Talk:Clydesdale Motor Truck Company

Clydesdale Motor Truck Company has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 4, 2018. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Clydesdale Motor Truck Company appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 April 2018 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Clydesdale Motor Truck Company was named, in part, after a breed of horse?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2018/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clydesdale Motor Truck Company.

Wikipedia

United States: Ohio Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.

Trucks Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trucks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of trucks 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.TrucksWikipedia:WikiProject TrucksTemplate:WikiProject TrucksTrucks
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Clydesdale Motor Truck Company/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 1.02 editor (talk · contribs) 01:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll be taking this review, expect comments soon. 1.02 editor (C651 set 217/218) 01:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 1.02, thanks for reviewing. SpinningSpark 07:12, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be taking over this review, so just doing a watchlist bump right here. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 18:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking this up. SpinningSpark 19:45, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Wound up" sounds like a euphemism for a company being folded.

"Finished off" is too.
- I don't see why either of those are a problem. Wound up is no more of a euphemism than folded, and, in fact, has an exact technical meaning of liquidation of the assets of a company in receivership. The article says as much; the company collapsed in 1938 but was not wound up until the following year. A euphemism is avoiding directly saying what is meant. Both those phrases are very direct. SpinningSpark 16:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Link the United States Army earlier in the article and the 1916 expedition when first mentioned.
- Done SpinningSpark 16:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"After WWI Clydesdale" Write out World War I or add the abbreviation earlier mentions of the war.
- Done SpinningSpark 16:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's a book preview for the Middleton and Semon book on Google, you should link it.
- I don't agree with that and will explain why if you ask me outside the GA review, but for now see Wikipedia:What the Good article criteria are not § (2) Factually accurate and verifiable. SpinningSpark 16:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming good faith on the sources.

That should be it. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 04:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I haven't agreed with everything you have said here, but hopefully we can come to a compromise and move forward. SpinningSpark 16:43, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinningspark: Yeah, I'm just going to pass it. Not worth the discussions over something tiny. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 18:48, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]