Talk:Moonville, Ohio

Cleanup June 2006

I visited this in order to clean up links to the B&O and performed a brutal edit on it in order to wikify it. Some information was removed in the interest of brevity, and I removed the claim about landmark status since I could find no definite evidence of this. I also did not check information against the cited websites, and I did not check the copyright status of the three quotations.

There are numerous references to this as a minor tourist spot and as a haunted locale. The page seems worthwhile but could use another eye. Mangoe 02:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Corrected spelling error of "succombed" to succumbed in The Legends section Trinidadiv 22:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Corrected spelling error of "secodary" to secondary in The demise of the line section Trinidadiv 22:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I'm the author of this page and would like to make a few cheers and jeers.

I'm thankful for the fact that someone took the time to put a picture up and streamline the page a little bit. I'm a novice on wikipedia, and so please forgive me for any mistakes and so on.

However, I don't appreciate the deletion of the things I put the effort to type down. If you have a problem with it, change it, don't delete it. It is my page and I put the things down in it that I wanted in it.

If you would like to change my info, thats fine. If you want to add to my info, thats fine. If you want to add new info thats fine. But don't delete what I put in for a reason. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.189.171.202 (talk • contribs) .

Comment It is not your page, anyone is free to edit Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Ownership of articles for reference. Thank you.--Húsönd 22:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

---

I am well aware of the policies of the site and the fact that someone can't own a page. I thought that it would go without saying that everyone would at least know that I created it, and I also assumed that everybody would resist being 100% politically correct and poke out holes in what I was saying.

I will say it once more. I have no problem with people editing my page; fixing inaccuracies, adding content, enriching current content, etc. But what I didn't appreciate was having a large part of my page deleted for the reason of "brevity." I had those things in there for a reason, and did not appreciate the fact that someone who most likely doesn't know anywhere as much as I do on this particular subject, determining what is important and what is not.--The-outlaw-torn 19:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you had them in for a reason, and maybe you needed an editor to (a) cut out the padding and (b) hammer what you wrote into something fit for an encyclopedia. You wrote what would have been a good article for a fantasy or wierd tales sort of magazine, but not for here. Mangoe 19:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

---

Padding? I was not writing to fill in gaps, or for the sole pupose of writing just to write. Who is to judge what is "padding" and what is useful? What you might have found useless and worthy of deletion, someone else would've found helpful and insightful?

Well excuse me for thinking that on of all websites, I couldn't write what I wanted to write on wikipedia. I'm well aware this is an encyclopedia and nothing but the best information is worthy of being posted. It seems to me I sense some animosity from someone who apparently doesn't believe in such jibberish. I've seen in countless places in the vast expanses of this maze of pages things dealing with these sort of topics, and some that are in my opinion are totally outlandish and unsubstantiated. These are things that some people would deem as drivel right away, but none the less, they are permitted on here. --The-outlaw-torn 23:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I am trying not to get personally involved in this, but let me be frank: I am perfectly capable of editing for non-fiction, reference publications. I do this as a part of my job all the time. And also frankly, I could have been a lot more hard-nosed about what you wrote. For example, the assertions about the "very unfair and inflated price" CSX wanted for the line. Says who? Plenty of editors would demand a citation for that passage; and I personally could really call for a citation from the timetable and/or operating rules about the signal that is mentioned earlier (because frankly, as a train buff I have a hard time believing this). Mangoe 01:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have pictures from inside the tunnel they could post?

Iansanderson 03:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

---

I've noticed the bars notifying readers of the article's potential unreliability. I carefully read the links about the "original research" and "unverified info" and so forth. From what I understand, you don't consider my source a reliable one? The only thing I can do to verify statements about, for example; the signal as well as the inflated price of the line is to contact, again in example; the ICC for the price gouging, and the CSX railroad for the signal.

What is it going to take to cite my source as a reliable one? Especially as how there is really not an abundance of carefully laid out, dated, and irrefutable documents out on the web concerning this topic.

I would also like to request a P files "paranormal files" bar for the bottom part of the page concerning the ghost stoires, if it wouldn't be too much trouble.--The-outlaw-torn 13:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

---

I have cited sources more formally for the part of the article deemed inadequate for citing sources. All of the information in question in that section came from that source. The author, Kirk DePeel, is an expert on this subject and is a local historian. The second section in question is also from that cited source, who in my humble opinion, has done a great deal of homework. --The-outlaw-torn 22:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Not sure why the race of the "black" ghost was mentioned, but not the race of other ghosts. It's unnecessarily descriptive and pointed. --jadedbluedited 24:00, 5 Dec 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.130.180 (talk)

new corrections.

I have taken off the point about Rastus Dexter, the supposed name of one of the legendary ghosts due to a poor citation. I have heard several times that Rastus Dexter could well have been this man's name however the citation page goes on to clash with a factual statement made earlier on about the supposed quarantine. Once again, this is as much part of legend as any other thing detailed here but the difference is, the quarantine has no historical back up as most of these other events do. --The-outlaw-torn (talk) 19:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't the website prove that there are such accounts? Either we should use the page and be aware of its contradictions, or we shouldn't use anything that is sourced to it, and we should remove anything that was sourced to it unless we can find a better source and add it. Nyttend (talk) 22:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with Outlaw. I love his page. I added a very nice photo and someone deleted it with a grand discussion about whether or not it was real and whether or not a claim of a ghost is appropriate. I still have the pic. file in original unedited condition as well as many other pics. inside and out of the tunnel. But I won't waste my time posting quality material if someone is just gonna delete it. Anyone else share my views? I also feel that if someone takes the time to start a page, they should have some ownership rights, specifically when it comes to permanent deletion of an item. Thanks for reading! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djlland (talk • contribs) 16:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:OWN — although you work on the page, you don't have ownership rights (not that any other individual does either) over the page. The deletion, anyway, is a different question. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Photographs of Moonville, Ohio free to use

I have a gallery of photographs taken at the Moonville Tunnel and surrounding area, including the old cemetery, on my Picasa page. I'm not very familiar with adding content to an article, so if anyone wants to add any of these photos to the article, feel free. There are no restrictions on the use of these photos, however if it is at all possible, please credit me as the original photographer and maybe even provide a link to the original gallery. Link to gallery follows: https://picasaweb.google.com/yoarkiv/MoonvilleOhio# Yoarkiv (talk) 19:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Moonville, Ohio. 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:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20010622205729/http://home.fuse.net/moonville/ to http://home.fuse.net/moonville/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060510181612/http://users.3z.net/~jschmidt/moonville/ to http://users.3z.net/~jschmidt/moonville/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 09:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)