Talk:Pioneer Zephyr

message: The two photos that are shown of Zephyrs in revenue service are more likely of the Mark Twain Zephyr than the Pioneer Zephyr since they show the train arriving at locations in Illinois (which were not on the Pioneer Zephyr's revenue route).  I have been able to find only one photo of the Pioneer Zephyr in revenue service online (), and the page I found it on seems to indicate that it's a royalty-free image, but I haven't found a definitive answer on whether I can use it in this article or not.  A copy without the watermarks is here. slambo 16:15, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
:Some of the reference material that I was looking at last night says that the Pioneer Zephyr route changed over time, so that assumption may not be entirely correct.  Further research is needed here. Slambo (Speak) 15:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revenue service photos 

message: To answer the question posed in the photo caption; Yes, there is a deadman's pedal partially visible in this photo. While the pedal itself is obscured behind the seat's lower cushion, the gray object just above the "right front" corner of the seat is recognizable to me as the mechanism of such a pedal. 20:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cab controls 

message: I've just made a series of edits to the article following a comment left on the  talk page. I thought it might be useful to see different ways in which the patent templates can be used to put different levels of information around an article. Each of my three edits works in a different way,
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pioneer_Zephyr&diff=137683190&oldid=137657588
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pioneer_Zephyr&diff=next&oldid=137683190
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pioneer_Zephyr&diff=next&oldid=137685099
so please take a look and decide which one you think works best for this particular article, if any! GDallimore (Talk) 14:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Way cool, thanks for looking into this.  I'll be reviewing the options and selecting one for consistency soon.  Slambo (Speak) 15:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. It's interesting to see how people want to use these templates so that I can try to improve the accordingly. By the way, if you want a complete example of how adding patents into a bibliography section or patent section can work, take a look at Atomic line filter. Personally, I'm not sure I like the style, but it had to be done there because one editor didn't like the different styles between citing a book and citing a patent, whereas I was not willing to have inventors named as the "authors" of a patent, since they very rarely are. GDallimore (Talk) 16:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorry for all the edits 

message: Intro says 115 mph; text of article says 130 mph. Jnmwiki (talk) 18:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  land speed record 

message: :File:Pioneer Zephyr Dawn to Dusk Club 1936.JPG This photo was published by the Chicago Tribune as the first regular service Denver Zephyr made its run in 1936. There's a photo similar to the one in the article (also non-free) at the McCook, NE public library.  Both are dated 1934, but in all three photos, the men are wearing the same suits and ties.
The "Tribune" photo looks to have originally been taken in 1934 and run with the copy seen on the photo's back. Contacting the Burlington Historical Society with questions brought no response.  I'm proposing that the free use photo replace the present one of the "Dawn to Dusk Club" as it appears to have been taken on the same day. We hope (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My preference is to retain the long standing current image which, although smaller, is still a superior quality image. Centpacrr (talk) 10:10, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dawn to Dusk Club photo 

message: This article contained the ridiculous exaggeration, "Even if they did have the money to travel, the equipment that railroads were using to carry passengers had not changed much since the middle of the 19th century." I've removed it. There was a world of difference in size, speed, and safety between the early, slow-running, modest-sized steam locomotives and small, frail passenger cars of the mid-1800s and the massive, fast steam locomotives and long, heavily-built passenger cars of the early 1930s. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 19:56, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk about misleading hyperbole... 

message: I don't have time to work on this article right now, but we really can't have a featured article with entire unreferenced paragraphs. Mackensen (talk) 20:15, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Pioneer Zephyr. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msichicago.org/exhibit/zephyr/history/nytimes/nytimes.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060618230700/http://www.dorneypark.com/public/inside_park/rides/rides/zephyr.cfm to http://www.dorneypark.com/public/inside_park/rides/rides/zephyr.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930071656/http://www.railmodel.com/bulletins/chl/CBQ_BM_Shovelnoses.htm to http://www.railmodel.com/bulletins/chl/CBQ_BM_Shovelnoses.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pioneer Zephyr. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120227192707/http://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communities/History/Landmarks/5623.pdf to http://files.asme.org/ASMEORG/Communities/History/Landmarks/5623.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pioneer Zephyr. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050309160358/http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/streamliners/peopleevents/p_rbudd.html to https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/streamliners/peopleevents/p_rbudd.html
*Added  tag to http://photoswest.org:8080/cgi-bin/cw_cgi?resultsScreen+31865+1+4+0
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:05, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The section Early Zephyr trains says:
:The six car sets 9904 and 9905 began service as the Denver Zephyr in May 1936 . . .
It is uncited.
The sources cited in Denver Zephyr#The first Denver Zephyrs state that the Advance Denver Zephyr of May 1936 were 9900 and 9903 (PZ and MTZ).  Kablammo (talk) 19:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In reliance on those sources, I have edited the article to remove the uncited assertion quoted above.  Kablammo (talk) 02:13, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting information 

message: :As a "featured article" this is supposed to be "...considered to be some of the best articles Wikipedia has to offer." There has been some referencing issues and a tag from February 2017 (See "References" above) that has been unresolved concerning unsourced sections. To even be considered for B-Class referencing cannot be an issue.
:A solution, short of finding sources or a demotion, is to remove the material that creates the issue. I have hidden the unsourced section and removed the tag. If someone wishes inclusion there needs to be sourcing. Otr500 (talk) 08:50, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Article issues

message: I reviewed this article for WP:URFA/2020 and I am concerned that the article no longer meets the featured article criteria. Some of my concerns are outlined below:
*The "Concept and construction" section is quite long. Can this be split into two sections and summarised/trimmed?
*Multiple paragraphs do not end with an inline citation. While this might not have been necessary in 2007 during the article's FAR, my experience with recent FACs has caused me to think that this standard has risen. An inline citation at the end of the paragraph makes it clear to the reader what is verifying the last sentence's information. 
*The ""Silver Streak" film" does not contain any inline citations. 
*The "Legacy" section contains one-sentence paragraphs. Can this section be reformatted to have paragraphs instead?
Is anyone interested in addressing these concerns? I am pinging  as they were the article's FAC nominator and they are still actively editing. Z1720 (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the ping.  I'll work a bit more on it in the coming weeks.  Slambo (Speak) 15:34, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Gathering my resources.  Some of the references cited are (widely available) books in my personal collection and are a bit buried in my basement, so I'm digging them out again.  Slambo (Speak) 03:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Still digging out a few resources. I have some handy now.  Work is a bit busy this week, but with more time opening up soon, I will try to pop in more frequently to work on it.  I moved the Byron book from Further Reading to References because I now have a copy of that book and will use it for further citations. Slambo (Speak) 22:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Now working on adding details and more citations.  I'll be working on it more on and off over the next couple weeks as I have time around my regular schedule.  Slambo (Speak) 16:30, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  are you still working on this? I still see some paragraphs that need citations. Feel free to ping me once your edits are complete. Z1720 (talk) 17:44, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I'm still trying to work on this.  The last couple months of 2022 were an unintentional Wiki break.  I've been editing on a nearly daily basis since September 2004, and now that we're into 2023, one of my goals is to get back to regular editing again, starting today. Slambo (Speak) 18:23, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  are you or any other editors still interested in working on this? Z1720 (talk) 13:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:URFA/2020|URFA/2020]] review and concerns 

message: For example, it states "Number built	1 trainset (3 cars)". That suggests the infobox is about the Pioneer Zephyr exclusively. 
But a reader could reasonably expect this article to be about all the contemporary Zephyrs, and be misled into thinking there was only one train set (despite the text mentioning more).
The page Zephyr could be argued would be a better destination for an overall info box, so we have somewhere to place the total number of Zephyr trains. Currently though it's only a disambiguation page.
CapnZapp (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that a summary article about Burlington's Zephyrs would be useful; Zephyr (train) doesn't fit that bill right now. I disagree that this article is the natural location for it, and that readers would expect it to be here. Mackensen (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

text: I mentioned at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Pioneer Zephyr/archive2 that I believe there's too much detail about the other trainsets. Their existence is relevant and merits mention (especially the Flying Yankee and other trainsets that heavily derived from the Pioneer Zephyr), but as it stands this article does go too much into detail about them. I propose an article titled Burlington Zephyrs or similar that covers all of the trains with the Zephyr name. I also proposed removing the Zephyr tributes in advertising, commercial products, and sports section as lacking any substantial sourcing. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:14, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mackensen: It can be difficult for an expert on a subject to appreciate how an article can come across as confusing for a regular reader so let me state: this article is not especially clear it is about just one out of many similar-but-not-identical Zephyr trains. Most trains don't have individual articles for each unit. This is compounded by there being no other well-developed article about the Zephyrs as a whole, again making this article's info box the natural place to look for summary info (such as the number of units built). CapnZapp (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

text:  Trainsandotherthings: I would wonder why you aren't simply creating the article, but it appears you are in an active discussion over at that other place, so I'll let that play out. CapnZapp (talk) 01:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Because I have a full time job and other responsibilities. There are many articles I want to create but haven't had the time or energy to do so. I have limited time that I can dedicate to Wikipedia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

text:  Just to be clear, what I would like is: an infobox somewhere that summarizes the run of Zephyr trains. How many train sets were built? CapnZapp (talk) 01:13, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

text: I've taken a ~3kb bite out of the article that didn't discuss the Pioneer Zephyr at all in favor of the other trains. More could probably be removed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, but I think what a reader expects the most, is a summary page for all Zephyr trains (and an infobox for all of them). Then, as a secondary interest, individual pages for each one. Alternatively, make it much more clear (to a non train buff) that even though all these trains had "Zephyr" in the name, they really aren't that similar, and should best be considered individual trains just with confusingly similar names. (I don't know which solution mirrors reality best) Hope this clears it up that my aim starting this talk section was not primarily or even secondarily "please remove stuff about other Zephyrs than the Pioneer Zephyr". Thanks CapnZapp (talk) 14:59, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't disagree that there should be a page that covers all the Zephyr trains. But this article is not the place for it. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  infobox about the Zephyr trains overall, or just this one?