User talk:Scottychaos

Image copyright problem with Image:Coach50.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Coach50.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

LVRR FPA/FA Units

Thanks for fixing that mention of the LV's FPA designation; I was going off the reference in that Steinbrenner ALCO centennial book. Maybe they fixed it in the revised edition. Please keep adding to the LV article; I figure you're one of the more knowledgeable types actively running around on the Internet who can.--Foxhound (talk) 02:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Canal label

Hi Scotty. Thanks very much for pointing out the problem with my Pennsylvania canal map. I had trouble figuring out just what my source maps and texts were referring to when they indicated or discussed the water connection between Athens and Binghamton. Your note prompted me to review these sources again, and I see that I have mis-named the connection. The connection is indicated but not labeled on the Pennsylvania Canal Society map here. On the canal map in William H. Shank's The Amazing Pennsylvania Canals, it's indicated and labeled as "Chenango Extension". A book that I acquired after making my map has more details. The book is The Canals of New York State, published by the American Canal Society (York, Pa.) in 1991, ISBN 0-933788-82-7. On page 35, it discusses the Chenango Canal, which ran from Utica to Binghamton. In part it says, "Pennsylvania eventually extended its North Branch Canal to Athens, Pa., and cooperated in building the Junction Canal to Elmira, New York, which was operable by 1856. The Chenango Canal then developed a connection with the Junction Canal at Athens via the Susquehanna River, which became known as the Chenango Extension." A more complete account of the Chenango Extension appears in History of the Canal System of the State of New York here. The Chenango Canal Extension, as this book calls it, was to go from Binghamton to the North Branch Canal along the Susquehanna. The canal was started but not completed, according to this account. The lower part of it would have consisted of nothing but the river, as far as I can tell from these accounts. All things considered, I think I need to leave the feature on the map but to re-label it "Chenango Extension" and leave out the word "canal". I'll wait to hear what you think of all this before proceeding. Thanks again. Finetooth (talk) 20:34, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead today and made the correction. Finetooth (talk) 22:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I take your point about the unanswered question of whether the Chenango Extension was ever actually used to haul freight. I'll continue to look for an answer. A somewhat similar case involves the Sandy and Beaver Canal, which was mostly in Ohio and crossed less than a mile of Pennsylvania territory and which I have not included on my map. According to one source, it's possible that only one boat ever made the full journey on the Sandy and Beaver. I wasn't sure how to handle either the Sandy and Beaver or the Chenango Extension. (I left the Sandy and Beaver out because I was running into a map-clutter problem, but its absence seems like an imperfection that I should fix.) Originally I left the Chenango Extension out too, then revised the map to include it but mislabeled it, as you noticed. I think I'll let it be for a while to see if anything new comes to light. Your "proposed" suggestion is a good one, but it would only apply to the lower end of the extension since the State of New York actually built quite a lot of the upper end. Finetooth (talk) 17:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Further research confirms that the lower 10 miles of the canal never got past the planning stage and that the original plan by the state of New York was to build a short crosscut canal to connect the Chenango Extension to the North Branch Canal slightly north of Athens. I've added a "Chenango Extension" section to the Pennsylvania Canal (North Branch Division) article that addresses this. I haven't made any further changes to the map; all the printed maps I've found in books include it as the "Chenango Extension" even though it wasn't finished. (It bothers me that the label is not quite accurate, and I may still revise it again if I can figure out how to squeeze in more words.) The river itself was used historically for water transportation during high water. A paragraph on page 5 of McCullough and Leuba's The Pennsylvania Main Line Canal cites a newspaper report saying that on July 9, 1814, "20,000 barrels of salt had been brought down the Susquehanna from New York salt-works. Three years later the same publication noted that in the first twelve days of April, $100,000 worth of property was sent to markets along the way from the village of Owego, New York." I'm pretty sure that trying to float cargo down the river would be useless during most of the year; a load of salt or whatever would just get stuck at the first riffle below the starting point and sit on the rocks until the following spring. :-) Finetooth (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:New-York-Central-Lines-logo.jpg

The file File:New-York-Central-Lines-logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 26 November 2019 (UTC)