Talk:Viewliner

message: ``Reservations for accessible Bedrooms can only be made by calling Amtrak and speaking with an agent. makes it sound like a travel agent can't help with such reservations.  Is that really the case?  Also, how does a deaf person who is paralysed such that they cannot use their legs but can use their hands make a reservation?  JNW2 (talk) 18:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Accessible Bedroom Reservations

message: This is a pretty pathetic phrase.  Exactly which routes? Silver Star, Silver Meteor and Palmetto that I know of.  Any others?68.224.206.168 (talk) 18:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Used on Eastern Routes" 

message: The linked references are images. One image shows a car marked "inspection car", while the other shows an image of people sitting in rear-facing seats, looking through a large glass window at the end, observing the tracks. If images aren't aren't a credible reference... what would be a more credible reference? RickyCourtney (talk) 04:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Viewliner Inspection Car 

message: I think it might make sense to split off a new stand-alone Viewliner II article. There's precedent with the Silverliner articles. While the basic design is the same, with the IIs we're talking about a new fleet with multiple car types and a different manufacturer. Alternatively, a more obvious split within the articles between the I and II, as was done in the Turboliner article, might be appropriate. Mackensen (talk) 01:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not going to strongly disagree here, but I think consistency is ideal here. Other cartypes run by Amtrak are on the same page- (Amfleet I/II or Superliner I/II) I think a better separation would not be bad however. 2604:2000:C6AC:D00:9A6:147:9101:D542 (talk) 03:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Spliting by formatting, but not in different articles, definitely seems like the way to go. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Viewliner. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20141006093856/http://mpeagles.com/files/Rail%20News%20for%20August%2011,%202014.pdf to http://mpeagles.com/files/Rail%20News%20for%20August%2011,%202014.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: All of the sources I found for the Viewliner I order with MK state that it was for 50 sleepers with 50 options. I cannot find anything that mentions the currently-published claim of 50 firm + 227 options (for a total of 277), and the citation link for this claim is dead. Also, the only way I can see 177 making sense ("none of the remaining 177 options were exercised") is if the original order was for 227 total (not 277), of which 50 were produced...but, again, I can't find any references for these numbers, either. I have a feeling that the 277 or 227 numbers were mentioned in Amtrak planning documents, and were never part of the MK order, which was 50+50. SixSix (talk) 14:02, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questioning Viewliner I option numbers 

message: This is what the Amtrak press release says:  I suspect this is clunky wording on Amtrak's part. It makes sense for the RFI to describe the current fleet, including the V-IIs. I would be surprised if the V-IIs, which only just entered service in some cases, would be subject to immediate replacement. That would be a significant departure from Amtrak's fleet management practices. I think we need a better source if we're going to say that the V-IIs are going to be replaced. Mackensen (talk) 03:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Fully agree. Unless there is direct evidence that the VII fleet specifically is to be replaced, clunky wording is more likely. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:23, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFI and Viewliner II replacement