Talk:Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


NPOV Questioned[edit]

I question the NPOV of the sentences "There's just something about trains. Whether it's the excitement of a child's first train ride or the memory of a forgotten era, everyone loves trains." Those who have fell victim to trains may feel somewhat different about those comments. This should really be revised to reflect Wikipedia's NPOV policy.

Fair enough. The article's sanguine, commercial tilt is ancient history, though. It's a shame that the warning stamp took five minutes to activate, and content changes took a few months to implement, but it took users three years to acknowledge the article's redemption. Mubaldi (talk) 09:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Response[edit]

The majority of the original text was Public Domain from the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service, Cuyahoga Valley National Park who are "partnered" with CVSR. The U.S. government owns the land/right-of-way ... within the Cuyahoga Valley National Park boundaries and most likely has a "Cooperative Agreement" with CVSR (a form of "cooperative" government contracting) allowing CVSR to operate over the NPS-owned right-of-ways, stations, ... I created and "stubbed out" the CVSR article using as many reasonable public domain references which I could cite, I used the official CVSR site to double-check some facts and figures from elsewhere. Please create a free Wikipedia account and contribute to the article if you would like to change the text to a more neutral point of view, I was trying to avoid using any Copyrighted text directly from CVSR, and the U.S. government seemed a reasonable Public Domain source. I agree that the PD NPS text is a bit "cheesy" and probably released by CVSR to the NPS. LeheckaG (talk) 12:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, the text in question probably came from NPS Cuyahoga Valley National Park - Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad. If you read the NPOV (you?) cited above: "... all significant views that have been published by reliable sources ...". The U.S. Government (National Park Service) was used as the primary source for the text, if you can point me to a different view and a "reliable source" for it, then I would be glad to add additional views... (or you can do so yourself). The article was written among the collection of other Cuyahoga County (a.k.a. Greater Cleveland), Ohio articles on "Points of Interest" and significant "hidden infrastructure" features.

My personal interest was mostly to document the stations and route in a detailed map, secondarily the schedule (but Wikipedia really does not appear to have a structured format for schedules?). The remainder of the article took a little digging but was generally Public Domain from the (U.S. Government) National Park Service. LeheckaG (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Resentment[edit]

this article is just disgusting. It needs to be rewritten. Too much opinion; unorganized; needs to be more factual; alot of this sounds as if it has come from an info site on the railroad or a brochire or something. As a railfan, i am VERY DISGUSTED AND OFFENDED by this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.244.146.225 (talk) 04:32, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:57, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]