Michigan Central maple leaf logo?

Roger Hensley wrote:And this is why wikipedia is almost worthless.

well..I wouldnt say its "worthless"..
I have read some interesting theorys on wikipedia..
yes, its true wikipedia pages can often be "junked up" with all kinds of incorrect data..because *anyone* can edit the pages..

but!

its also a GOOD thing that anyone can edit the pages, because the junk tends to get weeded out and corrected eventually..
this thread is an example of that!
I noticed the logo seemed odd..questioned it..found out it was in fact wrong, and fixed it!

so wikipedia is a mixed-bag..I used to be very "anti-wikipedia"..but the more I have worked with it,
I dont think its that bad afterall..the bad stuff tends to go away and more good remains..

there are very few examples of deliberate wikipedia tampering..people adding junk on purpose just to be trolls..
most of the junk data is a result of ignorance, and once its corrected, it tends to stay corrected.

its not a perfect system, and yes, I agree no one should ever trust wikipedia completely and assume its correct..
but the same can be said for ANYthing on the internet..

Scot

I think that a NYCL logo or herald does not make sense on the Michigan Central Wikipedia article to someone doing research and not knowing that much about railroads. I would think that the Niagara Falls Route logo would make more sense to such a person. The recent updates to this article are mine in order to let researchers know they can see a map of any line built up to 1850 in Google™ Maps on our website at http://www.oldrailhistory.com. While I could upload that logo and place it in the article, I would not do that without the permission of trlinkcaso.

Mr. Link of the CASO site is good to work with -- I have had some email with him. I imagine he would let you use the "Niagara Falls" herald. But I could also adapt one from that timetable cover I posted, if you like. It's not exactly the same as the boxcar herald, but obviously the letter styling was intended to emulate it (though actually I have no idea which came first).

Here it is.

Richard, I think your creation would be likely to cause the same problem as the Maple Leaf Logo. i.e. Some people might interpret it as an "official MC logo or herald". Why not just post the whole TT cover as something representative of the MC?

Well, that's an idea too. Preferably the CASO boxcar herald should be shown, as that was in actual use by the railroad. My idea is just an alternative to that. But whoever updates the Wikipedia entry is welcome to use my timetable cover as shown here, or request a somewhat higher-resolution copy. My father was an avid NYC fan and had a good collection of timetables, most of which I later sold (in a moment of foolishness). However I kept a few, including this MCRR timetable.

My cousin was an trainmaster out of Airline Yard in Toledo, Ohio. He was well-into in his 90s when he died over a decade ago, and loved to collect all sorts of memorabilia of the New York Central, and its predecessor lines. I can remember when I went to his house and saw the MC Maple Leaf logo in question on the wall. What struck me as strange about the logo, as I thought at first that maybe this was promotional item for a merger between the MC and Canadian National, but that never happened. Sadly, I didn't ask him too much about it, but I seem to remember it was a short-lived promotional herald for a train called "The Canadian" that ran from Chicago to Montreal, which would explain the use of the maple leaf.

Sincerely,

Ron

Wikipedia is a new animal - we need to understand how to use it right rather than trash talk it. To think about it correctly, think of wiki articles like a basketball game. You have two point shots and three point shots. The more points you score, the better your chance of being a winner. With wiki articles, certain features lend some credibility, while other features lend lots of credibility. The more features, the better chance of being a winner. Check the cites, compare articles, compare with other websites, investigate the author, and beware of a biased tone. If you came upon an article about McCain or Obama that states that person is 'stupid', you'd probably have a red flag for a bias. If you came upon an article stating the earth is flat, you would probably notice it doesn't jive with other sites or books, and ignore the article. If you came upon an article about a highly complex topic, such as railroad rail steel composition, and it said "the little magicians wave their wand and new rail is made", you would probably want to check citations - are they citing AISC/ASME, or are they citing the potsmoker's handbook?

It's not much different than a forum - check the sources and collaborating material. We trust a RR employee's word much more than somebody who has never made it out of their basement for the same reason - credibility. Not because we like or dislike a person.

As I said...

If you have to sort out good from the bad, it is nearly worthless for research.

I beg to differ... in my research for the UMTRR, I have found that a well cited Wikipedia article, especially on a company that's featured on a Micro-Trains car, can provide lots of other places to go to get more official documentation. In other words, I use it to locate other material.

Just like my column, Wikipedia is "free and worth at least that much".

Hi everyone,
Can we please try to steer the conversation back toward the MC logo?

Thanks,
Charlie

The official MCRR logo was issued by the MCRR VETERANS ASSOC in the mid-20s, and given to each member of that assoc. MCRR never, to my recollection had a MAPLE LEAF involved. The MICHIGAN CENTRAL RR logo on all rolling stock wasn't the same as that logo issued to members of the MCRR ASSOC. Those living in DETROIT will have to visit the MCRR Terminal on VERNOR AVE to view the originals....regds LARRY BAGGERLY