![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Some notes: /list of lines /corporate history /downtown routings
Congratulations to the contributors. Bryan 22:44, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/hb638nb72q/ (material in public domain) If this is a useful map, would someone care to add it to the article? - Tonyinthailand 08:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the following text from the article because it reads like a babelfish translation that needs quite a bit of work (and citations) first:
==Affected foreign countries== ===Japan===
Slambo (Speak) 18:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Many people frame their opinion about the GM Streetcar Conspiracy by starting with the statement that GM et al were convicted of conspiring to rip up streetcar systems across the country. This is an incorrect interpretation of the federal lawsuit, and is often presented as prima facie evidence that the conspiracy was real, and that the companies were guilty as charged. The problem is that the two counts that they were charged with in the lawsuit were simply 1: Conspiring to monopolize the provision of transportation services, and 2: Conspiring to monopolize the sale of equipment and supplies to their subsidiaries (National City Lines and others). They were acquitted on the first charge of trying to monopolize transportation services, but were convicted on the second charge of trying to monopolize the equipment sales to their subsidiary companies.
They were never charged with anything like a conspiracy to rip up streetcar lines, only that they didn't allow competitors to sell the City Lines tires, fuel, and buses.
The conviction was appealed, and the original conviction was upheld by the appeals court. The appeals court ruling contains a summary of the charges, and how they were interpreted, and can be examined in the link below:
http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/770576
Many sites available on internet are very wrong about the court case and the court verdict. They often reference other similar-thinking sites as proof of what they are saying, and it has reached a point where there are so many references and mutual cross references to incorrect information, that readers have come to believe that GM was convicted of conspiring to shut down streetcar lines simply by the imposing number of web sites that say it is so. One of the hazards of internet.
Instead of linking to web sites that contain various authors' opinions about the court case, the reference to the appeals court ruling, cited above, should be the conclusive reference cited in this article, as any other sites typically repeat urban legends, without proper documentation. The court ruling is a clean, seminal source, and is not colored by people's interpretation of the case.
As a final thought: Since National City Lines had less influence over the Pacific Electric than on other streetcar lines in the country, perhaps the bulk of the discussion of the conspiracy theory should be contained in the article covering that subject. This article would only need to contain a summary of the actions National City Lines took while they owned the system, and direct readers to the conspiracy theory article, where the subject would be in one place, and could be explored in more detail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Form19y ( talk • contribs) 02:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
The IE is Not a LA Suburb so it should be added to the Locale next to Los Angeles and suburbs. Salcan ( talk) 04:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
There wasn't a conspiracy involved with the demise of Pacific Electric. National Lines had little to do with Pacific Electric. Let's not drag that bit in. Binksternet ( talk) 07:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Replace both existing info templates with the alternate template shown while filling in all the data, etc.:
Pacific Electric Railway | |
---|---|
Overview | |
Locale |
Los Angeles, California, and its suburbs |
Transit type | Interurban |
Operation | |
Operator(s) | Pacific Electric Railway |
Reporting marks | PE |
Technical | |
Track gauge | 4 ft 8+1⁄2 in (1,435 mm) |
Minimum radius of curvature | ? |
Peter Horn 16:30, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Peter Horn 16:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The 'Great American Streetcar Scandal' section in this article doesn't actually contain any specific references to Pacific Electric Railway or its services. There are certainly two or more versions of what happened and we need to make sure that we are right.
In the 1970s Snell claimed in testimony to the Senate some claims which have been repeated many times since, but which are also disputed, that: [1]
Guy Span has written a detailed critic of the above saying: [2]
His version of what actually happened is here.
Can I suggest that we research the above a bit and then rework the content to match with what we find and avoid blindly following these claims unless they can be proved to be true? I can vouch that Span's critic of Snell's work in relation the New York is valid, so we should be careful about blindly using Snell's version which was after-all researched over 30 years ago and GM certainly weren't being open about what they had been up to!
-- PeterEastern ( talk) 23:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Can anybody say how many cars the line had in service in the '30s & '40s? Or at all? IMO, it'd be worth adding. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Could one add info about such a nice videogame as L.A. Noire that has L.A. in 40s including PE system and buildings. (idk if them are ok in it but it's definitely notable fact for "in culture" section of this article). I'm too lazy to do it on my own, sorry for that :) -- Base talk сontr. 07:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
In relation to the subject of the history of the Pacific Electric's Western Division and its ancestor lines and companies, I may have at my disposal some bibliographical reference material that could prove useful to substantiate some of the references that need to be cited.
Some of the history needs to be cleared up and clarified as well.
Tom 18:40, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Los Angeles Motor Coach Company, initially formed as LA Motor Bus, was a joint venture of the PE and LARy as a widening of the response to the McAdoo led -or fronted- bus proposal. PE Land Company, a PE subsidiary, also had a few bus lines of its own, as did several smaller players, to say nothing of the steam roads, stages, and long-haul bus lines. Most of the "empty space" at the time of the great merger was being developed through the twenties, and little of it was served by electric traction. This should be reflected here, I think. Anmccaff ( talk) 01:06, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Pacific Electric. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Pacific Electric. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:39, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Some difference of opinion on the article name. Pacific Electric or Pacific Electric Railway - From what source is the article name? I don't see it but have heard the company referred to as both and seen reporting marks as PE and PERy - What is official source? Lexlex ( talk) 20:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
(So put the Railway back, already.)
More betterer, but still NKR. The PE was a privately held mixed system that did not cease to exist, rather was absorbed into the SP, which in turn was gobbled up by the UP. It got out of the passenger business, passing it off to a series of operators, first private, then public. The last a PE-built passenger line ran was in the early sixties.
The continuity simply isn't there, except in some foamers minds. This article should be split, or renamed to reflect the two separate operations. Heavy weight and medium electric rail is pack in some places, but the PE is still gone. Anmccaff ( talk) 02:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Could you expand on this? I'say there are a considerable number of verifiable references for one of the views. Adler, Bianco, Bottles, Levinson, Post, and Richmond, for an accessible start. Anmccaff ( talk) 16:05, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Some notes: /list of lines /corporate history /downtown routings
Congratulations to the contributors. Bryan 22:44, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/hb638nb72q/ (material in public domain) If this is a useful map, would someone care to add it to the article? - Tonyinthailand 08:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the following text from the article because it reads like a babelfish translation that needs quite a bit of work (and citations) first:
==Affected foreign countries== ===Japan===
Slambo (Speak) 18:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Many people frame their opinion about the GM Streetcar Conspiracy by starting with the statement that GM et al were convicted of conspiring to rip up streetcar systems across the country. This is an incorrect interpretation of the federal lawsuit, and is often presented as prima facie evidence that the conspiracy was real, and that the companies were guilty as charged. The problem is that the two counts that they were charged with in the lawsuit were simply 1: Conspiring to monopolize the provision of transportation services, and 2: Conspiring to monopolize the sale of equipment and supplies to their subsidiaries (National City Lines and others). They were acquitted on the first charge of trying to monopolize transportation services, but were convicted on the second charge of trying to monopolize the equipment sales to their subsidiary companies.
They were never charged with anything like a conspiracy to rip up streetcar lines, only that they didn't allow competitors to sell the City Lines tires, fuel, and buses.
The conviction was appealed, and the original conviction was upheld by the appeals court. The appeals court ruling contains a summary of the charges, and how they were interpreted, and can be examined in the link below:
http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/770576
Many sites available on internet are very wrong about the court case and the court verdict. They often reference other similar-thinking sites as proof of what they are saying, and it has reached a point where there are so many references and mutual cross references to incorrect information, that readers have come to believe that GM was convicted of conspiring to shut down streetcar lines simply by the imposing number of web sites that say it is so. One of the hazards of internet.
Instead of linking to web sites that contain various authors' opinions about the court case, the reference to the appeals court ruling, cited above, should be the conclusive reference cited in this article, as any other sites typically repeat urban legends, without proper documentation. The court ruling is a clean, seminal source, and is not colored by people's interpretation of the case.
As a final thought: Since National City Lines had less influence over the Pacific Electric than on other streetcar lines in the country, perhaps the bulk of the discussion of the conspiracy theory should be contained in the article covering that subject. This article would only need to contain a summary of the actions National City Lines took while they owned the system, and direct readers to the conspiracy theory article, where the subject would be in one place, and could be explored in more detail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Form19y ( talk • contribs) 02:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
The IE is Not a LA Suburb so it should be added to the Locale next to Los Angeles and suburbs. Salcan ( talk) 04:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
There wasn't a conspiracy involved with the demise of Pacific Electric. National Lines had little to do with Pacific Electric. Let's not drag that bit in. Binksternet ( talk) 07:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Replace both existing info templates with the alternate template shown while filling in all the data, etc.:
Pacific Electric Railway | |
---|---|
Overview | |
Locale |
Los Angeles, California, and its suburbs |
Transit type | Interurban |
Operation | |
Operator(s) | Pacific Electric Railway |
Reporting marks | PE |
Technical | |
Track gauge | 4 ft 8+1⁄2 in (1,435 mm) |
Minimum radius of curvature | ? |
Peter Horn 16:30, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Peter Horn 16:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The 'Great American Streetcar Scandal' section in this article doesn't actually contain any specific references to Pacific Electric Railway or its services. There are certainly two or more versions of what happened and we need to make sure that we are right.
In the 1970s Snell claimed in testimony to the Senate some claims which have been repeated many times since, but which are also disputed, that: [1]
Guy Span has written a detailed critic of the above saying: [2]
His version of what actually happened is here.
Can I suggest that we research the above a bit and then rework the content to match with what we find and avoid blindly following these claims unless they can be proved to be true? I can vouch that Span's critic of Snell's work in relation the New York is valid, so we should be careful about blindly using Snell's version which was after-all researched over 30 years ago and GM certainly weren't being open about what they had been up to!
-- PeterEastern ( talk) 23:53, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Can anybody say how many cars the line had in service in the '30s & '40s? Or at all? IMO, it'd be worth adding. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Could one add info about such a nice videogame as L.A. Noire that has L.A. in 40s including PE system and buildings. (idk if them are ok in it but it's definitely notable fact for "in culture" section of this article). I'm too lazy to do it on my own, sorry for that :) -- Base talk сontr. 07:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
In relation to the subject of the history of the Pacific Electric's Western Division and its ancestor lines and companies, I may have at my disposal some bibliographical reference material that could prove useful to substantiate some of the references that need to be cited.
Some of the history needs to be cleared up and clarified as well.
Tom 18:40, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Los Angeles Motor Coach Company, initially formed as LA Motor Bus, was a joint venture of the PE and LARy as a widening of the response to the McAdoo led -or fronted- bus proposal. PE Land Company, a PE subsidiary, also had a few bus lines of its own, as did several smaller players, to say nothing of the steam roads, stages, and long-haul bus lines. Most of the "empty space" at the time of the great merger was being developed through the twenties, and little of it was served by electric traction. This should be reflected here, I think. Anmccaff ( talk) 01:06, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Pacific Electric. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Pacific Electric. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:39, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Some difference of opinion on the article name. Pacific Electric or Pacific Electric Railway - From what source is the article name? I don't see it but have heard the company referred to as both and seen reporting marks as PE and PERy - What is official source? Lexlex ( talk) 20:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
(So put the Railway back, already.)
More betterer, but still NKR. The PE was a privately held mixed system that did not cease to exist, rather was absorbed into the SP, which in turn was gobbled up by the UP. It got out of the passenger business, passing it off to a series of operators, first private, then public. The last a PE-built passenger line ran was in the early sixties.
The continuity simply isn't there, except in some foamers minds. This article should be split, or renamed to reflect the two separate operations. Heavy weight and medium electric rail is pack in some places, but the PE is still gone. Anmccaff ( talk) 02:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Could you expand on this? I'say there are a considerable number of verifiable references for one of the views. Adler, Bianco, Bottles, Levinson, Post, and Richmond, for an accessible start. Anmccaff ( talk) 16:05, 10 April 2017 (UTC)