Talk:Great Train Wreck of 1856

Comments

This article veers off into a long discussion of computer protocols, which does not seem appropriate here...? Afabbro 21:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

That discussion is not merely inappropriate. It is lifted word-for-word from Inc. magazine. --Hoziron 02:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed the section in question. Slambo (Speak) 02:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

best name

Compare with WP:MOS, is this the best name for the article? Problems:

• Starts with "The"
• Every word is capitalised
• "Great" == "large" is no longer common usage (it was in 1856 and at the time of World War I).

I propose moving to one of the alternate names - maybe "Camp Hill Disaster" or "Picnic Train Tragedy". But leave "The" off the title as is practice on Wikipedia and avoid overcapitalisation, even if that is the style employed in other works (it is a stylistic issue not an official naming issue). Garrie 04:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with leaving off the "The" -- however this incident is generally known as, and referred to as, the "Great Train Wreck of 1856." Neither "Camp Hill Disaster" not "Picnic Train Tragedy" would be suitable (or accurate) replacements for "Great Train Wreck of 1856." Alphageekpa 23:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

citations

I would like to see some citations on this article. There is a lot of information here, and it's got to come from somewhere. I think it's a good article, and could be much better with some copy-editing, but it still reads like a high-school term-paper ("A small brook ran rearby. The Sandy Run creek carved its way through the Wissahickon Valley, and had served as a source of refreshment for Revolutionary War troops in the Fall of 1777, under the command of General George Washington. ") But at the core, it's going to need the strength of some citations... Alphageekpa 23:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it's copied word-for-word from http://en.allexperts.com/e/t/th/the_great_train_wreck_of_1856.htm? 68.80.137.106 02:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it; well spotted! Hyperman 42 14:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Not quite so well. Scroll to the fine print at the bottom of that "allexperts" link, and you see that it was copied from Wikipedia, not Wikipedia from it. — Lumbercutter 19:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Great Train Wreck of 1856. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070816232038/http://home.catholicweb.com:80/StMichaelsHistory/index.cfm/NewsItem?ID=124237&From=Home to http://home.catholicweb.com/StMichaelsHistory/index.cfm/NewsItem?ID=124237&From=Home
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070202221530/http://www.amusementparknostalgia.com:80/camphill.html to http://www.amusementparknostalgia.com/camphill.html

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

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Doppler effect

The article mentions the Doppler effect in a manner that suggests that an understanding of it could somehow have helped avoid the crash.

Although Harris blew the whistle almost continuously, the doppler effect was not widely understood at the time and, as a result, neither engineer knew exactly where the other was.

It is not clear how the Doppler effect, which causes a slight increase in pitch when the source of a sound is moving toward the observer, could make any difference. Are we to picture the engineer of the Shakamaxon saying, as the disaster loomed, "that can't be the Aramingo; its whistle is a semitone lower!"? No citation is given for any statement that relates the Doppler effect to the crash.

This seems like nonsense. I think it should be removed. TypoBoy (talk) 01:13, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

There haven't been any objections. I'm going to remove the two references to the Doppler effect. TypoBoy (talk) 03:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)