Talk:Western Pacific Railroad

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.

California

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Nevada (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada articles

United States: Utah Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Utah portal This article is supported by WikiProject Utah (assessed as Mid-importance).

Presidents

Someone left a list of railroad presidents at the WT:RS page.[1] I'll add them to the article, just to WP:PRESERVE it, but someone else might want to improve on it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:07, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

UP 1983

@Moabdave: To your edit summary here, I don't know where you're getting that; nobody said it was controversial. I said it was uncited, and linked to the guideline on how to cite. References are required per the verifiability policy. — voidxor 23:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The wording in both the guideline and policy cited is citations are required for material that "has been challenged or is likely to be challenged". I meant "controversial" as a shorthand for that. I honestly don't think it's controversial (or worthy of a challenge) to contest that one railroad who purchases another railroad would keep a token number of locomotives in the paint scheme of the predecessor. Many companies do stuff like this to keep from loosing the trademarks they spent so much money to acquire. Probably the most well known case is Chevron Corporation which keeps one gas station per state they operate in branded as "Standard" so they don't lose the trademark. But fair enough, if you want to challenge it, so be it. However, in the time it's taken to write this, the first google hit for UP Heritage Fleet is a reliable source. So this should end it for once and for all, I'll just add it. Dave (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Moabdave: Read it again; the "challenged or likely to be challenged" thing is only in the context of requiring "inline citations". The material added to this article had no citations, not even at the bottom of the article. Nothing against you (and I realize that you weren't the editor who added it), but I'm sick and tired of tagging and cleaning up unreferenced material on rail-related articles. Every railfan around here is a self-appointed expert who doesn't need to cite anything they know because it's as obvious [to them] as the sky being blue. Thank you for the lecture, and history lesson, but I tagged this article nearly eight years ago. You seem to be overlooking that and everything else. I really wish you would discontinue using the word "controversial"; that's not what this is. I challenged it by removing it (and linking to instructions to cite). As for your point about time: true, it is quick to Google or copy a reference from the linked article. However, that's not my job. I'm trying to get others to contribute references as they go.

Anyway, thank you for adding a reference. That's all I wanted to see. — voidxor 17:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply on your talk page, as this is now more a personal discussion rather than about the article. Dave (talk) 07:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add a listing of locomotives

Add of Western Pacific locomotives to the page 2601:206:8201:3780:7483:3FDB:49EF:49B5 (talk) 04:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Something that specific would be considered fan cruft ("railfan cruft"?), and not really appropriate for Wikipedia. I think other blogs or wikis, such as Fandom or Reddit, would be a better venue for that kind of information. — voidxor 00:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]