Your American History Reference Guide!
- Talk:Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad

HistoryMania Information Site on Talk:Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad American History American History Search        American History Browse welcome to our free resource site for all enthusiasts!

Talk:Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad


Why was this page moved?

"Milwaukee Road" is a much more common name for this railway, especially considering the many name changes that happened over the years. I think this page should be moved back to that name. User:Mulad (talk) 17:57, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

I moved it; it had this name for a long time before the end. Milwaukee Road still redirects here, and you can still link to that. The only thing that changes is the official title, which I feel should be the official name in most cases. Eh, if you want to be inconsistent, feel free to move it back. Have fun changing all the redirects. --SPUI 18:08, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Another comment - we don't, for example, have Central Railroad of New Jersey at Jersey Central Lines, or New York Central Railroad at Water Level Route . If you want to find information in a historical database or book, like Moody's or Poor's, you look it up under the official name, not the nickname, however common. For instance, if you search [1] (which is based on Poor's, Moody's, and other official and semi-official sources) for Milwaukee Road, it says "See Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad". Soo Line isn't even covered, with only one entry, simply having "Soo Line Railroad" in the railroad field. --SPUI 18:14, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Well, all I'm saying is that Wikipedia is different than a reference manual, usually using the common name rather than the official name, at least when there is a significant difference in recognition between the two (for example, the article for Julius Caesar is not named "Gaius Julius Caesar"). Anyway, I'm putting it to a vote at Wikipedia:Requested moves. User:Mulad (talk) 22:47, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific RailroadMilwaukee Road

Much more well known as the Milwaukee Road. (The railroad also went through multiple name changes in its lifetime.) User:Mulad (talk) 22:47, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

  • Oppose: Leave at official title, redirect as is. Cburnett 22:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Suppport - Milwaukee Road is clearly the more well known name of this, which is what our Naming conventions tell us to use (Google: 52000 to 800). We only use official titles as a slight preference when no one use is the predominant one. -- Netoholic @ 23:09, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
  • Oppose: As long as both names are mentioned in bold in the first paragraph and Milwaukee Road is a working redirect, I'd rather leave it at the official name, for consistency. —Morven 23:17, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support if that'd the common name. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:19, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Naming conventions prescribe using the commonest name, except where slangy or inaccurate; that is, George W. Bush, but not Ole Miss. ADH (t&m) 23:23, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
    • comment You just made the "slangy and inaccurate" thing up. Actually it prescribes, in pretty strong terms: "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things."
    • Jimmy Carter is at Jimmy Carter, although his name is James Earl Carter Jr, Bill Gates is at Bill Gates although his name is William Henry Gates III , William Henry Gates III KBE to give him the title the Queen Elizabeth gave him (and who's going to argue with a chick who has a whacking great sword and used to own half the world?) For heaven's sake (or whatever you hold sacred) let's just have article where people expect to find them. Bill Gates, Jimmy Carter, wherever people will look for this article. Just don't go out of your way to piss people off by making up Wikipedia policy that doesn't exist. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:20, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Leave it official. By the way, I noticed that Britannica calls their article "Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company". —Mike 04:20, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • weak oppose. I recently moved it from Milwaukee Road, but this truly is a borderline case, nowhere near as clear-cut as say Central Railroad of New Jersey vs Jersey Central Lines or on the other side Consolidated Rail Corporation vs Conrail. --SPUI 07:27, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). Proteus (Talk) 16:26, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Neutralitytalk 21:35, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

This is a comment after the fact. I still do not like this current name, especially as Netoholic pointed out that his Google test had shown a 65:1 ratio between the common name and the official title. I often don't like using the Google test to determine page title, but when the ratio is so overwhelming, it is hard to ignore. Whatever, I guess. User:Mulad (talk) 21:24, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)


I just noticed that the todolist wasn't migrated with the main page, so I've just moved it into the proper place for the article's current name. slambo 14:09, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Last updated: 06-06-2005 19:12:43
The contents of this article are licensed from Wikipedia.org under the
GNU Free Documentation License. How to see transparent copy
Search | Browse | Contact | Legal info