User talk:SPUI/random rail stuff archive

Do you know of any good PD sources for photos or maps in Ohio? Warren County Canal is in need (up for FAC). thanks. Mark in Richmond. Vaoverland 20:01, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. This is a copy: Dear User:PedanticallySpeaking: Please look at my talk page (most recent item for User:SPUI). I had asked him to see what we could do about a map (or images) for the article. He has done some outstanding map creation work for other transportation article and also found image sources when I couldn't. However, if you can give him good information, maybe even a handdrawn map if possible, he may be able to create something nice for the article. I encourage you to communicate directly with User: SPUI I am having some computer broadband problems, so can't be on as much as usual. I will copy this message to both of you. And, my thanks to both of you for the good work on transportation articles, which are dear to my heart. <gr> Mark in Richmond. Vaoverland 20:23, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

---

Salve, SPUI!
Vaoverland suggested I get in touch with you re the Warren County Canal article about possibly creating a map. The route of the canal is spelled out in the article. Basically, it started at Middletown, Ohio, went southeast for about fifteen miles to about four miles southwest of Lebanon, Ohio, then turned northeast to Lebanon. It roughly ran along the route of the Middletown and Cincinnati Railroad to Hageman's Crossing, Ohio, then followed the Cincinnati, Lebanon, and Northern Railroad into Lebanon. The only map I've seen in Elva Adams's book (cited in the canal article) depicts a lazily drawn "U" shape. I did see a map in another book yesterday that says it ran through Sect. 28 in western Turtlecreek Township, Warren County, Ohio, which is bounded by State Route 741 on the east and Hamilton Road on the south. The co-ordinates for the termini are in their articles already. The railroads routes can be seen by looking at the Warren County property records [1]. The Indiana and Ohio Railroad and the City of Lebanon now own the railroad routes. If you will search for parcel 12145020010, owned by the City and running between Hageman's and Lebanon [2] you will find a map come up. Click on that map for a larger version. The railroad is easily picked out from the parcel map because it is a long and narrow parcel. Let me know if I can help further. PedanticallySpeaking 14:36, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

SPUI,
Thanks for your reply. Up there between Monroe and Middletown I recall one of the references, I believe the Bogan "Warren County Canal" piece, said the canal went north along Cincinnati-Dayton between Greentree and State Route 122. Of course, at this scale, I don't think anyone would be able to tell the difference if you weren't precise. PedanticallySpeaking 17:50, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

SPUI,
Thank you, thank you, thank you for the map of the canal. Wonderful that you should find this.
Could I trouble you for more maps? I've been working on the articles for townships (see my new Wikipedia:WikiProject Ohio townships), but lack maps for many of them. I wonder if you could zoom in on the counties of Butler, Warren, Clinton, and Hamilton and save them as individual files for me. They show the townships clearly and I'd like to add them to the township articles.
And though I said it before, thank you. PedanticallySpeaking 14:16, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

SPUI, I should have looked a bit closer on that map. I see that two of the Warren townships are missing; they hadn't been created yet (Massie and Harlan). Oh, well, scratch my request. PedanticallySpeaking 14:19, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

SPUI,
Thanks for the tip. Alas, I work at the public library, so I don't have the ability to down- and up-load or manipulate pictures. PedanticallySpeaking 16:11, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

What is the motivation for moving List of metro systems? Susvolans (pigs can fly) 12:34, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy is to have subjects covering discrete topics by their common names. Commonality does not justify mixing broad topics with observable physical and history differences into super-articles; and titles are supposed to be the common names of things: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). There is no such industry generic nomenclature as "heavy urban rail" which also more suggests commuter railroads. The generic term is rapid transit. If you wish to continue to make super-articles, I won't interfere, but please leave the individual articles alone. How can you justify making micro-articles for subway cars, but merge huge and diverse industries into one article? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A redirect is not an article; "urban heavy rail" is a non-expression; and overlap does not justify merger where there are discrete differences in understanding. Regional differences, when they are large, need to be respected rather than deciding that one or the other version or a neologism is the "right" name for the article. --- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:25, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rapid transit is better than Urban heavy rail, but my main argument is with the mergings. Light rail is a neologism that has a different meaning than streetcar both in existing systems and in history. There are streetcars (New Orleans, Toronto) that are streetcars first, and light rail only by extension. There are lines officially called light rail (JFK AirTrain) that are in no way streetcars.

I suggest we revert to the former names and place a poll on each article in the form:

Should (tram or streetcar) by merged into a common article with light rail?

Yes

No

Comment

I will be bowled over if there is a consensus to merge. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:35, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You said: By the way, note how I combined some subway services like the 1-9, F-V and J-Z. This is a similar case.

Therein is the core of our disagreement. Except for F-V (which should really be separate), these are simple clones with skip-stop being the only difference. Streetcars, trams and light rail have different discrete meanings. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:48, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I apologize on the 3RR issue. I miscounted what was going on. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 22:53, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, Wikicheerfulness seems to be restablishing. Please note, I didn't mess with any of your edits on the "new" articles--just reverted the redirects. I think this can work out. Cheers, Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:02, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK but could you please leave the tram/streetcar articles as they were until we come to some sort of agreement on what to do. G-Man 23:25, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thansk for your effort on this article. Mark in Richmond. Vaoverland 01:14, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

Hi.

You wrote:

I see you formerly discussed this split on Talk:Streetcar. There's a current discussion going on there now; I'd appreciate more opinions, no matter what side. Thanks. --SPUI (talk) 20:49, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again - there's also a poll now on Talk:Metro about whether metro and subway should be merged. --SPUI (talk) 21:04, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I've now voted (merge) in the metro/subway vote, and I'm pondering the other one.

I think there are two issues here. There are cases where we have two different article for what is to all intents and purposes the same animal, largely driven by the use of different names in different cultures. Metro and Subway is one such case, and (as you have noticed) I also believe Streetcar and Tram is another.

But those are easy issues compared to the ones where we have to draw boundaries between related and often overlapping terms on a continuous spectrum. So I don't think that streetcar/tram is quite the same thing as light rail, which isn't quite the same thing as metro/subway, which isn't quite the same thing as suburban rail, which isn't quite the same thing as commuter rail. But equally I cannot come up with a fail-safe way of distinguishing them. I think the only way to deal with this is to take arbitrary decisions, and then write lots of text to explain the arbitrariness. Although I worry that we try doing that on Wikipedia then someone will take a dislike to the arbitrary decisions, and change it all, again and again.

So on the whole, and right now, I do think we should merge Tram and Streetcar, but leave Light rail as a separate article. Now how to inject that into the discussion. -- Chris j wood 10:26, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Fine by me, except that it's ambiguous. I would have used 'surface rail' instead of 'at-grade urban transit', but 'surface rail' could reasonably mean _all_ non-subway, non-elevated rail, rather than just trams, trolleys, light rail, and the like. How about 'Urban surface rail?' It has 3 google hits, but we can always replace it with a better term when we come up with one. jdb ❋ (talk) 23:29, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Taking a modern view of the same angle (and a bunch of other spots) is something I want to fit in this summer. I hope they've calmed down a bit with the photo paranoia by now. --iMb~Meow 05:10, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It looks like the tracks match up great to the BERy versions, yay! Nice-to-have but not killer additions would be the demo date for the Atlantic section (1942, but a portion from Tower C out to Commercial St was kept around for layovers), and maybe some of the switch towers (for example, Boston transportation mentions towers C and D for the Atlantic Ave branch). --iMb~Meow 11:25, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Those names are confusing, for sure. It works out roughly like this:

• 1893, Union Station opens, just the one. Life is simple.
• 1898/1899: South Union Terminal is built and opens. The old Union station starts being called North for obvious reasons.
• 1927: The old (North) Union is hacked into tiny bits and replaced by North Station (officially this time) under the new Boston Garden.
• Informally, the North/South Station names were used "forever".
• As best I can tell, South Station wasn't the super duper officially official name until the 1980s redevelopment, even though it was pretty much universally known as that.
• Just to make things a little more clear, one of the Main Line platforms at what's now Haymarket was also named Union (but Friend on the other side, just to keep people guessing).

--iMb~Meow 12:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I had something that ancient, but it's from 1930 and adds nothing new. Sorry. --iMb~Meow 17:45, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's going to be a few weeks at best :( I do like the idea of scanning though, the artwork on those old maps was cool. --iMb~Meow

What is your objection to the UrbanPlanet forum link I added to the MBTA article? --DeanoNightRider 08:21, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind if I changed all the Silver Line stops so they have the same sort of navigation bar things as the other lines?

--Knuckle50 03:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I wasn't really sure about how I would fit it, I guess I'll think about it and get back to you... --Knuckle50 03:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi SPUI,

I just came across this copy of Template:acc. Is there a reason why this exists in addition to acc? If not then we should probably delete this template along with acc. The easiest way of achieving that would probably be to redirect it. --MarSch 15:42, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why don't you link them now, instead of waiting for the creation of those articles?--MarSch 15:49, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, what I don't understand is what happens to the wheelchair when you make them into redirects. --MarSch 15:54, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It works!!! I think this is a brilliant hack, I don't even understand where the picture is. Or is Image:NYCS acc.png an image AND a redirect? --MarSch 16:09, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I think I understand now. What you really want is <Unicode for a wheelchair> only that doesn't exist. Nothing I came up with works either :( Image:NYCS acc.png :Image:NYCS acc.png Image:NYCS acc.png Image:NYCS acc.png

Does any image tutorial/guide say anything about this?--MarSch 16:33, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

QUACK QUACK QUACK!!!

I have permission from the photographer. See [3]

I will get permission now, don't bother taking them down, I'm sure he'll be fine with it...

Got it. [4]

Hi, SPUI. Just thought you might like to know that someone (me) has finally answered your question at Talk:Railroad_switch... Picapica 8 July 2005 17:43 (UTC)

Nice touch-up! Thanks for adding the map. I'll see what other information I can scrape off the net. Can you find a map for BNSF Harbor Subdivision? - Lucky 6.9 02:44, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to Kulp, the SM&B name was applied to two companies (NJ & NY), so they probably only had charter rights to the state line in the vicinity of Boston Corners. The line from State Line to Northampton would have been an extension of the Mass. Central, but it's not clear whether it would have been built under their charter, or whether they did/would have had to charter another railroad to construct that line. As for the route east of Boston Corners, my educated guess would be that the original SM&B (NY) charter had rights Liberty Corners (NY/NJ state line) to Boston Corners. However, the SM&B (NY) doesn't seem to have been included in the renaming and subsequent mergers/reorganizations of the SM&B (NJ) which were limited to PA and NJ. Per Kulp, the line from Liberty Corners to Pine Island (on the Erie RR) was graded by the PS&NE and track laid by the PP&B, which then chartered the Campbell Hall Connecting Railroad in NY and turned over the track to it, presumably because the loss of the SM&B (NY) left them with no NY charter. By this time, the route beyond Campbell Hall was CNE&W. Choess 22:00, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Nice work on the Chicago rail terminals template. I'm impressed that, in the 24 hours since I wrote/expanded those articles, they're getting so much attention.

A good source of info on old rail infrastructure is HABS/HAER, the files for which you can find at the Library of Congress website here. Each entry has photos from the 60s or 70s as well as extensive history and, sometimes, measured drawings (although the entry for Central Station seems to be missing the history).

The Nickel Plate did indeed use Illinois Central Station (Central Station) until the mid-50s, I think, at which point its association with the New York Central caused its trains to be moved to LaSalle Street, which was the NYC's Chicago terminal. If you've got any other questions, please feel free to ask. This is an area of interest for me. --Boreas231 03:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, nice work on the train stations, especially the Chicago Terminals infobox. I've been agonizing over what to do with them for weeks now, but what you've done tops anything I could come up with. Bravo! 14:11, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

You're right; I must have been mistaken about the NKP's association with the NYC. What I am certain about, though, is that (Illinois) Central Station was the only major terminal to have existed at the eastern end of 12th Street (aka Roosevelt Road). It was sometimes referred to as "12th Street Station". The remaining commuter station's name is "12th Street-Roosevelt Road". The non-electrified intercity tracks on the IC alignment have now been reconfigured, but there used to be a direct link of quadruple tracks from Central Station to a junction just south of LaSalle Street Station. The connection has now been reduced to double tracks and simplified so that northbound freight trains cross over the commuter tracks under McCormick Place and turn west, connecting to the BNSF (ex-CBQ) over the old St. Charles Airline bridge.

As for pinning down the date of the terminal switch, you might try looking for a series called The Official guide of the railways and steam navigation lines of the United States, Porto Rico, Canada, Mexico and Cuba. It was published annually by the National Railway Publication Company, and includes maps and timetables for every passenger railroad in the U.S., as well as some scheduled freight info. I think it's available in most large university libraries. The Library of Congress call number for the series is HE2727.O3. --Boreas231 14:58, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Forgotten NY. Sounds from their description as if the 1830s construction predates the street. Choess 04:34, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

I don't believe "only had a category, which are not for images on Wikipedia" is one of the criteria for speedy deletion, so I removed the tag from Image:SEPTA_Rapid_and_Commuter_Rail_System_1980.png. It is used in the article SEPTA Regional Rail, so it is not true that it "only had a category"; moreover, images are categorized throughout Wikipedia, both in dedicated categories like Category:Wikipedia_images_by_topic or mixed with articles like Category:Flags_of_the_United_Kingdom. Thought I would drop a note in case I missed something. - choster 01:47, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the Commons. Thanks, sorry for the bother. - choster 18:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. Thank you. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 22:24, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am warning you based on these edits. You have not violated the rule; I am just providing you with a friendly reminder that if you revert again prior to 05:10, 25 August 2005 UTC, you will have broken the 3RR. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 22:29, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And just as before as in the the debate for Wilmington Station (Delaware), Trenton (Amtrak station) is not going to cut it. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:36, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll offer a compomrise, becuas i rather not see the rons get involed on RM, Trention Rail Station (New Jersey), that should remove most of the "ambiguity" and a disambig note for West Trenton, as that would be the only other New Jersey station that could be confused with Trenton. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fime, i moved the page, i'll fix the redirect in a sec, what "main station" are you talking about. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nifty, i could only guess that those stations were better then the present. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think using Center City Philadelphia for the SEPTArr infobox would be an improvement. --Luciuskwok 11:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be consistent with what a passenger would see before boarding a train. The problem is that on through trains, SEPTA crews sometimes put a "Center City Philadelphia" sign on the train, and other times use the ultimate destination of the train. I think "Center City Philadelphia" without a link works best.--Luciuskwok 11:57, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think as long as it's clear in the article that the station is in the Philadelphia area, "Center City" works. My preference is to be more verbose in situations where there is ambiguity. --Luciuskwok 12:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The form Kitchener, Ontario railway station (see Category:Canadian railway stations) seems to me much more effective for stations named after the city they serve than Grimsby (VIA station); for a start, it specifies the province, which is important given that not all city names are unique. It also matches the form that has been used quite successfully for articles about Britain (see examples such as Windermere railway station), which has far more passenger railway services than anywhere in North America, not to mention all sorts of cities with multiple stations, complicated routes, and the like.

In many cases, the stations also pre-date VIA, and a number are shared with other railways (I was planning to rename shared VIA-GO stations such as Aldershot (GO Station) to the more generic form). David Arthur 21:04, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

I see no reason why information about a railway station's predecessor couldn't be included in the same article, though it seems there are few enough people interested in writing articles about even the stations that do still exist (Pacific Central Station (Vancouver) still lacks an entry). When two railways operate from separate stations, there may be call for separate articles (for a parallel of sorts, see Canary Wharf tube station and Canary Wharf DLR station), but when there's only one station, I don't think it's productive to attach an individual carrier's name to it, especially when it's shared. The pipe trick is useful, but I personally don't think it's worth having a less-appropriate title in order to save typing. David Arthur 21:19, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Oops!! It came through e-mail. Let me get on that right away. Thanks. Mark in Historic Triangle, Vaoverland 22:36, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An image (admittedly not as stunning) from Ken Moss has been substituted. Thanks!! Vaoverland 22:50, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was pleased to see that you created a new (and long-overdue) WP article on this railroad. Harry Bundy of our Virginian Railway group on Yahoo is a retiree of the original Norfolk Southern and an excellent source for information,a s is warren Calloway. We may be able to get some good ikages, logo help, etc. There is also a group on Yahoo for the original Norfolk Southern. I moderate one and belong to the other. I will pass along the good news about your new WP article, and surely some additional facts and some links will emerge to enhance the article. Good job! (and thanks again for catching my screw up on the Buckingham Branch image!). Yours in Virginia's Historic Triangle, Mark. Vaoverland 11:09, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you did not mind my nominating your NS article for the DYK feature and adding to it. The various Yahoo rail groups are excited about it. A fellow named Harry Bundy who is active in my Virginian railway Enthusiasts Yahoo group (550 members online!) is something like a 50-year veteran. Railfans have noted that the original NS (as they seem to call it) may hold some kind of record for its many financial reorganizations. Here are some notes from Harry about the article:

"Mark:

A few corrections:

There is reference to Mackey. Prior to the trestle (1910), this was listed in timetables as Mackey's Ferry. After, the station became Mackeys.

It also notes that this station is "on the other side of the Albemarle Sound from Elizabeth City". It's on the other side of the Albemarle Sound from Edenton.

Virginia and Carolina Coast Railroad - later the Suffolk & Carolina. In addition to the line between Suffolk south to Edenton, the S&C also had a line from Beckford Jct. (on the Suffolk-Edenton section) to Elizabeth City.

The Egyptian Railroad. It isn't said, and not many people know, but North Carolina had coal near Cumnock. It was known as the Egyptian field. NS steam locomotives burned coal from the Egyptian field until about 1935. As one engineer noted - "it packed all the btu's of a day-old cow pie".

Trivia - Chocowinity was named Marsden to reduce having to send the eleven- alphas. As Texas Gulf Sulphur began receiving shipments, Marsden became the governing agency. In 1966 BZC (before zip codes), the agent at Timbuktu would send any correspondence regarding shipments to AGENT-Marsden, NC. Marsden wasn't a post office. The mail would usually be received by the SAL agent at Marston, NC and he, being a railroad familiar, would forward it to Chocowinity. So at one midnight in 1966, Marsden became Chocowinity and the NS went back to 1917 because in repeating train orders, stations are spelled out letter-by-letter. Care to guess what dunce was working the night ALL bulletin orders had to be rewritten showing Chocowinity instead of Marsden, and then repeated to the dispatcher?"

                                                             Harry Bundy

I must learn to do spell checking before releasing my work (due to my motor coordination disability, I transpose letters, creating misspelling a 2nd grader could avoid). Thus, the image file of the night shot of the NS passenger train on the Albemarle Sound was misspelled. I highly recommend the ieSpell program. Good article. I hope it makes the main page.

BTW, if you get a chance to come up with a simple map of the Historic Triangle, it would enhance that article a great deal, I believe. Thanks! Mark. Vaoverland 21:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Norfolk Southern Railway (former), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Hi, do you have a source for this edit? My understanding was that BC Rail was a provincially-chartered railway, and since it was provincially-chartered and not federally-chartered, it would be a Class II, regardless of how much revenue it earned. Thanks, JYolkowski // talk 01:23, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Calumet, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Ok, I see you point. I thought by intercity you were talking about anywhere outside of Chicago because Ogilvie serves Kenosha and other smaller cities in the metro area. --Gpyoung ^talk 00:52, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Texas and Northern Railway, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Pittsburgh and West Virginia Railway, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

left you a note at Template talk:CTA Tedernst 16:03, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As I don't know much or at least close to nothing about railroads in the United States, I was wondering if you could please share with me where these railroads fit into the fabric of the B&O railroad system. I've seen that you have written extensively on many American railroad lines. I know both were at times parts of the B&O System. Had you ever heard of them? I've always known of them from a local standpoint. The W&W is mostly abandoned and the SBVR was bought by the State of West Virginia as a tourist attraction and to haul grain and feed. I'd appreciate if you could offer up your estemed opinion of these two railroads.

Oh, and as a West Virginian, I have to agree with 71Demon, the West Run Expressway as a named highway is dead and it's back to being referred to as I-268. It is incorrect to redirect I-268 to an article named so. I suggest an article for West Run Expressway as a former concept that can be linked to from a separate I-268 article. --Caponer 00:17, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I looked at some topo maps in that area and the abandoned rail bed of the W&W is still listed and the SBVR is still functioning but I was wondering how they fit in with the grand scheme of things. I was wondering if they could get included on the Railroad template but I'm not sure what class they were, most definitely not high on the list of importance. --Caponer 00:49, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, jeez, now I'll have to think about it. B-) Good points, all. I was going through several articles looking for new facts for Portal:Trains/Did you know and WP:GA candidates when I ran across these two in the template. I've always known Columbus and Greenville as CAGY, but I'll be the first to admit that I hadn't really researched it yet. As to Montour, as far as I know, reporting marks were always a minimum of two letters. For both of them, I just looked at the articles and used the mark that is listed in the lead since that seemed the most natural to me. Having M and C&G in the template just looked wrong and inconsistent with the rest of the template to me. I'll have to research and think about it a little more before I really come to an opinion, but right now I think the more modern marks look better in the list. Whether they are more appropriate is a question that I don't have an answer to right now. I'll get back to you on it... slambo 21:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations are in order for your efforts to cleanup and present Conrail, one of the more complicated railroad articles. I guess we should have known you would be the one to face this challenge after your work on the original Norfolk Southern Railway, with a history of bankruptcies and reorganizations which was almost complex, save the government ownership aspect. Mark Vaoverland 06:00, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my removal of a speedy tag on Image:Chessie 255x70.png. Under exactly which CSD does this qualify for speedy deletion? I don't see any that apply. DES ^(talk) 19:31, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have now created {{Orphaned fairuse}} and a short-cut {{or-fu}} to tag images in this situation, on the model of {{nosource}} or {{unverified}}. That should help, i hope. DES ^(talk) 19:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The one reason to name the variable is that in the rare case where the new image name includes an equals sign, the positional form breaks and the named form doesn't, as I understand it. But that is a reare case. DES ^(talk) 20:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes subst: will probably do for the rare case. i picked this up when someone altered {{nothanks-sd}} to use a named parameter, after I created it with a positional one. Of course, a URL is far more likely to include an equals sign than is an image name. DES ^(talk) 20:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I was thinking that Wikipedia:Assume good faith was meaningful, and the reason that you were "waiting" for an explanation is that you hadn't read the reasons on the talk page that were waiting for you, and that the reason you hadn't answered the questions posed to you on said talk page was because you hadn't seen them. Apparently, I thought wrong; perhaps you should review Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility before editting any further. siafu 20:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Have you considered making a template for Chicago interurban trains, rather than mixing it in with L? You could include Metra and South Shore, as well, which makes much more sense. We also wouldn't have to fight about it. siafu 02:38, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your image Amtrak_schematic.png shows up as broken on Amtrak and the image history only shows deleted edits on the Wikipedia side. However, Image:Amtrak_schematic.png is in Commons and therefore should be showing up. Any idea what's up with that? Thatdog 01:00, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Central Railroad of Pennsylvania, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Scimitar ^parley 21:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the 1842 extension back to Mount Carbon. However, the line to Pottsville already existed, as the Mount Carbon Railroad (originally built to connect the canal to mines), so I clarified that. --SPUI (talk) 23:26, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks, good job, that is true Scott 00:50, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Scottfisher"

This image, Image:Amtrak California simplified map.svg, has two San Joses, with one of them located where San Diego should be. ^BlankVerse 13:36, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your recent edit to the Alaska article stating that many commuter rail services still offer flag stop service - do you have any sources to support this? —akghetto (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the cite, however as you also stated, it is a bit different than flagging down a train on a platform; even calling the Alaska Rail Road an "intercity" service is a tad of a stretch. The train literally goes through the middle of nowhere - it is the only means of getting to and from some areas of the state. You're not flagging down the train on a platform, you're in the woods standing along the track with no one else in a 50 mile radius trying to flag down a speeding full-size locomotive. Anywho, unless you streniously object, I think I'm going to re-add this notation to the Alaska article.

OK, how about, "It's one of America's last flag stop trains."? —akghetto (talk) 06:45, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]