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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philately, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of philately and stamp collecting 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.PhilatelyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilatelyTemplate:WikiProject PhilatelyPhilately articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is written in
American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
Hello! I'm back on this Talk page to propose an all-new Delivering for America subsection. There's currently nothing in the article about DFA, a 10-year reform plan launched in March 2021. It includes a $40 billion capital investment and rather significant changes to USPS's operations, so I thought it might be worth covering at some length. I've put together a draft for this section and uploaded it to my user page.
Link here.
Obviously, editors should closely review the text and the references, but just to give people a sense of what's included, I'll briefly summarize what the draft covers:
Launch of program and USPS's stated intentions
$40 billion capital investment
New expedited parcel delivery services
Expansion of USPS parcel-sorting capacity under DFA plan
Planned construction of 60 large regional processing and distribution centers
Budget deficit reduction through postage rate increases, operational reforms, and passage of the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022
Measures USPS has taken to reduce employee turnover and stabilize its career workforce
I think this subsection would fit well at the bottom of the Operation and budget section, below the Coronavirus pandemic and voting by mail subsection. I've done my best to use solid sourcing and organize the information coherently, but as ever, I'm open to independent editor feedback. Happy to refine a passage, track down better sourcing, clarify language, etc. Thanks!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk) 18:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Hi Jonathan. It's a bit large and seems to include some unnecessary info that might not be considered
WP:DUE....
"In March 2021, the Postal Service launched a 10-year reform plan called Delivering for America, intended to improve the agency's financial stability, service reliability, and operational efficiency. The plan includes $40 billion in investments meant to improve USPS technology and facilities.
As part of Delivering for America, the Postal Service introduced the USPS Connect offering in June 2022 and USPS Ground Advantage in July 2023. Together, these offerings have expanded expedited parcel shipping options for the agency's customers. Between Delivering for America's inception and September 2023, USPS installed 348 new package sorting machines within its facilities. As of September 2023, the Postal Service is able to process approximately 70 million packages per day, up from 53 million in 2021, and 60 million in 2022.
USPS announced in July 2022 that it would be building 60 new regional processing and distribution centers in order to replace smaller, redundant facilities. The first of these new facilities is a million-square foot building in Atlanta that, as of March 2023, is under construction.
In May 2023, the Postal Service announced that its Delivering for America initiatives had cut the agency's projected losses through 2031 from $160 billion to $70 billion. Losses are projected to go down due to postage rate increases, improved operational efficiency from the consolidation of its delivery network, and the passage Postal Service Reform Act of 2022, which lifted financial burdens placed on the Postal Service by the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.
Under the Delivering for America plan, USPS has focused on reducing employee turnover. The Postal Service has also sought to reduce its reliance on seasonal employees by stabilizing the size of its career workforce. Between October 2020 and September 2023, the Postal Service converted 150,000 of its pre-career workers into full-time employees."
I would suggest a shorter version, removing the parts in bold and restructuring a bit, in order to gather more support for this change. I would also use some attributions to avoid violating
WP:VOICE. Cheers.
DN (
talk) 22:03, 6 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I would add that when there is a request to add text to an article, that text needs to be posted verbatim on the article's talk page. COI edit requests should exist on the talk page as a permanent record of what has been requested to be added or deleted. Placing the requested text in a draft page that the COI editor ultimately controls does not satisfy this guideline. The only permanent record we have of the above request is a portion of the proposed text added by the reviewing editor as part of their review. Other than that, it is anybody's guess what is being proposed here, should the COI editor decide (however unlikely that may be) to delete their draft — an action which, because they control that draftspace — is something that remains in the realm of possibility.[a] Concerns about the length of the the additions and heading formatting are easily handled with {{
collapse}} and {{
fake heading}} templates.
Notes
^Editors have control over pages they create, and may request that their pages be deleted. Deleting the page would remove (for non-admins) any diff records of the text that was placed there.
Hey,
DN! Thanks so much for the helpful feedback. I've taken your suggestions into account and reworked the section. Per another editor's feedback above, I'll put both my initial and the revised versions of the section draft here:
Delivering for America (initial version)
In March 2021, the Postal Service launched a 10-year reform plan called Delivering for America, intended to improve the agency's financial stability, service reliability, and operational efficiency.[1][2] The plan includes $40 billion in investments meant to improve USPS technology and facilities.[3]
As part of Delivering for America, the Postal Service introduced the USPS Connect offering in June 2022 and USPS Ground Advantage in July 2023.[4][5] Together, these offerings have expanded expedited parcel shipping options for the agency's customers.[5][6] Between Delivering for America's inception and September 2023, USPS installed 348 new package sorting machines within its facilities.[3] As of September 2023, the Postal Service is able to process approximately 70 million packages per day,[3] up from 53 million in 2021,[7] and 60 million in 2022.[8]
USPS announced in July 2022 that it would be building 60 new regional processing and distribution centers in order to replace smaller, redundant facilities.[9][10] The first of these new facilities is a million-square foot building in
Atlanta that, as of March 2023, is under construction.[11]
In May 2023, the Postal Service announced that its Delivering for America initiatives had cut the agency's projected losses through 2031 from $160 billion to $70 billion.[8] Losses are projected to go down due to postage rate increases,[8] improved operational efficiency from the consolidation of its delivery network,[12][13] and the passage
Postal Service Reform Act of 2022, which lifted financial burdens placed on the Postal Service by the 2006
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.[11][14]
Under the Delivering for America plan, USPS has focused on reducing employee turnover.[15] The Postal Service has also sought to reduce its reliance on seasonal employees by stabilizing the size of its career workforce. Between October 2020 and September 2023, the Postal Service converted 150,000 of its pre-career workers into full-time employees.[3][16]
In March 2021, the Postal Service launched a 10-year reform plan called Delivering for America, intended to improve the agency's financial stability, service reliability, and operational efficiency.[1][2] The plan includes $40 billion in investments meant to improve USPS technology and facilities.[3]
In April 2022, the
Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 was signed into law.[4] The bill was described by the Washington Post as a "key component of DeJoy’s 10-year plan for the Postal Service to avert a projected $160 billion loss over the next decade".[5] It lifted financial burdens placed on the USPS by the 2006
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.[6]
As part of Delivering for America, the Postal Service has introduced two new parcel shipping offerings: USPS Connect in June 2022 and USPS Ground Advantage in July 2023.[7][8] It has also installed 348 new package sorting machines within its facilities.[3] As of September 2023, the Postal Service is able to process approximately 70 million packages per day,[3] up from 53 million in 2021,[9] and 60 million in 2022.[10]
The USPS announced in July 2022 that it would be building 60 new regional processing and distribution centers in order to replace smaller, redundant facilities.[11] In an effort to stabilize its workforce, the Postal Service converted 150,000 of its pre-career workers into full-time employees between October 2020 and September 2023.[3][12]
^Bogage, Jacob (April 8, 2022).
"DeJoy is poised to remake a resurgent USPS. Now comes the hard part". Washington Post. Retrieved October 11, 2023. The bill is a key component of DeJoy's 10-year plan for the Postal Service to avert a projected $160 billion loss over the next decade.
As you can see, I cut most of what you suggested. I see your point about the initial version being a little bit gratuitous. Two notes on specific changes:
Per your attribution suggestion, I added a quote from a Washington Post article describing the Postal Service Reform Act as an important part of the DFA plan
I condensed the passage on the Postal Service stabilizing its workforce. I realize my first crack at describing it was too long, but 150,000 part-time workers being moved into full-time positions feels significant enough to include. USPS employs about half a million people, so 150k is a large percentage of its workforce. I'll defer to you, since you're the indepedent editor, but I'm just asking that you reconsider the inclusion of that fact.
I'll now step aside and let DN, or any other independent editors, judge the revised draft. I hope what I've put together now fits the site's content guidelines, but if further changes need to be discussed, I'm available. Thanks!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk) 19:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Without discussion of the negative aspects and criticism of DFA by postal unions, members of Congress, etc., this is irredeemably biased. --
James (talk/contribs) 20:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC)reply
If you want to discuss negative aspects and criticisms, or add them, you are free to do so, but I think you may be expecting too much from a COI editor, to do it for you. Cheers.
DN (
talk) 21:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Complying with basic, fundamental precepts such as NPOV is not "expecting too much". It is expecting the bare minimum.--
James (talk/contribs) 01:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
How is this violating NPOV?
DN (
talk) 02:33, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Interesting that you would go to that. I never said anything about conflict of interest. In fact, I would respond in the exact same way to an editor without a declared conflict of interest: Without discussion of the negative aspects, failures, and criticism of DFA by postal advocates, unions, commercial mailers, members of Congress, etc, such as the plan's inaccurate revenue forecasts, rate increases, lower mail volume, lack of profit, layoffs, lower QoL for postal employees, and postal facility closures, the proposed text is irredeemably biased. And if we're going to play the acronym game:
WP:UNDUE,
WP:NOTPROMO,
WP:SYNTH,
WP:COVERT,
WP:PAYTALK,
WP:COIRESPONSE,
WP:COIPOLITICAL, see alsoWP:BOOSTER,
WP:PAIDATTRIBUTE,
WP:CPP.--
James (talk/contribs) 13:24, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not here to "play a game". I simply asked you some genuine and fair questions without insinuation. Please do not assume I am just here to troll. The article seems to already mention those things, so if you would kindly explain how adding any of those proposed details would be a NPOV violation, I am all ears.
DN (
talk) 17:38, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Let's try to stay cordial and productive and try to avoid turning this into a BATTLE.
DN (
talk) 17:39, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Just to clarify, are you still looking at the (initial version) or (revised version)? They seemed to have made some significant improvements in the revised version, IMO. What do you think would make it more acceptable without rehashing the criticisms that are already in the article, or, would you prefer to copy edit those details and put them with the proposed addition?
DN (
talk) 18:02, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
"Rehashing" is an incorrect descriptor. Like Jonathan said, There's currently nothing in the article about DFA. Therefore, there is also currently nothing in the article about responses to DFA. Adding a new section describing a controversial political plan (written in PR-speak, to boot) without integrating response and criticism of the plan is not neutral. And yes, I am looking at the revised version. It is extremely telling, in my opinion, that the proposed text does not ever actually say what the plan is! (It is, among other things, raising rates, lowering service standards, layoffs, and closures.) Leaving aside the tactical omissions, here are some specific phrases and terms that are not neutral and/or insidiously promotional: "intended to improve the agency's financial stability, service reliability, and operational efficiency" (How? Be specific), "$40 billion in investments meant to improve USPS technology and facilities" (Improve how? Be specific. How does this number compare to past spending? Where is the funding coming from? Without context, this is just saying Big Number Good), associating PSRA with DFA (this is disputed), "installed 348 new package sorting machines within its facilities" (Over what time period? What, if anything, was removed and/or replaced in order to make way for these machines? Be specific. Without explaining the reasoning and context of these decisions, this is just Big New Shiny Thing Good), "smaller, redundant facilities" (self-evident), "in an effort to stabilize its workforce" (What does that even mean? Why no mention of the fact that most of these conversions came about due to union negotiations, not some mysterious "plan"?). Further reading:
WP:NIF,
WP:NOCRIT,
WP:CONTROVERSY,
WP:WTW. --
James (talk/contribs) 19:24, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I appreciate this explanation and now understand your argument much better than before. I'm unaware of sources referring to the DFA as a "controversial political plan" or that it "raises rates, lowers service standards, layoffs, and closures" etc... So I would request citations for that, as well as any other criticisms that you are suggesting. More attributions should help to resolve at least some of these concerns. I hope we didn't get off on the wrong foot, but for now I will just ping
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service and suggest that AGF be observed in working towards a consensus to include an acceptable version of the proposed addition. Cheers.
DN (
talk) 20:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I found a few sources that include some analysis and criticisms we can all perhaps agree on...
Cheers...
DN (
talk) 01:05, 14 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Thank you to both editors for weighing in on this request. I will take a step back and consider all the information presented in the discussion.
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk) 20:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Okay, I've now had time to think about how this section can be furter revised. Following
DN's lead, I've used three of the four sources they suggested above, and done a little research of my own, to produce a section that's more balanced, and covers some of the drawbacks/criticisms of the Delivering for America plan. Please click the dropdown in order to view my revised section draft:
Delivering for America (futher revised version)
In March 2021, the Postal Service launched a 10-year reform plan called Delivering for America, intended to improve the agency's financial stability, service reliability, and operational efficiency.[1][2] The plan includes $40 billion in investments meant to improve USPS technology and facilities.[3]
In April 2022, the
Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 was signed into law.[4] The bill was described by the Washington Post as a "key component of DeJoy’s 10-year plan for the Postal Service to avert a projected $160 billion loss over the next decade".[5] It lifted financial burdens placed on the USPS by the 2006
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.[6]
As part of Delivering for America, the Postal Service has introduced two new parcel shipping offerings: USPS Connect in June 2022 and USPS Ground Advantage in July 2023.[7][8] It has also installed 348 new package sorting machines within its facilities.[3] As of September 2023, the Postal Service is able to process approximately 70 million packages per day,[3] up from 53 million in 2021,[9] and 60 million in 2022.[10]
The USPS announced in July 2022 that it would be building 60 new regional processing and distribution centers in order to replace smaller, redundant facilities.[11] One of the first of these facilities, a 700,000-square-foot building in
Gastonia, North Carolina, opened in November 2023.[12]
In an effort to stabilize its workforce, the Postal Service converted 150,000 of its pre-career workers into full-time employees between October 2020 and September 2023.[3][13]
Delivering for America has attempted to stabilize the Postal Service's finances by adjusting service times for mail and package delivery.[14] In 2020, the
Postal Regulatory Commission gave the Postal Service increased authority to raise postage rates in order to cover its operating costs.[15] Between 2021 and 2023, USPS has raised the postage rate four times.[16] In May 2023, USPS reported a $2.5 billion loss over the year's first quarter, with approximately $500 million of that figure related to costs within the agency's control.[17] It also reported that its projected ten-year losses had been reduced from $160 billion to $70 billion.[18]
^Bogage, Jacob (April 8, 2022).
"DeJoy is poised to remake a resurgent USPS. Now comes the hard part". Washington Post. Retrieved October 11, 2023. The bill is a key component of DeJoy's 10-year plan for the Postal Service to avert a projected $160 billion loss over the next decade.
I hope this addresses the concerns voiced by editors above. If anyone has additional feedback, please reach out and I'll do my best to address it. Thank you!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk) 16:05, 15 November 2023 (UTC)reply
I have pinged James to see if they have any more input. I've been rather busy but I will try to give some feedback soon.
DN (
talk) 21:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)reply
This discussion has been dormant for a few months, so I thought I'd ping the thread. Reaching out to
DN because they've demonstrated the most consistent interest but other editors are welcome to jump in as well. Happy to offer clarification on anything above for anybody who's new to the discussion. Thanks!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk) 20:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
An impartial editor has reviewed the proposed edit(s) and asked the editor with a conflict of interest to go ahead and make the suggested changes.
Hello again! Jonathan from the Postal Service here to propose some updates to the Fleet subsection, which I noticed doesn't have much information about the ongoing electrification of the USPS fleet. I've added well-reported details about that effort to the section and done some slight reorganizing. You can see all the changes I'm suggesting in the comparison below.
Fleet revisions
−
The USPS operates one of the largest civilian [[vehicle fleet]]s in the world, with over 200,000vehicles, the majority of which are the distinctive and unique [[Chevrolet]]/[[Grumman LLV]] (long-life vehicle), and the similar, newer [[Ford-Utilimaster FFV]] ([[flexible-fuel vehicle]]), originally also referred to as the CRV (carrier route vehicle). The LLVs were built from 1987 to 1994 and lack air conditioning, airbags, anti-lock brakes, and space for the large modern volume of e-commerce packages, the Grumman fleet ended its expected 24-year lifespan in fiscal year 2017. The LLV replacement process began in 2015, and after numerous delays, a $6 billion contract was awarded in February 2021 to [[Oshkosh Corporation|Oshkosh Defense]] to finalize design and produce 165,000 vehicles over 10 years. The [[Next Generation Delivery Vehicle]] (NGDV), will have both gasoline and battery electric versions. Half of the initial 50,000 vehicles will be electric, as will all vehicles purchased after 2026.
The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$1.1 billion</span>. For every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$8</span> million per year to fuel its fleet. Startingin2026,alldeliverytruckpurchasesarescheduledtobe[[electricvehicles]],partlyinresponsetocriticismfromthe[[EnvironmentalProtectionAgency]]andanenvironmentallawsuit.
The fleet is notable in that many of its vehicles are [[Left- and right-hand traffic|right-hand drive]], an arrangement intended to give drivers the easiest access to roadside mailboxes. Some [[rural letter carrier]]s use personal vehicles. All contractors use personal vehicles. Standard postal-owned vehicles do not have [[license plate]]s. These vehicles are identified by a seven-digit number displayed on the front and rear.
+
The USPS operates one of the largest civilian [[vehicle fleet]]s in the world, with over 235,000 vehicles as of 2024, the majority of which are the distinctive and unique [[Chevrolet]]/[[Grumman LLV]] (long-life vehicle), and the similar, newer [[Ford-Utilimaster FFV]] ([[flexible-fuel vehicle]]), originally also referred to as the CRV (carrier route vehicle). The LLVs were built from 1987 to 1994 and lack air conditioning, airbags, anti-lock brakes, and space for the large modern volume of e-commerce packages, the Grumman fleet ended its expected 24-year lifespan in fiscal year 2017. The LLV replacement process began in 2015, and after numerous delays, a $6 billion contract was awarded in February 2021 to [[Oshkosh Corporation|Oshkosh Defense]] to finalize design and produce 165,000 vehicles over 10 years. The [[Next Generation Delivery Vehicle]] (NGDV), will have both gasoline and battery electric versions. Half of the initial 50,000 vehicles will be electric, as will all vehicles purchased after 2026.
The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$1.1 billion</span>. For every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$8</span> million per year to fuel its fleet.
The fleet is notable in that many of its vehicles are [[Left- and right-hand traffic|right-hand drive]], an arrangement intended to give drivers the easiest access to roadside mailboxes. Some [[rural letter carrier]]s use personal vehicles. All contractors use personal vehicles. Standard postal-owned vehicles do not have [[license plate]]s. These vehicles are identified by a seven-digit number displayed on the front and rear.
====Electrifying the USPS fleet====
Starting in 2026, all delivery truck purchases are scheduled to be [[electric vehicles]], partly in response to criticism from the [[Environmental Protection Agency]] and an environmental lawsuit, and also due to availability of new funding provided by the 2022 [[Inflation Reduction Act]]. The Act included $3 billion for electric USPS vehicles, supporting the initiative by Postmaster General DeJoy and the Biden Administration to add 66,000 electric vehicles to the fleet by 2028. The electric fleet will be composed of 9,250 EVs manufactured by [[Ford Motor Company|Ford]]; 11,750 [[Commercial off-the-shelf|commercial off-the-shelf]] EVs; and 45,000 [[Oshkosh NGDV|Oshkosh Next Generation Delivery Vehicles]]. In February 2023, the Postal Service announced its purchase of the Ford EVs as well as 14,000 electric vehicle charging stations. The fleet electrification plan is part of the Postal Service's initiative to reduce carbon emissions from fuel and electricity 40 percent and emissions from contracted services 20 percent by 2030.
References
^"Size and scope". United States Postal Service. Archived from
the original on December 15, 2018. Retrieved December 8, 2018.
The subsection would look like this, if all my proposed edits were made:
The USPS operates one of the largest civilian
vehicle fleets in the world, with over 235,000 vehicles as of 2024,[1] the majority of which are the distinctive and unique
Chevrolet/
Grumman LLV (long-life vehicle), and the similar, newer
Ford-Utilimaster FFV (
flexible-fuel vehicle), originally also referred to as the CRV (carrier route vehicle). The LLVs were built from 1987 to 1994 and lack air conditioning, airbags, anti-lock brakes, and space for the large modern volume of e-commerce packages, the Grumman fleet ended its expected 24-year lifespan in fiscal year 2017. The LLV replacement process began in 2015, and after numerous delays,[2] a $6 billion contract was awarded in February 2021 to
Oshkosh Defense to finalize design and produce 165,000 vehicles over 10 years.[3] The
Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV), will have both gasoline and battery electric versions. Half of the initial 50,000 vehicles will be electric, as will all vehicles purchased after 2026.[4]
The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of US$1.1 billion.[5] For every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra US$8 million per year to fuel its fleet.[6]
The fleet is notable in that many of its vehicles are
right-hand drive, an arrangement intended to give drivers the easiest access to roadside mailboxes. Some
rural letter carriers use personal vehicles.[7] All contractors use personal vehicles. Standard postal-owned vehicles do not have
license plates. These vehicles are identified by a seven-digit number displayed on the front and rear.[8]
Electrifying the USPS fleet
Starting in 2026, all delivery truck purchases are scheduled to be
electric vehicles,[9] partly in response to criticism from the
Environmental Protection Agency and an environmental lawsuit,[10] and also due to availability of new funding provided by the 2022
Inflation Reduction Act.[11][12] The Act included $3 billion for electric USPS vehicles,[13][11] supporting the initiative by Postmaster General DeJoy and the Biden Administration to add 66,000 electric vehicles to the fleet by 2028.[12] The electric fleet will be composed of 9,250 EVs manufactured by
Ford; 11,750
commercial off-the-shelf EVs; and 45,000
Oshkosh Next Generation Delivery Vehicles.[14][15] In February 2023, the Postal Service announced its purchase of the Ford EVs as well as 14,000 electric vehicle charging stations.[14][16] The fleet electrification plan is part of the Postal Service's initiative to reduce carbon emissions from fuel and electricity 40 percent and emissions from contracted services 20 percent by 2030.[17][18]
References
References
^"Size and scope". About USPS. United States Postal Service. Retrieved February 12, 2024.
I'll now step aside and let editors without a COI review and discuss. Happy to hop in and provide clarification or revision as needed. Thanks!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk) 15:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page.
Zippybonzo |
talk |
contribs (they/them) 20:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi there, this is Jonathan from the Postal Service. I want to alert editors to the fact that several anonymous IP editors have persistently tried to add scam LiteBlue links to the article over the past couple months. I'll cite a few examples, with diff links:
ex 1,
ex 2, and
ex 3.
LiteBlue is the portal that USPS workers use to monitor and manage their career and benefits. It contains, among other things, sensitive payroll information, and probably doesn't belong on the USPS page at all.
The link to the real site is here:
https://liteblue.usps.gov/wps/portal. The links in the edits cited above, all of which have since been reverted, have slightly different URLs and take the user to a fake LiteBlue landing page that tries to scam them out of their login credentials. In other words, it's a phishing scheme.
The American Postal Workers' Union
put out a bulletin in early January alerting its members of this scheme. Apparently it has since grown to include Wikipedia. I'm not suggesting that this article be put under protection. I just want to flag the issue and advise editors to double-check any edits that include LiteBlue links, because there's a good chance they're fraudulent.
Tagging in a few editors whom I've noticed tend to keep a close eye on the USPS article:
DN,
User:Ww2censor, and
User:Coolcaesar.
POV issue: "Criticism of the universal service requirement and the postal monopoly"
This section is properly written to conform to neutral POV standards, but it's glaring in its omission of any contrary views. Is anyone with knowledge on the subject able to add some balance?
WP Ludicer (
talk) 16:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I
shortened one of the arguments in the section, which appeared too long and prominent for
WP:DUEWEIGHT.
Llll5032 (
talk) 18:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply