pennsylvania Railroad railway cars.jpg – that shows the Red Caboose Lodge (see the 'RCL' painted on them) from when all of the cabooses were indeed red.  That image should be included in the article somewhere.

added
Anyway, that's the review, I am placing the nomination on hold.  Wasted Time R (talk) 16:31, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Wasted Time R, Thanks for the review. After waiting for several months, this review has happened when I have suddenly become very busy IRL. I am going to be away for three days later in the week, so there is no way I will be able to make any updates until next week. Some of this will take some time - like when did the name change from Lodge to Motel - I will have to look through the sources for info like that. MB 00:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
@MB: Understood, no problems.  As for when the name change happened, the Newspapers.com search result histograms may help, but it looks to me like both names were used interchangeably during certain periods.   Wasted Time R (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Wasted Time R, I just finished going through everything. Updates are in the article. MB 03:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@MB: I'm looking it over, but meanwhile, you do not seem to have responded to the two points above that I made in this edit a couple of weeks ago.   Wasted Time R (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Wasted Time R, I didn't notice those at all. I didn't realize you had been back - I assumed you would wait for me to say I was done. I made some more changes to address those two points. MB 04:15, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@MB:  Okay, we're done – I have passed the article.  Good work on it ...   Wasted Time R (talk) 10:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

To avoid OR, I'd suggest reworking the first few paragraphs of the "Origin" section roughly as follows: Red Caboose Lodge incorporated in 1967 by Denlinger—Denlinger an entrepreneur etc.—Bought cabooses in 1969—"Accounts differ on the circumstances of Denlinger's purchase"—Narrate the 1970 newspaper account, then the "official" account from the motel—Move on to recounting how the cabooses were delivered. We don't have to make a statement in Wikivoice as to whether any of these in particular are accurate or inaccurate, just present the facts and let the reader draw their own inferences about how to reconcile the accounts. Choess (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I think I've gotten that issue more or less sorted. There are some further improvements that could be made here. There are a bunch of archived URLs to things like Google Books pages and so on where the archive doesn't actually show the information that's being cited, which is rather pointless. Also, it looks like some of the later books and newspaper articles have simply repeated the early history of the motel from the motel's own pamphlet. To the extent that they do so, I think it would be better to cite the pamphlet directly and cut out the middleman, as it were. Choess (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)