Talk:Northern Transcon

Trains Mid‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Minnesota Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Idaho / North Dakota / Washington Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Idaho portal This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho (assessed as Low-importance).
	North Dakota portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Dakota (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).

Montana Low‑importance

	Montana portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Montana 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.MontanaWikipedia:WikiProject MontanaTemplate:WikiProject MontanaMontana articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed move

I'm not sure what the proper name for this route is, just used "Northern BNSF Route" as a temporary name. Someone in the know, please fix this. MrZaius^talk 19:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Hi-Line. A merge would be appropriate.Kablammo 12:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit - explanation?

Please specify specific issues or remedy them. A quick scan through reveals no major issues. MrZaius^talk 15:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although I didn't place the tag, I have a couple of suggestions for improvement beyond copyediting...

The article could use a dedicated lead section and a more thorough explanation of the line's history from construction through to today. Since a lot of the construction information is in other articles like Northern Pacific Railway, we can probably get away with summary style for part of the history section.
All of the images in the gallery are from Washington, but the route extends to Chicago; we need to show images from along the entire route (I have uploaded photos from Illinois and Wisconsin, and I can easily get more from these two states as I am in Madison) and we need to display them in a better format so they're not all clumped together at the bottom of the page.
The article has no references.
There is very little on how the BNSF uses the line today. We can probably extract some data from the railroad's annual reports (which are all on the BNSF website, dating back to the first BNSF annual report in 1995) and from journals such as Trains or any of a multitude of others.

As this line plays an important role in today's transportation, we should be able to do better than the start class article that we have today. Slambo (Speak) 10:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This line is used by the Z-trains (the high priority intermodals) between the port of Seattle and the midwest. Today this is where the money is. With just-in-time inventory controls, it is not the lowest cost but the quickest time that gets the business. This is a fast direct route which means crossing the Cascade Mountains with a 2.2% grade as opposed to the longer flat route around them up the Columbia River Gorge even though it requires far more fuel. 24.19.45.169 (talk) 16:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:BNSF.png

The image File:BNSF.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-Line (Montana) Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not merged. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned above by Kablammo back in 2007, Hi-Line (Montana) is essentially another name for part or all of this route. Jason McHuff (talk) 17:16, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One of the subdivisions of the Northern Transcon is officially named the Hi-Line Subdivision. IF (and only if) this article is re-written to focus on that subdivision, making it similar to the article for Staples Subdivision, it is appropriate to keep. If there are no plans to do that, yeah redirect for now. Davemeistermoab (talk) 04:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reordered info and rewrote a bit to satisfy @Davemeistermoab — i vote to Keep separate in its current state, as it's about as complete as articles relating to other BNSF railway subdivisions -MJ (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The entire route is often referred to as the Hi-Line, not just the subdivision. This ought to be mentioned in the text. -ProhibitOnions ^(T) 07:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The National Weather Service routinely uses the term Hi-line in their forecast discussions. For example from May 29, 2022, “Storm totals drop off sharply going northeastward through North-central MT, with little to no precipitation expected for the central and eastern portions of the Hi-line.” For those not familiar with the area, having a easy to find definition , ie a specific Hi-line topic, is very useful. I vote to keep separate. 172.58.27.234 (talk) 13:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.