Talk:Canadian Pacific Railway

Last Spike

According to the Globe & Mail Style Book 2003, Last Spike should be capitalized. GreatWhiteNortherner 07:30, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

Incorporation of CPR

CPR Incorporation was February 16, 1881. Not 1880. R.L.Kennedy 1800 July 23, 2004

Map

Shouldn't we have a map here somewhere? just my opinion but i thought it was a good idea :P SECProto 16:04, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yes, we should have a system map for this article. Very few railroad articles right now have system maps, but I think they all should have at least one map to show the extent of the railroad(s) in question. I haven't had a chance to try creating any yet, but I was planning to add a System maps subsection to Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo#Articles to improve to highlight the need on our project page. slambo 16:56, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

• I just finished creating a network map for the CPR while I should have been studying for my exam tomorrow. Suggestions and comments are appreciated. If someone has a good idea on how to incorporate it into the article, please feel free to do so. Image:CanadianPacificRailwayNetworkMap.png. Al guy 01:55, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
  • Looks great! Let's go ahead and add the image to the article. Not sure where in the article it best fits right now, but we can always add it near the top and move it around later. JYolkowski 15:25, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Way cool! As we add enough system maps for the railroad articles, we should probably add them into the Template:Railroad infobox much like the geography articles (Wisconsin, for example) has the map in the infobox. slambo 16:33, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Facts about the Canadian Pacific

I removed this section because it sounded like trivia and hence unencyclopedic. I tried to move as many facts into other sections but there are three that didn't fit. If anyone wants to try putting these in context somewhere in the article, feel free.

• The CPR has created and owns 80 tunnels and 3,000 bridges.
• CPR employs 24,000 workers.
• CPR owns 48,000 freight cars. The railroad spends about $1 billion annually for maintenance, repairs and improvements.

-JYolkowski 01:16, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Still too much red ink for FAC status

I think we need to make war on the remaining red wikis in the article before it will be taken seriously as a FAC candidate. I'm very surprised that some things (like Delaware and Hudson) don't have articles already... Fawcett5 05:01, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that was something I was slightly concerned about (although I haven't gotten any comments about that on WP:FAC). I took a look through the article a few hours ago and counted fourteen redlinks, not including the navigation templates. Since then, I've unlinked three terms and created four new articles, including a D&H one. As for why the D&H didn't have an article, we used to have an article on the D&H but it was deleted as a copyvio. Also, I think you've created one new one. So that brings us down to six redlinks, which is probably alright. JYolkowski 18:47, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It is looking a bit better. I will have a crack at John Macoun and Yellowhead Pass in the next few days. Some of the things that were unwikied should DEFINITELY get their own articles at some point, such as the crowsnest pass agreement (but I'm biased, I was the one that added that stuff). Looking now, I think the special train section detracts a bit from the coherency of the article, although there is some good stuff there, especially the role the North-West rebellion played. Can it be reworked? Also we should add a bit about how Crowfoot allowed contruction through Blackfoot territory after negotiations with Father Albert Lacombe. I've just finished adding the Lacombe article, but Crowfoot's is way underdeveloped. Still, it's not a red wiki. Fawcett5 21:33, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I might be biased here because it's one of the few sections I didn't write from scratch, but I too have mixed feelings about the "Special trains" section. I feel that some of it makes sense to be there instead of elsewhere, but other stuff doesn't really need its own section. Two sections aren't really saying anything so I'm going to remove them and maybe add a sentence or two elsewhere. I'll leave the other sections in but copyedit them a bit more. JYolkowski 00:24, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Now only ONE red wiki, and Featured article status has been granted!

Navvies

The material on Navvies is interesting and good, but there is too much detail here for an article specifically about the CPR. The article is already greater than 32K. I would argue that much of it should be moved to the article on Navvies. Since they played such an important role in building the CPR, they certainly merit a mention on the main page, but the detail should be elsewhere. Opinions?