Talk:Missouri Pacific Railroad

Copyrights
As noted, this is an edited version of the Screaming Eagles article. which is free for non-profit used. He seems to have based some of it on Encyclopedia Brittanica. I think I have removed all the similarities I noticed, but I don't have a subscription to the Brittanica, so I may have missed some of it.


 * For reference, this is the page http://mo-pac.com/about.html Where did you find that this is public material? Are you sure we are allowed to release this material under the GNU Free Documentation License? Note that the GFDL allows commercial redistribution!

Sander123 14:16, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The webmaster of that site says everything not otherwise credited is his own work, and is free for non-profit use: http://mo-pac.com/copyright.html


 * (first of all, as an aside, please sign your comments by typing ~ at the end of your comment so we don't have to go through the history for a timestamp and to see who is talking where; AdThanksVance) slambo 23:48, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * And that's where one potential problem arises, because that doesn't fully answer the question. The GFDL, as mentioned earlier, allows for-profit (commercial) redistribution.  As the article stands, is Wikipedia legally able to republish this work?  The bottom of every edit page explicitly states "All contributions to Wikipedia are released under the GNU Free Documentation License" which, states :"You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License."Has the original author of the material allowed commercial redistribution of this article?  I have emailed the webmaster of Screaming Eagles to ask this and to point him to this discussion. slambo 23:48, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Just got a response from the webmaster at Screaming Eagles:"Sean, your Missouri Pacific article as it is published on Wikipedia has my blessing. Thanks for asking! Best regards, Todd Greuter, mo-pac.com"So, we're able to continue as normal. slambo 04:00, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Reporting marks
What is the Wiki convention in showing U.S. railroad reporting marks, with regard to use of ampersand (&) ? On the Missouri Pacific page, I note KO&G and C&EI, but T&P is shown by its much later reporting mark of TP, and SLIMS has no close relationship with the actual STLIM&S reporting marks used by the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern. While current AAR practice is to disallow the use of an ampersand in reporting marks, the use of that symbol was a standard part of reporting marks until the 1960s. There are other examples not pertinent to Missouri Pacific.... CAGY versus C&G for Columbus & Greenville Railroad, for example. Thanks for clarification.RI-Bill 17:06, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Rollback abbreviated name
I've never seen "Mop" used to describe the railroad in any reference, nor have I heard it in my years of research. While it does seem plausible, it is by no means common enough to include it in the common abbreviations sentence at the beginning of the article. If you want to add this abbreviation, please cite a credible reference that uses it. Slambo (Speak) 18:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Mop or MoP as abbreviated name for Missouri Pacific
Mop was a very common shorthand designation for Missouri Pacific, used in both speech and written documents. The term was frequently seen in Missouri Pacific's employee magazine in the 1930s and 1940s, as well as being discussed in some detail in Boomer Bill, His Book, by I.M. Brown. The 1930s discussion of the MoP terminology suggested that it originated with the then obsolete 'Mo.P.' reporting marks formerly used on freight cars before the more recent 'MP' reporting marks were adopted. RI-Bill 04:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Brown, I.M. (1930) Boomer Bill, His Book, privately published by Missouri Pacific Lines, St. Louis, MO.

Financial Information Needed
MoPac history is truncated severely - no information on the period 1918-1980s. MoPac endured one of the longest (if not the longest) bankrupcy proceedings in American history - from the 30's to the 50's. Financial data is particularly lacking for all periods. All of this needs to be fleshed out.teneriff 00:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Pacific Railroad of Missouri
The Missouri Pacific Railroad, in all official corporate histories, pointed to the Pacific Railroad of Missouri as the original predecessor company of Missouri Pacific. For many years, MP proclaimed itself as the "First Railroad West of the Mississippi." For that reason, I am adding back references to the Pacific RR which were removed in an earlier edit. Making a separate, more detailed page about the Pacific Railroad would be beneficial, but but that does not preclude the need for basic, pertinent information on that topic, which should appear on this Missouri Pacific page.RI-Bill (talk) 00:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Control by Jay Gould & George Jay Gould
Under the History section, it states that "From 1879 to 1915, Missouri Pacific was under the control of highly successful but extremely controversial New York financier Jay Gould." Jay Gould died in 1892, and his son, George Jay Gould I took control of most or all of his father's railroads, including the MP. Some sources also say that the younger Gould lost control of these roads following the Panic of 1907. Can someone verify this? Caseyjonz (talk) 23:19, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I know George owned the Mopac as part of his almost-transcontinental. I don't know when he lost it, but the system started to fall apart by 1910. --NE2 05:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Still maintaining a legal existence
A Texas Supreme Court case decided last year lists Missouri Pacific Railroad Co., dba Union Pacific, as a party. The other party, which lost the decision in Texas, is petitioning for review by the United States Supreme Court. So, the text in this article notwithstanding, the courts still believe that the MP exists and has a distinct legal personality from UP. 18.26.0.5 (talk) 23:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Missouri Pacific 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://web.archive.org/web/20121024013411/http://www.library.okstate.edu/okmaps/ to http://www.library.okstate.edu/okmaps/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Missouri Pacific 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://web.archive.org/web/20070208052640/http://skyways.lib.ks.us/history/mp/mphist.html to http://skyways.lib.ks.us/history/mp/mphist.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Somebody please explain what this phrase means
Under History, this phrase appears:

"By 1994, all motive power of the Missouri Pacific was repainted..."

Does this mean the company's locomotives were painted with a new livery? Then say that!

I'm only a casual train nerd, not a die-hard one. So if I'm wrong and the railroad has other sources of power (e.g., maintenance car, magic power caboose), I stand corrected.

I'm only trying to make this entry more readable and comprehensible. You can help by making this passage clear. Thanks! Kinkyturnip (talk) 02:54, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

What's with the alphabet soup in the lede?
Including all those companies' names does nothing but get the reader lost in a black hole of obsessive lists.

Please help improve the lede with your suggestions here on Talk page.

BTW I'm not the first editor to point out this problem. It is not helpful to include such info in the lede, which should clearly summarize the article. Kinkyturnip (talk) 03:58, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

One more thing...
"After the Supreme.Court denied a trial to the Southern Pacific..."

Does this mean the Supreme Court declined to hear a petition from Southern Pacific? Because courts only refuse to grant trials in banana republics (this refers to events in 1982, not our current demagogue-embracing, dictator-worshipping, banana Republican administration).

I would normally clear this up by clicking through to the necessary citation, but &mdash; surprise! &mdash; there's no in-line source cited here (and dozens of other places they're needed in this article).

'''Any help greatly appreciated. Talk to the Turnip! Kinkyturnip (talk) 04:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)