Talk:First transcontinental railroad/Archive 1

message: __TOC__
This article is americentric. What about the first transcontinental railway for all the _other_ continents?. Bryan Derksen
Good comment. Do you have any ideas on what else this article should be titled? Perhaps we could then have First Transcontinental Railways point to the different continental railroads and have First Transcontinental Railroad (singular) redirected to First Transcontinental Railways. maveric149
Is "First Transcontinental Railroad" the proper name of the first transcontinental railroad in North America? The capitalization suggests this might be the case. If so, then it's appropriate for this content to remain here, but I think there should still be links to the other major rail lines. Not sure what I'd call it. Perhaps we could have a link-list article named "First transcontinental railways" (or maybe "Major railways" to include other significant routes such as the Orient Express) and then link to various important railways from there? I wasn't expecting to contribute to any of these articles, so I don't want to make any grand pronouncements on these matters. :) -BD
Perhaps when the new wiki software is ready, we can remane this article First Transcontinental Railroad (North America). However, some Canadians might object to this.... If that becomes the case, then "North America" could be changed to "(America)" or even "(United States of America)". maveric149
There was a railroad built across Panama in 1854. Shouldn't that be called the First Transcontinental Railroad? Moving this article to First Transcontinental Railroad (United States of America) would be a good idea. SFGiants
:Does any other country have an article on a first transcon rr?  When we do reach that point I would recommend renaming the North American/USA one to First transcontinental railroad (US).
Rhallanger 23:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the tittle "First Transcontinental railroad" is wrong here.   The first transcontinental railroad in the Americas was the Panama Railroad opened in 1855.  This article should be renamed  U.S. Transcontinental railroad or something similar, the "First" tittle can be given to many things, I don't think that the Panama Railroad article should be named "First transcontinental railroad" either, the fact that it was the first transcontinental railroad is included in the article. Radioheadhst 18:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Hunh? If you actually read the article, you will find that the one in the USA was not the first transcontinental railroad built. -- Infrogmation 17:48, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Note the capitalization - it is a proper name. --21:01, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: Isn't that a sluice that the central man's stirring with the pitchfork? Isn't that a pan whose contents are being shown to us at the left? In spite of the national archival cataloguing of this image, aren't these men actually panning for gold? Wetman 20:38, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like it. -- Infrogmation 22:49, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: Good catch!  The image has now been removed.--Lordkinbote 06:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Subject: panning for gold?

message: As a Brit I should not be writing about American history, so would someone over there add the names and roles of General Grenville Dodge and Thomas Durant? JMcC 00:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now added a couple of paragraphs JMcC 12:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A few missing people

message: This section as currently written is inaccurate.  "It runs along the original line between Sacramento and Salt Lake City, Utah." The original line does not pass through Salt Lake City, Utah. How much of the California Zephyr runs on the original transcontinental railroad is not easy to answer as both the original Central Pacific track and the sorta parallel Western Pacific track (which does pass through Salt Lake City) are now owned by the Union Pacific and they can route the Zephyr over whichever track they please. I will attempt to clarify this if anybody has any objections please "fix". Davemeistermoab 18-March-2006
*Sounds good, I put that in and you're right, there are some slight modifications.  I mod'd that SLC-SAC from someone that said it ran the current route, either the entire way or from Omaha - Sac. (they didn't mention that from SLC-DEN it's old DRGW and DEN-OMA it's old BN route.  Rhallanger 09:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Passenger Service

message: I didn't think the railroad made it to San Francisco - it's pretty difficult with the Bay in the way. The Transcontinental Express went to Oakland, right? Lagringa 15:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: RR in SF?

message: The article's POV is way too much oriented from a California POV and gives the impression that the Union Pacific (which built 2/3 of the track) just tagged along.  Americasroof 20:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Too much California POV

message: The constant anonymous vandalism to this article is astronishing and it's astonishing how extensive and hidden it is.  I restored it back to an October 16 version.  I really, really, really dislike the history section and will work to rewrite it.  But the section should not have been nuked.  It just needs to be rewritten.   Americasroof 14:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. LuciferMorgan 00:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Re-Review and In-line citations