Talk:Portland Rose Challenger

Not sure what to do here (with redirect to Challenger (train))
What is the correct tag for this situation?

Presently the title Portland Rose Challenger redirects to Challenger (train), however there is no mention of a Portland Rose Challenger on that page.

There is ample material on a long running and well known service named Portland Rose (train). Do we deleted this? Do we change this redirect to Portland Rose (disambiguation) adding Portland Rose Challenger as an entry linking to Challenger (train)? Does somebody add unknown information on the Portland Rose Challenger to Challenger (train)?
 * The Portland Rose ran from 1923 to 1971, named the Portland Rose from 1930 on.
 * Challengers existed from 1936 to 1947 and again from 1954 to 1971 (according to the WP page).
 * UtahRails.net just mentions a third Challenger, Portland Rose Challenger but provides no details. On the other hand UtahRails.net has a page dedicated to Portland Rose that makes no mention of Challenger.
 * There is at least one model train set named Portland Rose Challenger dominating search results, but that is not a reliable source.
 * The most reliable source for a Portland Rose Challenger I find is an obscure clipping.

IveGoneAway (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC) 19:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I do not know what the correct solution is. I have no expertise in railroads.  ~ GB fan 14:23, 1 January 2021 (UTC)


 * What is normally done for a redirect for which there is no reasonable source known at the time?
 * I am kind of thinking of replacing the redirect with text explaining what little is known about the name and the weakness of the sources, maybe a tag for an expert, and then a link to Challenger (train).
 * There possibly was a limited time where there was as a 3rd Challenger called Portland Rose Challenger, but there possibly was some instance of customers or UP calling the Portland Rose the Portland Rose Challenger, or the Portland Rose was briefly combined with some of the Challenger's traffic.
 * The current redirect just at present tells the reader that there definitely was a Portland Rose Challenger, and if there definitely was a Portland Rose Challenger, there should at least be a disambiguation to let the reader know that there also was a more famous and longer running Portland Rose.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Quick note, short on time: I think I have a solution with citation (UP train schedule). You may see how the text corresponds with what is already in Portland Rose (train):
 * Portland Rose-Challenger was a discount-rate UP/CNW through passenger service between Chicago, Illinois and Portland, Oregon. Numbered 17-87/18-88, the service was a section of recently produced, improved sleeper cars. Between Chicago and Green River, Wyoming the section was carried in Chicago-San Diego train The Challenger (#717/818), while between Green River and Portland, the section was cut into the Cheyenne-Portland Portland Rose (#17/18). Service to Spokane, Washington on the Portland Rose was available, but required change of car as the sleepers would be cut out at Portland.
 * OK?
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you don't think the redirect is correct you can nominate it at WP:RFD. ~ GB fan 15:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Once I get the citation added, I'll proposed the redirect be replaced with the topic. I'm not up to speed yet with WP:RFD, yet, so it'll be my baptism. Probably, as a topic, though, I wonder if it might not be not notable.
 * The Challenger came out of Chicago with more than one section that got cut out on the way west and cut back in on the way east -- at least two, maybe three or four, and that would need to be described to permit correct integration with the Rose. (That is probably missing from the dialog on the City to Everywhere, one train, undivided, didn't go to all of the those cities.) So, you know, it might be possible or even better to describe the Challenger in terms of the sections that parted on the way west, and then the present redirect could actually make sense, because the Portland Rose could then be mentioned in linked-in context.
 * The point to not ambiguate the (1st class) Rose" (or the Columbine for that matter) as just an ancillary (2nd class) mini-Challenger''. IveGoneAway (talk) 16:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)