Talk:Via Rail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Companies (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Trains (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.
 
WikiProject Canada / Quebec (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
 
WikiProject Montreal (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montreal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montreal 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Crown corporations[edit]

VIA Rail is a not a true Crown Corporation in that it cannot raise funds on the money market, rather it is subject to the whims of the government of the day for its ongoing funding. This is a major reason for the failure of VIA to improve its lot.

True enough regarding how political control limits the company's "viability" (pun intended!), however the definition of a Crown corporation throughout Canada's history has been fairly broad. In the sense that any publicly owned (ie. government) company in Canada is a Crown corporation, then VIA Rail would meet that criteria. For many years prior to its recapitalization in the late 1970's and the Canadian railway industry's deregulation in the 1980's, CN was not allowed to raise funds either. Provincial Crown corporations like B.C. Rail and B.C. Ferries or N.B. Power were similarly limited at certain points in their existence. I could be wrong, as I have not read the VIA Rail Act in-depth but is there a specific provision which limits the company from seeking funds on the "money market" in the way you describe? I would also argue that there is likely no public transport company in the world which is financially successful in the limited way in which economists in the 20th/21st century measure this. Since there is no accounting taken for the numbers of vehicles taken off a nation's highways each day, or having to construct new roads to isolated communities served by VIA/Amtrak/etc., or the environmental benefits realized, etc. etc. etc. then VIA Rail, Amtrak, Eurorail, various ferries, etc. will never be financially solvent. Cheers, Plasma east 22:00, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)


The following section was added by User: Andrew Dunning and I have commented it out pending input from others due to several errors:

Officially, the move from the CP to CN line was to keep service to more remote communities on the CN line. However, this move was seen as somewhat more politically-motivated by some. Coincidentally, the CN route goes through more towns that voted Progressive Conservative. Harvey André, the Cabinet minister who represented Calgary in 1990, was fairly public about the fact that he did not care if he never saw a train again in his life. The CN line also went through Edmonton, the home of both Mulroney and Joe Clark.

No doubt politics played a heavy role in this 2nd round of VIA cuts, however I'm unsure as to what the actual political representation played throughout the Super Continental's route (historically, the Super was a CN transcontinental train, and The Canadian was a CP transcontinental train). In the 1990 cuts when VIA was reduced to a single transcontinental, they decided to keep the more-recognized Canadian brand, and use it on the CN line... why the CN line is the question, however some have suggested CN being a crown corp at the time, gave VIA a better deal on trackage fees, insurance costs, etc. etc. Politics could also have played a role, or perhaps the thinking was that VIA should be supporting the feds to provide service to the more remote northern prairie communities since the Trans-Canada Highway follows the southerly CP route and was already well-served by inter-city busses. The main reason I've commented out the above addition was the last line concerning Clark & Mulroney's ridings - Clark represented High River near Calgary, Alberta in the 1980s and Mulroney represented Manicouagan near Baie Comeau, Quebec. Harvey André... I have no idea - very likely though. Once this part gets edited/verified properly, it should appropriately be added to the story surrounding the 2nd round of cuts in 1990.Plasma east 16:57, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Joe Clark was born and raised in High River, but he represented Yellowhead, a large riding between Edmonton and Jasper, from 1979 to 1993. Mulroney never lived in Alberta, nor was he ever an Alberta MP.--Indefatigable 17:30, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)


Order in council[edit]

I noticed the citation next to the order in council sentence. This article seems to support that comment: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/via-rail-seeking-federal-budget-funding-for-1-3b-passenger-car-upgrade-in-toronto-montreal-corridor, although it states it is because VIA Rail is a crown corporation, not an order in council. I'll add it as a citation, but won't remove the other citatation needed. -- jlam (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Long-winded History section[edit]

The history section is long-overdue for a major rewrite. The focus on service cuts is excessive, I believe. At a bare minimum this should be moved to an different article. The entire thing needs a complete rewrite in my opinion. Other thoughts? Nfitz 18:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I find the information about the number of trains confusing. The article starts off by mentioning that there are 480 trains but does not mention the measurement period (weekly?). Later the article mentions that when VIA took over from CN and CP it ran more than 150 trains per week. Since VIA runs fewer trains now the two numbers appear confusing.

It might be helpful if the historical section included information about the absolute decline in passenger levels (today's level of 4 million per year is very low compared to historical figures). Passenger miles would be a good measurement to include. These could show the relative importance of rail passenger travel in Canada compared to that in other countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rev40 (talkcontribs) 06:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, do we need to retain the information about old service classes? Can these be shunted off to a history page? Bootofthebeast (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The history of VIA seems to be a history of service cuts. So the focus on service cuts is appropriate. It could contain more information on passengers per year and passenger-miles per year, of course. 24.59.149.223 (talk) 02:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

POV concerns[edit]

The extensive history section is rife with much political speculation that borders on libel (twice claiming that politicians spitefully cut certain routes because they serviced their opponents' ridings), and finally asserting that the new Renaissance trains are failure-prone without any citation. While these claims may be true (VIA has indeed seen service cutbacks), the reasons are given without link or evidence to back it up.

There is a lack of NPOV; the general tone paints a picture of relentless and malicious political persecution, going so far as calling VIA a "political football". - quanta 02:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Some of the remarks are factual; but they need citing. This article has clear POV problems (and I'm a rail fan myself). --Orange Mike | Talk 18:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
This has to be one of the longest-lasting most-horrible Wikipedia pages I've seen. The endless orgy of information about cutbacks, and of equipment, much of which it isn't clear if still runs (some sent to the junk yard a quarter-century ago) — no one has made any comment here about these issues, or the POV concerns. As far as I can tell, someone needs to take a knife to entire article. Is there anyone who actually objects - or cares? Nfitz (talk) 05:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
In case your question (above) was not rhetorical, I care. That is to say, I agree that the article should be edited by someone with the requisite knowledge, but I do feel that the subject is worthy of such an effort.CanRuby (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I would go as far to say this page needs a criticism section against vias practices to make it fair. I recently had a ticket stolen ( just the ticket portion and not the reciept) I was forced to buy a new ticket, same reservation number, same seat and the cost for via rail to investigate the issue and issue me a refund was 40 dollars charged to me, which was the price of the ticket. Its a policy that isnt right by the carriers. Not to make this sound like a blog, but many customers have had very negative experiences with via rail services in terms of ticket refunds, late trains no refunds, etc that seemingly arent mentioned as much as you think in the article, it reads as a poor me corportation article where people are meant to feel sorry for the government cut backs the corporation has had.Ottawa4ever (talk) 20:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree with Ottawa4ever on the question of POV concerns - if VIA's customer service, and over all experience is of a certain character, indicating that online shouldn't be an issue. It is, as wikipedia aims to be, factual. A POV concern would come out of going overboard in presentation of those facts. If VIA's ticket refund system can catch people 'off guard' or 'un-awares' that that's the truth - it's merely stating VIA policy. Equally, if traveling on VIA is is remarkable or it isn't, presenting both sides of factual observations is the key to objectivity. Doingmorestuffonline (talk) 03:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but most of the information about cutbacks is neutral point of view, and rather important for a historical presentation of VIA. Unfortunately. It would be lovely if there were lots of things other than cutbacks to talk about in VIA's history, but there aren't. 24.59.149.223 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:32, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Tshiuetin Rail and White Pass and Yukon[edit]

Would anybody object if I delete all mention of these two railways from this article? Other than operating passenger trains in Canada, they don't have anything in common with Via Rail. They don't serve the same cities, and there is no way to connect from Via to those roads without a long auto/bus/plane/boat ride in between. Indefatigable (talk) 23:30, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I personally found it a very interesting find that there was a rail company in these areas. I was going to add them, but if they were previously removed, I won't add it again. -- jlam (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Freight train priority / delays[edit]

Something perhaps worth mentioning, though not sure whether it would be in keeping with an encyclopedic entry. Since Via owns very little of its own trackage and pays usage fees to CN and CP, and furthermore since many lines are single-track, the consequence is that passenger trains are frequently sidelined while waiting for freight trains to go by. I don't have a solid source, but there are numerous mentions of it on travel forums. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.92.194 (talk) 21:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC) It's not really reported on, because it only happens in the West, where few people take the train anyway, so everyone knows, and nobody cares. 142.165.145.71 (talk) 06:02, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Revisiting the VIA/Via question[edit]

The logo and business name both use the capitalized version. (So does the stock exchange, although that means nothing by itself.) Given that the mass media is divided, shouldn't we go with the business name as it is used on all business documents? (Yes, I saw the archived discussion above. I also noticed that it was four years old. Consensus can be revisited, especially where there is strong reason to believe that a different consensus is now appropriate.)

Merger proposal[edit]

CLOSED:

Reject merging of List of Via Rail routes into Via Rail article as per consensus. Non-Administrative closure-- GenQuest "Talk to Me" 14:07, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

I propose that List of Via Rail routes be merged into Via Rail. I think that it would fit nicely instead of the current setup, and the routes alone do not seem like a large enough article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RES2773 (talkcontribs) 23:14, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Better as a free-standing article, especially given the likely addition of discontinued routes as sources permit. Compare List of Amtrak routes. Mackensen (talk) 21:51, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - It works better the way things are. The main article is long enough. Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. Both commenters have excellent reasoning IMO. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  12:37, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

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.

Does Via Rail own tracks?[edit]

I don't find anything about that in the article. A system length is given, but is all that on tracks owned by other companies or does Via have its own infrastructure? --Tobias b köhler (talk) 16:12, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

VIA owns 200 km of track [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.21.158 (talk) 17:29, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Via Rail. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:30, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.viarail.ca/sites/all/files/media/pdfs/About_VIA/our-company/annual-reports/2015/ViaRail_AnnualReport_2015_EN.pdf