Talk:Overland Limited (ATSF train)

I do not understand why you removed the date the train ended and the equipment used on the train? Tomas417 01:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Most (if not all) of the added information refers to the Union Pacific train Overland Flyer and not the Santa Fe train Overland Limited, which is the subject of this article.--Lordkinbote 04:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Overland Limited (UP train) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Problems
I can't find mention of this train in the January 1904 Official Guide. Trains 7/8 are the California & Mexico Express and the Chicago Express, respectively. Lucius Beebe mentions the Overland Limited once in his book about the UP train but doesn't give dates. I have Duke in front of me but can't find a mention of this train. Searches in newspapers.com reveal much discussion of an Overland Express going back to the early 1890s. Honestly, my inclination at this point is to delete this article outright until someone finds proper sources and do the subject justice. Mackensen (talk) 22:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Hat note
In general I don't like hat notes that wrap over multiple lines: "This article is about the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. For the train jointly-operated by the Chicago and North Western, the Southern Pacific, and the Union Pacific, see Overland Limited (UP train). For limited corporations known as 'Overland', see Overland (disambiguation)." This is my preferred version: "For the train jointly-operated by the Chicago and North Western, the Southern Pacific, and the Union Pacific, see Overland Limited (UP train)." I think it's unlikely that someone arrives here looking for a limited corporation named Overland. There are none listed by that name on Overland (the actual dab page). Typically we only dab on a likely search term. I'm open to having my mind changed, though. Mackensen (talk) 12:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * If someone is looking for a company named "Overland" and knows that it is a company, and that they themselves refer to it as "Overland", it would not be unreasonable for them to try "overland limited", "overland company", "overland corporation", "overland inc" etc as search terms, therefore the hatnote should include that possibility. -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 03:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I suppose, but it seems pretty unlikely. Mackensen (talk) 13:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)