Talk:Newfoundland Railway

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

Mid

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

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

Canada: Newfoundland & Labrador Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador.

Wasn't this called the Newfie Bullet?

Only its passenger train was called by this name. Peter Horn 01:33, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newfoundland Railway#Canadian National

Did they change the wheelsets or the complete trucks? Peter Horn 01:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that they changed the trucks/bogies completely. This would make more sense, since it would take much less time to swap the entire bogie assembly then the wheels on it.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 05:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Longest narrow gauge?

I'm a little skeptical about the article's opening-paragraph claim that the Newfoundland Railway was the longest narrow-gauge system in North America. While it was certainly true at the end, I'm pretty certain that the Rio Grande's narrow-gauge network was substantially larger at its peak. Pitamakan (talk) 18:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad, according to the linked article, it was both a standard and narrow gauge railroad; the 1930 map supplied with the article indicates the narrow gauge line was limited to Colorado and the link to Santa Fe in New Mexico, which I think is smaller than the narrow gauge line in Newfoundland at it's full extent, including spurs.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 05:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's the railroad I'm referring to, and by the twentieth century it was indeed a mix of standard and narrow gauge. Until about 1890, though, nearly all of the line was narrow gauge, including the entire main line between Denver and Utah; much of the narrow gauge was later converted to standard. So perhaps the Rio Grande was North America's longest narrow gauge, but the Newfoundland was North America's longest twentieth-century narrow gauge? Pitamakan (talk) 14:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem might be we're comparing apples and oranges here. The reference at the bottom of the article is a historical paper from Memorial University, so I would expect their facts to have been checked, and it very clearly refers to the railway as the longest narrow guage in North America. However, they are referring to narrow gauge as meaning 3 feet 6 inches - which makes sense, since the narrow gauge wiki page refers to 3 feet 6 inches as the common British narrow gauge, and Newfoundland was a British colony at the time the railway was constructed. But the common US narrow gauge was 3 feet; so it's entirely possible that both statements are correct. I'm going to clarify the article to refer specifically to the 3 foot 6 inch track gauge.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 02:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to me, and yours is a good solution. Thanks! Pitamakan (talk) 03:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caribou (train) should be merged into/redirected here

I don't see any value in having a separate article for Caribou (train) that only contains facts found in this article. I suggest that that article be turned into a redirect to here. Ylee (talk) 20:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ambivalent: It is fairly common to have passenger train articles independent of the railroad(s) over which they operated. (see San Juan Express, Atlantic Limited, Broadway Limited, Super Chief, Flying Scotsman, and Orient Express. The Caribou article is short enough to be merged as a paragraph without exceeding desired length of the railroad article; but I suggest the article remain independent with the hope someone may expand it to include photographs and descriptions of service schedule and equipment which might be considered minutia in an article describing the entire railroad.Thewellman (talk) 22:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since this merger discussion has now been open for 2 years with only one ambivalent !vote, I do not believe there is a consensus to merge these articles and am therefore closing discussion as "no consensus to merge".Vulcan's Forge (talk) 01:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Trivia

Not sure if this is appropriate for the article, and the source is suspect:
[[George V of the United Kingdom|Prince George]], was in 1882 stationed in the [[Maritimes]] as a midshipman on [[HMS Cumberland (1842)|HMS ''Cumberland'']] and, during his time there, drove the last spike into the Harbour Grace Railway.<ref name=RT>{{cite web| url=http://www.railways.incanada.net/circle/Royal_Trains.html| last=Churcher| first=Colin| title=Colin Churcher's Railway Pages > Royal Trains and Royal Occasions| publisher=Colin Churcher| accessdate=12 July 2009}}</ref>
Preserving it here in case it can be sourced from a more reliable location.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Newfoundland Railway. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:12, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]