Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Saline Valley salt tram/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Buidhe via FACBot (talk) 12 March 2022 [1].

Saline Valley salt tram

[edit]
Nominator(s): ♠Vami_IV†♠ 05:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a defunct aerial tramway that operated in the mountainous desert of south-eastern California at various times in the 20th century. Whenever it was operating, it was the steepest tramway in the whole country. It was created by Possibly as a Draft in July 2021 and then entered mainspace that December, since then it has become a Good Article. I believe it now worthy of the bronze star. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 05:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support by CactiStaccingCrane (talk)

[edit]

Will definitely comment :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 05:14, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, after reading Wikipedia:Notability#Whether to create standalone pages, I have some concerns about the topic's warrant of an article. The sourcing are definitely good, but I think that individual contents these listings at Death Valley to National Register of Historic Places listings in Death Valley National Park would be more appropriate. I would let FAC coordinators (@FAC coordinators: ) to decide whether this is a good idea or not. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 05:24, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's notable. NRHP structures are generally held to meet WP:GEOFEAT, and I'd say DeDecker and the NRHP nomination form certainly count towards notability. Unrau contains significant coverage, as well. I would say there's also definitely a case for a separate article, as extended content on this subject would be WP:UNDUE at the NRHP list article. Hog Farm Talk 05:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks! I will take a look at the article and do the usual FAC-picking. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 05:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Prose
[edit]

(strikethrough meant deletion, [brackets] meant appending)

---

  • The Saline Valley salt tram was an electric aerial tramway located in Inyo County, California. It was constructed from 1911 to 1913 to carry salt from the Saline Valley over the Inyo Mountains to a terminus northeast of Keeler, California in the Owens Valley. —— redundant phrasing of "tram", better: "The Saline Valley salt tram was located in Inyo County, California and constructed from 1911 to 1913. The electric aerial tramway carried salt from the Saline Valley, over the Inyo Mountains, and end at northeast of Keeler, California in the Owens Valley."
  • its construction and operation was ruinously [too] expensive for the business [and cause the company to go bankrupt]. —— The previous wording was very muddy
  • Its [The] salt mining operation and tram were [then?] leased to the Owens Valley Salt Company until it[s] went bankrupt[cy] in 1918. —— Better to say "the" than "it", as "it" could mean either the company, the tram's construction, and the tram itself
  • The tram did not see use again until 1929, when t[Between then and 1929, t]he Sierra Salt Company repaired and upgraded it.[the system.] —— Obviously you cannot use the tram when it is repaired
  • [In 1935, t]he Sierra Salt Company, too, went bankrupt in 1935, marking the[its] permanent closure of the salt tram. —— Unnecessary repetition of "salt tram" in prior sentences
  • It was placed on[designated at] the National Register of Historic Places on December 31, 1974. —— "placed" won't do justice to this honor

---

  • The extraction of salt from the Saline Valley began i[I]n 1864, when a farmer residing in the nearby Owens Valley began gathering[gathered] salt from a 12-square-mile (31 km2) deposit at the southeastern end of the valley[Saline Valley]. —— It is redundant to basically say "This is the beginning" at the article's first sentence.
  • The farmer sold the [99% pure] salt, which had a purity of 99%, to other settlers in the Owens Valley[his neighbour] —— "Which had a purity of 99%" break up the prose
  • but found transportation between the valleys prohibitively expensive. Located between the Panamint and Inyo Mountains, access to the Saline Valley was difficult [as the farmer found out] —— redundant, the next sentence said precisely that
  • I[Nearly four decades later, i]n 1902, the Conn and Trudo Borax Company established a mine in the Saline Valley —— It's good to give the reader some sort of length between long breaks of time
  • Directed by businessman L. Bourland as its president, t[T]he SVSC mined the valley's salt at a small scale from 1903 until [the company's president L.] Bourland died in 1905. —— Too much emphasis on a random businessman
  • Thereafter, Smith took over direction of the company and began seeking investors so as to enlarge the SVSC's operations. —— Redundant phrasings
  • In 1907, the SVSC began studying how to simplify transportation into and out of [investigating transportation to and from] the Saline V[v]alley —— I assumed that they do have access to the mine, but they want to build a proper system to transport salt. If what the source meant that they study possible transportation methods but then quit, then this sentence need to rephrase in another way. Nevermind, but this sentence works best if being placed on the next paragraph

---

  • [They considered]A railroad and a pipeline were considered, but were ruled out because of [their high] cost and [low] practicality —— Clarify the reason why they don't build other alternatives to a tram
  • Instead, the SVSC opted for an aerial tramway[,] crossing the Inyo Mountains to reach a processing plant on Owens Lake. —— Add a comma to separate run-ons
  • Surveys of the terrain to be crossed took place f[F]rom 1908 to July 1911[, the company survey the terrain] —— Date should go at the front of the sentence, unless it is not important at all. Also, this would make the information less confusing.
  • Work began the following month and was immediately complicated by the rough terrain of the selected route. —— Way too redundant. We know these information implicitly by default.
  • Construction was difficult; w[W]orkers were obliged to live out of tents[lived inside tents] while the work itself often took place in [site's temperature might rise up to] 100 °F (38 °C) heat —— No real need for passive voice here. Workers aren't forced to live in tents, it's that there is no option to live in the first place.
  • In order t[T]o transport construction materials, a road on the w[W]estern slopes had to be[was] expanded and a team of eight horses [were] employed for pulling supplies. —— Redundancy and correct grammar
  • lasted until July 1913 and was ruinously expensive for the SVSC. —— Tone not encyclopedic
  • In 1915, it[the company] leased the Saline Valley operation[salt mining and tram] to the Owens Valley Salt Company, which worked the Saline Valley until [the leasee company] going bankrupt in 1918 —— Always help to clarify broad, generic words and delete redundancies
  • In 1935, the Sierra Salt Company[company] went bankrupt —— repetition
  • It was reopened, though briefly, for the last time in 1954. —— The phrase break the well-crafted prose in prior sentences

---

  • The tramway had a length of[was] 13.4 miles (21.6 km) [long], which was divided into five sections ranging in length from 0.75 miles (1.21 km) to 4 miles (6.4 km). —— If miles aren't the indication of length, then what else?
  • Each of these sections was managed by its own [a] control station. —— Of course that it is controlled section's control station, no need to say that it is owned by the sections
  • In addition[,] to these[there] were 34 subsidiary structures for maintaining tension on[of] the line. —— Prior phrasing is a huge run-on
  • During its operation[From 1913 to 1954], the route was the steepest of any aerial tram in the United States —— Specify exact time rather than forcing the reader to do math gymnastics
  • The line rose 7,600 feet (2,300 m) from the Saline Valley [rose 7,600 feet (2,300 m)] —— Wrong order
  • which weighed 800 pounds (360 kg) [when empty] and [could] held up to 700 pounds (320 kg) of salt —— Missing words
  • The first(,) [cable] for loaded buckets(,) was 1.125 inches (28.6 mm) thick while[and] the second(,) [cable] for empty buckets(,) was 0.875 inches (22.2 mm) thick —— Comma break prose
  • Power was supplied by an 75 horsepower (56 kW) Westinghouse electric engine at each control station[, which was] that was in turn powered by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power —— run-on
  • to perform[do] maintenance along the tramway —— Shorter is better, also, we do implicitly know that they are there to maintenance the tramway

---

  • On October 31, 1973, the Bureau of Land Management office responsible for the Saline Valley salt tram nominated it[the Saline Valley salt tram] for inclusion —— We know that the Bureau of Land Management office is responsible for the tram, therefore the agency can nominate it in the first place
  • The nomination was received on October 16, 1974(,) and was approved on December 31, 1974 —— Comma break the prose
  • The tram was named[included] a historic structure by the state of California on the same date —— "included" is better as there is already a list of California historical structure

--- Overall, I like the article! It is an interesting read. I would give a pass on the prose once everything is done. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 07:29, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Media and other stuff
[edit]
Those used to be in the article as a gallery, but their copyright status is dubious and thus they were removed from the article. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Coordinate is way too detailed, see WP:COORDPREC for help
  • potential ramblings

Overall, I support the article on all criteria except 1b, 1c, 1f, and 3 at what is a featured article. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 07:59, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Comments from ChrisTheDude

[edit]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]

I'll review this, but first you might take at look at this and this to see if you can incorporate any of the material in the article. The first clipping is just a short reference at the end of the article, but it's interesting because as far as I can tell it's not included in the history as you give it. The other one includes pictures, but they may be too poor to use. Both articles are out of copyright in case you did want to use the pictures. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, good finds! I've plugged in the second of those to have the final cost of the tram's construction in the article. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There's also this, which seems like it must be the same tram, though I'm not sure if I could prove it to the extent of using this in the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:33, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And searching newspapers.com for "Saline Valley Salt Company" finds a lot more; see this for example; I got 66 hits, though just looking at the first page, that's the only one that looks useful. Searching for "Owens Valley Salt Company" finds more: [2], [3], [4], [5]. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:47, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A quick look in Google Books finds this, which has a wonderful picture of the first day of operation. Wehrey cites the Eastern California Museum and other collections; it might be worth contacting both Wehrey and the museum to see what images exist under what copyrights -- there might be free images available. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That does indeed seem like it'd be the same tram, but I do not remember the name "Combs" from any of my research. Indeed, our tram was built by the Trenton Iron Company, a subsidiary of US Steel. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll come back to this tomorrow, but would you mind if I tried contacting Wehrey and the museum? I'd like to see if we can find some additional material, and that book convinces me there is more sourcing out there if we can find it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:25, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead. We've got some additional photos already on Commons from the early 19th century that we can't use at the moment because we don't know the date of publishing. It would be fantastic to know definitively if they were put out there before 1927. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 15:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I emailed the museum; I'll let you know when I hear from them. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vami IV, I am starting to think you should withdraw this and work on getting more sources; I think the article can be expanded. There's a book partly visible on Google Books titled Salt to Summit by Daniel Arnold in which he tells the story of the tram's construction, though I can only see part of it. Similarly George Turner's Slim Rails Through the Sand seems to have a page or two about the tram. I've emailed the Eastern California Museum about the image in Wehrey's book but haven't heard back. I think we could probably get another picture of the current state of the tram or one of its surviving trestles. There's a 32-page article about the construction of the tram in the April 1917 proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers called "An Aerial Tramway for the Saline Valley Salt Company, Inyo County, California", by F.C. Carstarphen, including several photos. Another Arcadia Press book, Lone Pine, by Christopher Langley, contains more pictures of the tramway, noted as from the Bruce Branson collection; I am emailing him to see if he has more resources or can provide copyright information. That's all in addition to the links above. I know articles can be expanded while at FAC, but I think it would be best to take more time. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Salt to Summit is an autobiography and the sources already used more ably and comprehensively cover the construction, operation, route, and specifications of the tramway; I doubt Slim Rails Through the Sand has anything more to add about the train; I didn't want to use the 1917 Proceedings because it was so close in time and had information already in the sources I was using or was superfluous, like (IIRC) how much Owens Valley Salt was paying for the lease. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 01:40, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to hear you looked at these already. The Carstarphen has an elevation profile that I think could be used, on p. 530, and quite a few details about the construction, and some pretty good pictures of the tram in operation. There are a lot of engineering details that don't need to be in the article, but "The first bucket of salt arrived at the discharge terminal on July 2d, 1913, and was the occasion for a great demonstration" seems like we could use it to quote the exact date of start of operations. There's a discussion of the need to design a completely new type of cable grip (pp. 551-552) At the bottom of p. 553 there's a discussion of the risk of too-high tension on sharply rising sections of the line which is a good insight into the kind of engineering problems they encountered. There's a discussion of the bucket design and what the constraints were. Is it possible in the proceedings you were reading the section by Carstarphen responding to letters about the article? That section comes up first in the Google search, and it does talk about pricing, so I think you may not have seen Carstarphen's original article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:03, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FYI an elevation profile, depending on exactly how it's done, is likely {{PD-chart}} and OK to upload. (t · c) buidhe 05:59, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just heard back from the Eastern California Museum, and unfortunately they have no other information about prior publication of that picture, so we can't use it. However, they did link me to two local papers that are apparently not in newspapers.com, and they seem to have relevant hits when I search for the salt tram: the Inyo Independent and the Big Pine Citizen. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vami IV, just checking in -- are you planning to use any of the Carstarphen article? I listed a few points I think could be used above. I saw you did use one of the articles I found. I haven't gone through the other articles I linked to to see what is useful, but would be glad to do that and list the results here if you haven't gone through them yourself. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back from a trip to the local university library (for another article); I'll read and likely use the 1917 article tonight. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 23:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reading now. How best should those images be extracted? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:55, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done, pending further suggestions. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 05:05, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through the additions from Carstarphen, here are some more points I think are worth mentioning.

  • Carstarphen says a survey was begun in April 1911, but it appears Unrau says surveys were going on before that? I don't know if Unrau makes it clear, but it would appear that the earlier surveys were not specifically to plan a tramway, but were to look into the possibility of a pipeline or railway, since those had not been ruled out. So I think we can use Carstarphen to say when the survey that resulted in the tramway was started.
    • Carstarphen and DeDecker contradict this reading; Carstarphen says on page 257, "Surveys had demonstrated the impracticality of building a railroad into the [Saline] valley." I have however expanded on the surveying as Carstarphen allows. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 14:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The location was selected in July 1911.
  • Searching for "Trenton-Bleichert" finds a couple of books -- 1914 and 1929 -- by American Steel and Wire about the construction of aerial tramways. The 1914 one can be read here, and there are some excellent pictures of other tramways and components; one or two could be used as representative. The 1929 one is more likely to have pictures of the Saline Valley tramway but I can't find online access -- it would have to be requested through WP:RX.
    • The Trenton-Bleichert thing struck me as too esoteric to include. I welcome any future contributors to our coverage of aerial tramways to contradict me and add on to the article in the future, though, if RSs provide. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the section on design you mention the length of each section of the tramway. Carstarphen makes the point that the sections were chosen to make the height differential on each section the same, and that this was important for engineering reasons.
  • The line was planned to pass through a saddle in the range with a height of 8500 ft.
  • Any reason not to use the map and the elevation diagram?
  • The end of the tramway was adjacent to a spur of the Southern Pacific. Later (p.544) Carstarphen says the selection of the discharge point was a major cause of delay and led to additional cost, and gives details. This seems significant enough to describe in the article.
  • The description of the difficulty of the survey on p. 532, including the bit about taking days to find paths out of canyons, seems like a nice bit of colour to add to the mention of the survey.
  • We say a road was extended on the west slopes and a temporary tram put in on the east for transporting materials; Carstarphen says the temporary tram was put in because it was impossible to build a road, and I think that's worth mentioning.
  • Heavy equipment was brought in by a wagon road from Big Pine, and moved further by a go-devil which he describes; I think this is interesting enough to mention, at least briefly, and to link to go-devil.
    • I left this out in the first writing process, and continue to, for approachability; for those so inclined to learn more, the sources (Unrau, DeDecker, and Carstarphen) that discuss – and quite literally! – the nuts and bolts of the tram are available online. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we use any of the images? The quality is not great but they are out of copyright and are images of this specific tramway; I think we should try to find something we can use.
  • There's a discussion of the problems caused by shipping wet salt, which led to the buckets being over the specified weight (pp. 544-549)
  • You mention the need for new grips, but I think a little more detail could be justified -- the fact that two lines were necessary because one line would have had to be so large it would have been uneconomical, and then the fact that having two ropes led to problems with the grips. You might also name the grips "Universal Wico grips". Searching for information on those led me to the Salt Tram blog which is no doubt not reliable but I think it would be worth contacting the blogger to see if we can get pictures or any leads to more sources.
  • The discussion of tension at the bottom of p. 553 seems worth mentioning to me as an example of a place in the tramway where particular care had to be taken in the design.
  • In the last few pages there are some minor operational details that might be worth mentioning -- the problems caused by high winds, the installation of telephones along the tramway, the crew complement (which I think you have covered already), and the loading mechanism (p. 557). I also like the mention of the crew using it to cross the mountains in preference to going around on horseback!

I have not looked through the various newspaper articles to see what could be used there, but I will try to get to that tonight. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:34, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And there's a Facebook group for the tram here which announces they have thousands of photos of the tram; again I'd suggest asking about ones we might use. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. With the invasion of Ukraine, it will take me a while to address all of this. I am now considering withdrawing the nomination. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:52, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No hurry, but if you are busy, that might be best. I'd be happy to give you a pre-FAC review before you bring it back, if you like. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:58, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Vami_IV, this is looking close to done. If you need a little extra time, consider asking the coordinators rather than withdrawing it. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:21, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'm finished; I have chosen to withhold more engineering details at this moment because I judge them minutiae. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 19:04, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK -- I'll take another look, today if I get time. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:13, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: : I am not going to oppose or support. If I were writing this article I would include more of the engineering details but I think it's a judgement call and I see no reason to oppose because of that. Vami IV, the only remaining issue I can see is that your cites to Carstarphen are to pages in the 228-244 range, but the cited source has pages in the 525-558 range. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:22, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how I didn't notice that. Fixed now. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 23:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild

[edit]

Recusing to review.

I see three names on the front cover and a, possibly optional, collaborator on the title page.
  • Cite 19 - Saline Valley Salt Tram Historic Structure - is a nomination. Where in this source does it cover "then approved on December 31, 1974" and "The tram was designated a historic structure by the state of California on the same date"?
    • The cited NRHP document is signed and dated by the Keeper of the Register, and then stamped with that dated and the word "ACCEPTED". The reference for the California designation is not a nomination and also has the date it received its California designation. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then could you point me to at least the page where it indicates the date it received its designation? And is there no reliable secondary source which covers this? Primary sources should only be used at FAC when secondaries aren't available - which seems improbable in this case.
Done. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The inflation calculator currently only runs up to 2020. I have added a template to reflect this. As new data becomes available the inflation calculator will use it, and the template I have added will automatically updayte accordingly. Let me know if you have an issue with this. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "until the latter went bankrupt in 1918." Suggest 'until it went bankrupt in 1918.'
  • "repossessed by the Trenton Iron Company." So had this company owned it previously?
    • I have no idea what specifically happened here. From newspaper clippings I've read, the Trenton Iron Company sued in 1917 to repossess the tram for failure by the SVSC to pay for an (iirc) construction-related debt, but they got that worked out. I would then assume that something like that happened here, but Trennert is not specific. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Can I suggest avoiding "repossessed" then? The "re" bit makes it seem that it was coming back into its possession. Maybe "taken over"?
Done. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was reopened briefly for the last time in 1954." Are the dates of the start and end of operations known? Is the company which operated it known?
    • No. Norwood & Bull do not have much to say about this venture except that that venture began and ended within 1954. The only names associated with it are the three guys behind it. I've deleted this venture from the article since it has nothing to do with the tram itself now (along with the subsequent mention of the year 1954 - I don't know why I wrote 1954 in #Design rather than 1935). –♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "From 1913 to 1954, the route was the steepest of any aerial tram in the United States". Which tram took over the title in 1954? (Coincidentally in the same year the Saline Valley tram ceased operation.)
  • "thus, 20 tons of salt could be moved in an hour." I don't think "thus" is appropriate here. Suggest deleting and starting a new sentence.

Gog the Mild (talk) 14:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just the bolded comment above to go. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:24, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is done. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 23:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By Gerald Waldo Luis

[edit]
Source review - pass
[edit]

All the sources are reliable, just a few things. If it's all resolved I'll give it a pass.

  • Does there need to be a subsection on Books and articles? I'm aware it's personal preference, but there's not much sources to warrant division.
  • The =work, =publisher, and =via in refs 23 and 24 must be linked for consistency with the others.

** Done, except that there is no article for The Press-Tribune I cited. We do not have an article for that newspaper.q –♠Vami_IV†♠ 00:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the first source in the "Sources" section, "pdf" must be capitalized.

** Done. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 00:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Have to disclose that I've added archives and accessdates on most of the refs; made the GBook links usurped since they're unusable. However, the first source in the "Sources" section still has no acc-date.
Comments Support
[edit]
Resolved comments from GeraldWL 01:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
* I almost wanted to comment on the lack of images but seeing the above threads I can understand it. However this has already been reviewed by the VRT; what do you think? Other than that, I would suggest too adding Template:Commons category-inline with c:Category:Saline Valley salt tram.

Motion to close

[edit]

@FAC coordinators: Motion to close as Promote. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:01, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Saline_Valley_salt_tram/archive1&oldid=1076687272"