Jump to content

Talk:Central Railroad of New Jersey Terminal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Communipaw Terminal)

Article needs renaming

[edit]

"Communipaw Terminal" is not a name that this terminal was commonly known as. Communipaw was a separate station from this terminal. The informal name among passengers was "Jersey City Terminal".

71.241.115.139 (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relocated in 1889??

[edit]

So did it relocate FROM this location, or to this location from somewhere else? --Ragemanchoo (talk) 09:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NJ Central Main Line

[edit]

Main Line of the former Central Railroad of New Jersey. The main line service originally ran through Elizabeth and Bayonne to Jersey City, and terminated at Communipaw Terminal in what is today Liberty State Park. This station, which was served by the Reading Jersey Central, and former B & O Washington-Jersey City line, had direct connections, either by chartered bus or ferry, into Manhattan (the latter serving the financial district).

Under the 1967 Aldene Plan, however, the Aldene Connection connected to the former Lehigh Valley Railroad right-of-way, and trains were re-routed to Newark Penn Station on the Northeast Corridor.

The main line of the CNJ was along the Raritan Valley route, on what today is the NJ Transit train line of that name, from Elizabethport to Elizabeth to Plainfield to Easton, Pennsylvania. It is problematic that the CNJ Main Line is cited as going to Scranton. That latter route was the main line of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western, today, the Morristown Line.Dogru144 (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the Lehigh and Susquehanna Railroad, which the CNJ leased from 1871 onwards, did go to Scranton. It would be better to show the main line going to either Easton or Phillipsburg, and then indicating the L&S. An ETT from before the early 1970s would help clear this up. Mackensen (talk) 13:26, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The image File:CNJ logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:25, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I may have solved this. The only question is of the resolution. ----DanTD (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Central Railroad of New Jersey Terminal. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Central Railroad of New Jersey Terminal. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:37, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lehigh Valley mention is problematic

[edit]

The Lehigh Valley Railroad mention is problematic. The RR, from New York Pennsylvania Station's first decade, was able to use the Pennsylvania tracks from Newark to the Secaucus portal, and the North Tunnels of the PRR to NY Penn Station. So, the mention of the Lehigh Valley RR in the opening table on the right is misleading.Dogru144 (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

B or C class article?

[edit]

Per Wikipedia:Content assessment: B-class: The article is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.

One can say that this is true of this article, which has sufficient references cited. Thus, meets C-class, at least.Djflem (talk) 10:28, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]