Talk:Nevada Northern Railway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
	This article needs a map. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article. Once the requested map is added, remove the Mapneeded parameter from the {{TrainsWikiProject}} template call on this page to remove this map request.

[edit] Merge proposal

After adding the RHP category to this article, I found that we have another article on the same entity. I propose merging the information into this article because the railway itself is more than a museum. Slambo (Speak) 15:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

They're not really the same entity, though: the museum only owns and operates a few miles of trackage near Ely, while the Nevada Northern is roughly 150 miles long. The railway has a very different history from that of the museum (and hopefully a distinct future, as well), and the museum and railway are owned by different entities. I'd recommend keeping the articles separate. Pitamakan 03:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thinking about it a bit more -- while I do support keeping the museum article separate, it might make some sense to merge the BHP Nevada Railroad into the main Nevada Northern one, since BHP was just a short-term owner/operator of the overall Nevada Northern line. Pitamakan 03:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I just added NRHP infobox and more NHL info to the article. The East Ely Yards and Shops aka the museum are a separate entity from the larger railway. Only the Yards and Shops are a National Historic Landmark. Any National Historic Landmark deserves a separate article. So I am removing the merge proposal from the article itself, a decision consistent with discussion by others above. doncram 01:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)