Talk:Myrtle Beach Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Station

End of passenger service

An anonymous address editor claimed that service continued to 1962 at the location. This is inaccurate. The station went to freight-only status in 1955. The ACL's timetable at the end of 1954 showed service; however, the timetable by the fall showed the station as freight-only. As documented in the article, from 1955, onward, there was only freight service from Myrtle Beach. This conversion to all freight is reflected in wintertime schedules in the latter 1950s as well.Dogru144 (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Dogru144 I hope we've addressed the above concerns. And I recently found a source that said while it wasn't regular passenger service, there was a passenger train in 1986. Below is some additional discussion.

Copied from User talk:Mapsax:

This section is an excerpt from User talk:Mapsax/Archive 3 § Myrtle Beach Depot excerpt.[edit]

I'll just ask you. Since you added a new date for the last passenger service, it should be mentioned that the tracks were in bad shape, and the bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway needed a lot of work, so these are obstacles. How much needs to be said beyond that I don't know.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: I see that you've been adding things. At this point, there's probably enough detail there and anything else should probably go on the rail line article, though I realize that there's a lot of overlap.

As for the older 1990s/2000s refs: Now I understand the "work" comment. I just was making things consistent since I was always planning to use a cite news template, which is encouraged. Now that I know that you're digging through the archives, I'd like to request that you distribute the references among all the sentences, rather than writing a series of sentences and putting the cites at the end of the last one, especially since there are no ELs to the articles so are harder to verify or get context from (yes, I know that not linking to anything is permissible, and in fact I've done it myself on other articles). Spanning would also work but I don't think that's available for the cite news template like it is for Template:Cns. That's why I put the template there because I wasn't sure which sentences went with which cites or whether some of them didn't go with any cites. (The last sentence regarding the restoration volunteer is an exception since it was an edit by an IP contributor who hasn't ever edited anything else, not by you.) Mapsax (talk) 22:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

It is probably possible to tie each source to information, but to me it just looks sloppy when the different sources have different information and I'm trying to do everything in chronological order.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay, it's done. I guess it doesn't look that bad.

Just to be clear, one article is the oldest one available on the topic online using my library card. The other is the first one that actually states repairs were done, which supposedly makes passenger service possible. However, that article, and not the other one, says between the waterway and the depot, the tracks still can't be used. It also says the offer made earlier was rejected, which seems to be the main obstacle to getting the railroad ready for passengers. And that seems to be all that needs to be said about why the depot wasn't used for that purpose.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: Looks good to me. That should probably be done with the last section, too. I've deleted the template either way. Mapsax (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I have replaced the copied comments with {{excerpt}}. Mapsax (talk) 00:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)