Talk:International Limited (train)

Latest comment: 13 years ago by 209.213.254.157 in topic Fair use rationale for Image:OP-20267.jpg


Inconsistency edit

The text of the article claims that the route ran via Port Huron and Sarnia, while the route diagram template suggests it ran via Detroit and Windsor. FWIW, when I travelled on it in 2001 it definitely went via Port Huron (I have the stamp in my passport to prove it!), but historically did it always take that route? What does the 1979 reference say? --RFBailey (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

  • The article seems to say that when Amtrak took over the route shifted north--which the route map refers to. I think the Grand Trunk routed through Detroit at the time; let me look for a source. Mackensen (talk) 15:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
  • The plot thickens! This suggests that the Grand Trunk routed trains through both Sarnia and Windsor, but with Detroit as the destination. The full-page ad implies that the Limited went via Sarnia-Port Huron. This all dates from 1907 though. Mackensen (talk) 15:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
  • Well, another source, Amtrak in the Heartland, indicates that the Limited, while still under the Grand Trunk, ran via Port Huron. It's not clear to me if it then jogged south to Detroit, but I think the routemap is wrong. Mackensen (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
The route map is consistent with the timetable reproduced in the book "Timetable Treasury", as noted in the references; I have a copy in my collection. I might have another passenger timetable in my collection, the trouble is in locating it right now. The timetable reprinted in the book is from 1926. We can indicate route changes on the diagram (see Coast Starlight for an example). I wonder if the confusion stems from the availability of river crossings at the time. Slambo (Speak) 12:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
The Michigan Central Railway Tunnel (Detroit-Windsor) only opened in 1910, so in 1907 I suppose it wouldn't have had any choice other than to go via the St. Clair Tunnel (Port Huron-Sarnia), which dates from 1891. Also, the St. Clair Tunnel was owned by GTR/GTW/CN etc., while the other was used by CPR and its predecessors, so I would have expected that a GTR train would have used their own tunnel? --RFBailey (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:OP-20267.jpg edit

 

Image:OP-20267.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I would be VERY SCEPTICAL of reports of GTR trains running through the tunnel at Windsor-Detroit. From my own collection of timetables from the late 1970's -- alas, also hard to find -- there was no such train running Windsor-Detroit. I'd really like to see this timetable from 1926. Nevertheless, the Sarnia-Port Huron route is certainly the predominant one and the route map should be changed to reflect that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.213.254.157 (talk) 14:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)Reply