Talk:Ulster and Delaware Railroad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ulster and Delaware Railroad is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
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
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject.

Contents

[edit] History

I would like to know why when I save something to the "History" section, it only shows up on the display page, but not on the editing page. If anyone knows, please tell me. Kschwerdt514 18:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the cache in your browser is interfering. Try clearing it and go to the edit page again. User:n2xjk

How do I clear my browser, and how do I get to it? Kschwerdt514 21:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind! It just needed some refreshing. Kschwerdt514 21:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I see the history section on CSX was mercifully removed. I think what you were trying to refer to Kschwerdt514 is the portion of the former Wallkill Branch that is now a team track. I don't think it was ever considered part of the U&D. n2xjk 03:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think "They abandoned the portion from Kingston Point to Kingston, as the stops at Kingston Point and Rondout were worthless stops to the NYC" is correct. Passenger service to Kingston Point stopped in 1924(?), but the track remained in freight service until 1977. n2xjk 03:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I was going to correct that, but I guess I forgot. I'll take care of that later, though. --Kschwerdt514 03:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions

I think the introductory paragraph has become clumsy. Now about concentrating on a general description of the railroad (location, environment, business conditions) and leave the detailed history for the sections below. n2xjk 18:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I changed the introducing paragraph. So, is it better than before? Kschwerdt514 13:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Better, but now there are several typos through the article. n2xjk 15:28, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Typos gone! Kschwerdt514 23:25 23 April 2006 (UTC)

"62- and 70-pound rail" is used without explanation. Railroad people know what this means, but here we should define it or link to another page that does define it. n2xjk 15:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the article could also benefit by adding more information about the industries served by the railroad. There's no mention of cement, blue stone and brick, which were major industries in the area. Its a major reason that a town as small as Kingston had four railroads serving it. n2xjk 16:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I took care of the pound rail ref. n2xjk 01:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

And I took care of the industries in Kingston. --Kschwerdt514 17:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ideas

I would like to list this in the Trains Portal. Please tell me if you think I should. Kschwerdt514 14:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind! I already added it to the trains portal. Kschwerdt514 01:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Looking good. n2xjk 21:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I plan on cleaning up the other sections and adding more information and pictures. Kschwerdt514 3:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Updates

I have taken away the paragraph about the prefabricated stations, as I believe that info about the stations should be mentioned on the station pages. I also relocated the picture of Brown's Station to the Ashokan Reservoir paragraph. --Kschwerdt514 03:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I have completely revised the section about the Ulster and Delaware, shortening the paragraphs (which were quite lengthy, I must say), and adding more information on its history and former presidents. I plan on doing the same with some of the the other sections. --Kschwerdt514 04:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is better not to let paragraphs get too long. Shorter paragraphs make for easier understanding.

I think the sentence "The Ulster and Delaware Railroad had many junctions with other railroads along the way, including much bigger railroads that went as far as Minnesota." is a little odd. By the time the U&D came into existance, basically all the major railroads intersected. Once the Transcontinental Railroad was completed, freight from the U&D or a passenger with fortitude could go all the way to the west coast. n2xjk 19:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA comments

There is certainly a vast amount of information presented, though I feel that resolution of some structural issues would greatly improve the article:

  1. The middle paragraph in the introduction should be moved to the main body of the article or trimmed way down; the relevancy of the information therein is, IMO, questionable without better context.
  2. Some of the longer sections would benefit from the addition of subsections to better organize the information presented and thereby improve the readability of the same.

Attention to the above will not only help the article achieve GA status but (I believe) get it in shape for another run at FA.--Lordkinbote 08:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More Updates

I have removed the sentence that read, "The Ulster and Delaware Railroad had many junctions with other railroads along the way, including much bigger railroads that went as far as Minnesota", from the introducing paragraphs, and I have removed the middle paragraph in said section. I plan to do yet more revision on the article. --Kschwerdt514 15:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Failed GA

For an article of this length, four references is not enough to make a GA.Some P. Erson 22:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)