Talk:Newark and New York Railroad
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Newark and New York Railroad article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Coordinate error
edit{{geodata-check}}
The coordinates need the following fixes: The site of bridge is actually north of cited coordinates and west of these 40°42′53″N 74°05′14″W / 40.7146°N 74.0873°W" Crossed over both rivers as well as the the point between them Djflem (talk) 01:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 03:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
CRRNJ Passaic River Bridge
editCRRNJ Passaic River Bridge would be better merged into this article, no? The no longer existing structure served its lifetime for this CNJ line. As both are gone is their history not better consolidated in one article since most of info is the same, with the bridge specifics being covered in a paragraph? Djflem (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Suggestion withdrawn. Djflem (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Newark Transfer branch
editThere were only a few trains a day along the Newark Transfer branch, see this timetable http://www.thejoekorner.com/scripted-ticket-display.shtm?http://www.thejoekorner.com/brochures/crrnj-main/cnj-main-15.jpg Should this be added to the page? Jaysbro (talk) 18:03, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
A branch from Elizabethport on the main line to Brills Junction from a connection at the Newark transfer was completed in 1872. The Manufacturers Railroad was put into operation in 1882 and the extension to the Passaic River extension was completed in 1916.Djflem (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
http://jcrhs.org/cnjtowers3.html Djflem (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Newark and New York 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:
- Added archive https://archive.is/20120525161050/timetables.m72express.com/scans/CNJ-NewarkWeekday1941.jpg to http://timetables.m72express.com/scans/CNJ-NewarkWeekday1941.jpg
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714011118/http://timetables.m72express.com/scans/CNJ-NewarkWeekday1925.jpg to http://timetables.m72express.com/scans/CNJ-NewarkWeekday1925.jpg
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100201224707/http://www.njcu.edu/programs/jchistory/pages/c_pages/central_Railroad_of_New_Jersey.html to http://www.njcu.edu/programs/jchistory/Pages/C_Pages/Central_Railroad_of_New_Jersey.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:47, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
B or C class article?
editPer Wikipedia:Content assessment: B-class: The article is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.
One can say that this is true of this article, which has sufficient references cited. Thus, meets C-class, at least.Djflem (talk) 10:28, 6 February 2019 (UTC)