Talk:OnBoardMidwest

First of all, this entry contains only factual information about the group in question, it contains no promotion or unsourced opinion. As for the relevance of the content, I'm attempting to add substantially more information about the group as well as further references and details about the route and its context in the stimulus program. It's after midnight here, but I'll be working on this a lot more tomorrow.

Please allow me to complete the work!

Bpalmen (talk) 04:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite needed; borderline PoV

Somewhere in here we crossed the line between describing the nature and work of an organization, and using that as a platform to debate policy. This article is about the organization, and while some mention of the issues is important, there seems to be a lack of balance.

I'll take a stab at it if nobody more directly involved does so. It'd look something like this, with citations:

OnBoard supports the existing river alignment because...(lowest start cost, most infrastructure in place, starts service to MN fastest) OnBoard opposes the Rochester alignment because...(no direct line exists, train would have to run 30mi W to Fairbault before turning north)

(Of course, there's no mention here of the fact that an Eau Claire alignment is being considered as well, which changes the whole ballgame.)

Disclosure: I personally believe Rochester would be a fantastic addition to the route, but the much higher costs and longer CHI-MSP travel time really weight down their chances.

Thoughts? Uberhill 18:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uberhill (talk • contribs)